Sakamoto, Taro - Six National HistoryJapan

THE Six NATIONAL HISTORIES OF JAPAN The Six National Histories of Japan (Rikkokushi) was written in 1970 by one of Japan's foremost historical scholars, Sakamoto Taro. An authoritative study of Japan's first scholarly works and a modern classic, it is now translated into English for the first time. The Six National Histories chronicle the history of Japan from its origins in the 'Age of the Gods' to A.D. 887. They were compiled in the imperial court during the eighth and ninth centuries by leading scholars and officials of the day. Until the late nineteenth century each of the Six National Histories was accepted as an authoritative work containing the absolute truth about the past. In the twentieth century, particularly since 1945 when state censorship ended, scholars have focused on the first of the Six National Histories, Nihon Shoki, rejecting its authenticity. In his book, Sakamoto interpreted modern scholarly findings, as well as presenting his own views, thus completing the modern re-evaluation of this controversial first work. Sakamoto's study also surveys the remaining five works, identifying common features and pointing out the special characteristics of each. John Brownlee's meticulous translation of Sakamoto's seminal work is supplemented by an informative introduction, notes, appendices, and an index. The translation makes available to English readers a valuable study of the Six National Histories which also provides insights into the methods of contemporary Japanese historians. SAKAMOTO TARO (1901-87) was Professor of Ancient History at the University of Tokyo. He was a prolific writer, publishing more than 200 books and articles on ancient Japanese history. JOHN s. BROWNLEE is an associate professor of Japanese history at the University of Toronto.

This page intentionally left blank

TRANSLATED BY JOHN S. BROWNLEE

The Six National Histories of Japan Sakamoto Taro

UBC Press / Vancouver University of Tokyo Press / Tokyo

English translation © UBC Press/Univ. Tokyo Press 1991 Translated from the original Japanese edition, Rikkokushi, by Sakamoto Taro, published in 1970 by Yoshikawa Kobunkan, Tokyo, © Sakamoto Matsue All rights reserved Printed in Canada on acid-free paper °° ISBN 0-7748-0379-7 (UBC Press) ISBN 4-13-027026-5 (Univ. Tokyo Press) Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Sakamoto, Taro, 1901-1987 The six national histories of Japan Translation of: Rikkokushi. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-7748-0379-7 i. Japan - History - To 1185 - Historiography. I. Title. DS854.S3413 1991 952'.oi C91-091144-4 Translation and publication of this volume were made possible by a grant from the Japan Foundation. UBC Press University of British Columbia 6344 Memorial Rd Vancouver, BC v6T 1Z2 (604) 822-3259 Fax: (604) 822-6083

Contents

Translator's Preface / vii Translator's Introduction / xi Author's Preface / xxix 1 Introduction / 3 2 Nihon Shoki I 30 3 Shoku Nihongi I 90 4 Nihon Koki 1123 5 Shoku Nihon Koki 1141 6 Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku 1155 7 Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku 1169 8 Afterword /187 9 Conclusion / 202 Appendices / 205 Notes / 207 Original Text Index / 223 General Index / 227


Translator's Preface

This translation has been prepared with the aid of a Translation Assistance Grant from the Japan Foundation and a research grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. It has been published with the aid of a Publication Assistance Grant from the Japan Foundation. Mrs. Sakamoto Matsue kindly provided personal information about Professor Sakamoto Taro (1901-87) in discussions from 1988 through 1990. Kanai Madoka, Professor Emeritus, Historiographical Institute, Tokyo University, gave much encouragement and practical assistance, without which publication could not have been accomplished. Professor Sasayama Haruo of the Department of Japanese History, Tokyo University, solved numerous scholarly problems. Mr. Yamaguchi Masami, Supervisor, International Division, Tokyo University Press, and Ms. Sandra Hawkes and Ms. Jean L. Wilson, University of British Columbia Press, were quick to reach agreement on complicated questions of co-operative publication. Professor Uwayokote Masataka of the Faculty of Liberal Arts, Kyoto University, provided facilities for research at Kyoto University in the summers of 1988 through 1990. Professor Sey Nishimura, Department of East Asian Studies, University of Toronto, checked the translation and helped compile the index. Professor Raymond W.C. Chu, Department of East Asian Studies, University of Toronto, checked the romanization of Chinese names; and Professor John Lee, Department of History, St. Mary's University, provided romanization for Korean names. Mr. John Parry of Toronto edited the translation. The translation is based on the 1970 edition of Rikkokushi, published by Yoshikawa Kobunkan. Another edition was published by

viii


Yoshikawa Kobunkan in 1989 as Volume 3 of Sakamoto Taro Choshakushu [Collected Works of Sakamoto Taro], and it contains a few corrections, but the index of the 1970 edition is superior. Some deletions have been made from Sakamoto's text. Certain portions are of little use to readers of a translation, such as how to read the Japanese text of Nihon Shoki, and the discussion of variant texts for each of the Six National Histories. Also, since the work is very detailed, some materials have been deleted or summarized in order to save the reader from drowning, where the point remains clear. For the same reason, side-issues have been eliminated: for example, the compilers of each text are introduced in considerable detail, and it seemed enough to explain why they were appointed, without explaining why Fujiwara Mimori was not appointed to compile Nihon Koki. Some matters that are no longer controversial among scholars have been removed from the text to the notes, such as whether there was a civil war between Emperor Kinmei on one side and Emperors Ankan and Senka on the other. It has not been necessary to make major changes in the order of Sakamoto's argument. The few minor changes are not noted. The only addition to Sakamoto's text is the brief Conclusion, which is entirely my own writing. Sakamoto ended abruptly with discussion of Nihon Kiryaku, but western readers look for a general conclusion; thus I have summarized his essential views. Pronunciation of names in the ancient texts is often a problem. I have invariably followed the readings given by Sakamoto in the text or the index of the 1970 edition. The particle 'no' has been eliminated from all names, thereby saving space. There is no universally accepted system of translation for offices and titles. The translations used are an amalgam from three main sources, all of which contain some difficulties: - H.H. Coates and R. Ishizuka, Honen, the Buddhist Saint (Kyoto: Chion'in 1925), sets out offices and titles with great clarity, but has some errors and is regarded as old-fashioned. - William H. and Helen C. McCullough, trans., A Tale of Flowering Fortunes (Stanford University Press, 2 vols., 1980), Vol. 2, Appendix A, is more accurate, but somewhat wordy and not easy to consult. - The terms in Robert Borgen, Sugawara no Michizane and the Early Heian Court (Harvard University Press 1986) are accurate and sound good, but must be extracted by going through the work. In using these sources, I have strived for consistency. The indicators gyo (ff), used when the rank of the person is higher than prescribed by the law codes for the office, and shu ( ^), used when the office is higher than the prescribed rank, have been


ix

eliminated in every case but one, where it is central to the discussion of the date of compilation of Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku. The terms for Buddhist offices are especially difficult to render. Archbishop sounds too much like the Church of England, while Primary Prelate of the Central Monastic Office is too cumbersome and does not sound like anything at all. There are several dictionaries of Buddhist terms, but they do not agree and often give derivations rather than equivalents. Solely for the reason that the number of Buddhist terms is small, and therefore will not lead to too great misunderstandings, I have generally adopted churchly renderings, and will bear the criticism. Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku and Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku were sometimes abbreviated by Sakamoto to Montoku Jitsuroku and Sandai Jitsuroku, and these abbreviations also appear in the Tables. Years are converted to the western calendar; however, days and months are as given in the original texts or documents, so that an advanced reader of the translation can easily locate any document by using a chronological table of Japanese history such as Nihonshi Nenpyo [Chronological Table of Japanese History], (Kadokawa Shobo Shinsha, revised edition 1989). Reference to sexagenary cycles has been omitted unless it is central to the argument. For citations from the Six National Histories themselves, reference to page numbers in the standard Kokushi Taikei edition is not given. Each citation can be found from the date, which is always given. In addition, there is a four-volume index to the Six National Histories published by Yoshikawa Kobunkan (1963-9). The title of each Japanese and Chinese work is rendered into English on its first appearance, whether in the text or the notes. November 1990


Translator's Introduction

THE SIX NATIONAL H I S T O R I E S OF J A P A N

The Six National Histories of Japan were the first document-based histories of Japan. They were written at the imperial court during the eighth and ninth centuries, under order of the Emperors. On six different occasions, high ministers of state and leading scholars, particularly those skilled in Chinese Confucian learning, were commanded to prepare the history of a defined period. There were many difficulties, the compilation teams had to be changed, and the target period of history frequently had to be redefined, but the compilers produced the desired result in six books: 1 Nihon Shoki, or Nihongi [Chronicles of Japan], 720. This work probably originated in 681 from an order of Emperor Tenmu (r. 673-86), who instructed an assembly of princes and nobles to compile a chronicle. The names of the participants and process of compilation have become obscure, necessitating much study of the text for internal clues. The completed work was presented to the throne by Prince Toneri (677-735). It covers first the mythical period of the Age of the Gods, substantially replicating Kojiki [Record of Ancient Matters, 712]. However, whereas the coverage of Kojiki becomes thinner and thinner for the sixth and seventh centuries, Nihon Shoki becomes progressively more detailed and reliable, reflecting the use of historical documents. It concludes in 697, at the end of the reign of Empress Jito (r. 690-7). 2 Shoku Nihongi [Chronicles of Japan Continued], 797. Originally commanded by Emperor Konin (r. 770-81), it was completed during the reign of his son Emperor Kanmu (r. 781-806) after a complex three-stage process and was presented to the throne by Sugano Mamichi (741-814) and Akishino Yasundo (752-821). The

xii

3

4

5

6


chief compiler was Fujiwara Tsugutada (727-96), who died a few months before the task was finished. Covering nine reigns from 697 to 791, Shoku Nihongi was the first of the works to be based entirely on documents. It is particularly valuable for recording imperial edicts in their original Japanese style (senmyotai), unlike the other National Histories, which converted them into Classical Chinese (kanbun). Nihon Koki [Later Chronicles of Japan], 840. The chief compiler was Fujiwara Otsugu (773-843); his original compilation team was supplemented twice during the period from the initial imperial command in 819 to its completion. The work covers four reigns from 792 to 832. Unfortunately, only ten of the original forty volumes have survived. Shoku Nihon Koki [Later Chronicles of Japan Continued], 869. This work covers the reign of Emperor Ninmyo, starting with a preascension account in 832 and proceeding to his funeral in 850. It was the first National History to focus on a single imperial reign, perhaps because the chief compiler, Fujiwara Yoshifusa (804-72), the first Fujiwara Regent for the Emperors, was a half-brother of Emperor Ninmyo. During transmission through the ages, much of the text became disordered and abbreviated. Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku [Veritable Records of Emperor Montoku of Japan], 879. The chief compiler was Fujiwara Mototsune (831-91). Covering the short reign of Emperor Montoku from 850 to 858, it is the thinnest of the Six National Histories. It is distinguished by long and sympathetic biographies. Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku [Veritable Records of Three Reigns of Japan], 901. Covering three reigns from 858 to 887, this History is the most detailed and most conscientious in giving the text of imperial decrees and statements to the throne. The chief compiler was Fujiwara Tokihira (871-909). He succeeded in having co-compiler Sugawara Michizane (845-903) exiled in 901, but this antagonism is reflected only in his taking credit for the work, and not in the contents, which chronicle the history of Japan as seen from the imperial court, as in the preceding Histories. Each of the Six National Histories was accepted as an authoritative work, containing the absolute truth about the past. This concept of a definitive history produced by the government does not exist in the modern world. Historical writing today is conducted by both professionals and amateurs; officially appointed teams, university professors, and independent scholars; and foreigners as well as nationals of the country in question. The worth of each work is evaluated by the judgement of those learned in the field.


xiii

Indeed, the greater the association of a historical study with a government, the less likely it is to be accepted as historically valid. Governments are perceived to have their own legitimation as their chief interest, and their publications are often regarded as selfserving. To understand the concept of a definitive National History we must go back more than a thousand years in time. THE SIX NATIONAL HISTORIES IN ANCIENT TIMES

The origins of the Japanese people may go back tens of thousands of years, and their development came through mixing several races and peoples. The origins of the classical Japanese state are more recent, deriving from the combination of ancient sacred kingship with a bureaucratic administration borrowed from China, beginning around the end of the sixth century AD. A process of conscious borrowing of institutions from China, partly by way of Korea, brought Japan into the world of contemporary high civilization. Institutions of government were supported on a broad base of Chinese culture, including Chinese language as the vehicle for law and administration, literature, and religion. The beliefs and practices of China thus entered Japan during a period of intense reform from the Taika Reform of 645 to the building of the capital city of Nara in 710. At the centre of the reformed government of Japan was the Emperor, whose legitimacy was based on descent from the main Shinto deity, the Sun Goddess. Japanese society was organized into a system of clans, each of which also claimed divine descent. The framework of government, however, was a Chinese-style imperial state, which was organized in Japan under a series of law codes in the Chinese language, which culminated in the Taiho Code of 701. Within this framework, governance was, at least in theory, exercised entirely by the Emperor, who was the source of policies announced in edicts and to whom all officials made reports. By 900, this system seemed to have existed since time out of mind, and there were no challenges to it nor even any conception of an alternative form of government. Such had not been the case in 673, however, when Emperor Tenmu came to the throne after a war of succession. Emperor Tenmu favoured continuation of the reform process that had begun with the Taika Reform edicts of 645. He realized that not only practical measures were required but also steps to legitimize the process and the resulting imperial institutions. He resolved to

xiv


give intellectual credibility to the Japanese imperial state by writing history, and so he commanded the compilation of Kojiki. He chose history, rather than theology or philosophy, because the Japanese state had no other intellectual foundation. The Emperors claimed legitimacy because of the historical fact of descent from the Sun Goddess. There was no theology about this, since all the 'eight million gods' of Japan shared the same fundamental nature as the Sun Goddess. Emperor Tenmu also knew that others could also make assertions about history to their own advantage, claiming that their own ancestral deity was the most important. Stating that distorted versions of history existed in abundance, threatening imperial pre-eminence, he undertook to correct them. According to the Preface to Kojiki, he decided to review and correct existing documents, with the aim of 'discarding the mistaken and establishing' the true. For, he claimed, 'If these errors are not remedied at this time, their meaning will be lost before many years have passed. This is the framework of the state, the great foundation of the imperial influence.'1 This motive inspired the later Six National Histories. To rescue the foundation of the imperial state, the Preface to Kojiki says, Emperor Tenmu ordered a young man of prodigious memory, Hieda Are, to learn by heart the texts of two ancient manuscripts about the Emperors. In 711 Empress Genmei expressed similar dismay at the mistakes and corruption in existing documents and ordered a courtier, O Yasumaro, to record and present what Hieda Are had learned. He did so in short order, presenting Kojiki to the throne in 712.2 The first of the Six National Histories, Nihon Shoki, was completed in 720. As with Kojiki, the date of its inauguration is debated by scholars, but the strongest view is that it began in 681, when Emperor Tenmu commanded an assembly of princes and nobles to 'commit to writing a chronicle of the Emperors, and also of matters of high antiquity.'3 Nihon Shoki differed in conception and nature from Kojiki. It was the first historical project undertaken by a specially appointed government team; it was written in Classical Chinese, the language of administration, literature, and religion; and it followed the prestigious Chinese models for historical writing, thereby demonstrating Japan's maturation as a state on the Chinese model. While Nihon Shoki, like Kojiki, began with the Age of the Gods, it handled the period as if it were document-based, giving alternative versions of many events, citing 'one book says ...' or 'another book says . . . ' As the narrative approached the period of


xv

compilation, it became more and more detailed, reflecting the increased availability of historical documents. Moreover, unlike in Kojiki, all events were ascribed dates, beginning with the reign of the first Emperor, Jinmu, thereby giving an unwarranted impression of accuracy and credibility. The early dates are not acceptable to modern scholars, and the existence of some of the early Emperors is the subject of considerable scepticism; but no one doubts that Nihon Shoki is mainly accurate for the last one hundred years of its coverage and almost completely accurate for its last thirty years. In ancient times, doubts about historical authenticity did not exist, because everyone believed in the Age of the Gods. Not only was it satisfying in all these respects, it was also skilfully written to incorporate the histories of the major clans smoothly into the history of the imperial state, so that every family could be pleased with the book. No dissatisfaction with its contents was registered until 807, when the Imbe family presented Kogo Shui [Gleanings from Ancient Words], in which the account of the Age of the Gods was disputed at some points on the grounds that it distorted the relative roles of the Imbe and Mononobe families.4 Because it seemed an authoritative history, Nihon Shoki overwhelmed Kojiki, which was largely ignored and forgotten until the eighteenth century. Then nationalist scholars rediscovered Kojiki as a source for the ancient language and for ancient myths (taken as literal truth) embodying the fundamental national values of Japan. Nihon Shoki, in contrast, remained an active source of historical information throughout ancient times. Sakamoto Taro discusses the lecture sessions on Nihon Shoki, held periodically at the court on a total of seven occasions between 721 and 965. These events, sometimes lasting several years, involved explication of difficult points by the leading scholars of the time. With the decline of the imperial court in the eleventh century these readings ceased to be held, but Nihon Shoki continued to be read, or at least possessed, in the Middle Ages, and serious study of it was resumed in the Edo period, when Confucian textual scholarship was revived. Nihon Shoki is unique among the Six National Histories in covering the Age of the Gods and the early legendary period. The subsequent books, covering defined periods of actual history, form a sub-group known as the Five National Histories. Like Nihon Shoki they are composed in Classical Chinese and base their narratives mainly on government documents. Many imperial decrees and reports to the throne are recorded in full, so the Histories are a

xvi


valuable source of documentary information. The basic format is annalistic, proceeding in strict chronological order. While described as National Histories, the works are centred around the imperial court; and events outside the capital, such as rebellions, disasters, famines, and auspicious omens, are recorded from the perspective of the court, as they were reported or dealt with. This type of court-centred annalism creates some dissatisfaction in modern readers, who are impatient with works such as the second National History, Shoku Nihongi, which is filled with page after page of promotions and appointments to office, a subject dear to the hearts of courtiers. As Sakamoto notes, Shoku Nihongi includes an abundance of these notices at the cost of excluding important national matters, such as completion of the Taiho Code in 701 and the planning and building of the new capital city at Nara. However, these seemingly arid materials can be used to determine dates and periodization, structure, and process. Sakamoto himself skilfully uses materials on appointments to discover the dates of inauguration and completion of four of the Five National Histories.5 The authors of the Five National Histories did not feel the same urgent need to save the foundation of the state as did Emperor Tenmu. It needed no saving, for there were no threats to it. Kojiki and Nihon Shoki were completely effective in establishing the imperial state as the only conceivable form of government in Japan. What motivated the authors of the Five National Histories was a sense that their work was an important part of government. They were all responsible and highly placed government officials or senior scholars, who took seriously their mandate from the Emperor to produce an authoritative record of a period of Japanese national life. Their perfectionism helps explain why compilation took so long: Shoku Nihongi took the most time, thirty-nine years; the works that were produced the most quickly, Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku and Sandaijitsuroku, required eight years each. One motive for the work was an ideology that originated in China - that literature and scholarship are an essential function of good government, viewed with favour by Heaven. 'Nothing is greater than literature/ said Emperor Saga (r. 809-23), 'as a means of administering the state and governing one's house.'6 However, it is also clear that they regarded the national life of Japan as somehow incomplete unless it were correctly recorded in the National Histories. Broad general agreement on this point among the ruling elites of society explains how they were able to marshal talent and general enthusiasm for a new National History every


xvii

thirty years or so until the mid tenth century. Of course, there was also a universal desire to have the merits of oneself or one's family recorded for posterity in the journal of record. The Six National Histories have their peculiar strengths and weaknesses, which are the subject of extensive discussion by Sakamoto. He takes up each History in turn, examining the compilers, circumstances of composition, and contents, and he discovers from these factors the reasons for the special qualities of each work. What lies behind the strengths and weaknesses, however, is a remarkable ideal of ancient Japanese society. Their conceptual world included the religions of Shinto and Buddhism, the philosophy of Confucianism, and a plethora of undesignated beliefs; but what determined the shape of society was their idea of history. Leading members of the ruling elite, confident that they could perform the awesome task assigned by the Emperor of producing a perfect record, set about writing history that would last for all time. In fact, the Six National Histories did have long-lasting importance, commanding attention to the present day. They remain the first reference for study of the Nara and early Heian periods. THE SIX NATIONAL HISTORIES IN LATER TIMES

Different types of historical writing developed in Japan after the tenth century demise of the state historical projects. Historical Tales were written at the Heian court (Okagami - The Great Mirror; Eiga Monogatari - A Tale of Flowering Fortunes); and the rise of the military brought about many works of War Tales between the tenth and sixteenth centuries. The Middle Ages also saw great works of Historical Argument, provoked by the danger to the imperial throne posed by the development of warrior rule. Among these were Gukansho [Miscellany of Ignorant Views, 1219], by the high priest Jien, which referred to Buddhist causation, and Jinno Shotoki [Record of the Legitimate Descent of the Divine Sovereigns, 1339], by Kitabatake Chikafusa, which invoked the Shinto deities as the prime cause in history. However, the model of the Six National Histories was not forgotten. In the Tokugawa period, two works showed their influence. Dai Nihon Shi of the Mito domain was produced over nearly two and a half centuries, with the project beginning in 1657 and ending in 1906. Covering the period from Emperor Jinmu to Emperor Go Komatsu in the fourteenth century, it also is written in Classical Chinese and includes numerous documents. The format differs

xviii


from the Six National Histories, however, in including biographies, essays, and tables as well as chronicles, thus following the form developed in ancient China in Shi Ji [Records of the Historian] by Sima Qian, Despite this, the Mito scholars asked that their work be considered equivalent to a National History compiled under Imperial command.7 A less successful work was Tokugawa Jikki [Veritable History of the Tokugawa], compiled by the Hayashi scholars, who were officially favoured by the Tokugawa Bakufu. This was started in 1809 by Hayashi Jussai and completed in 1849; a sequel called Zoku Tokugawa Jikki [Veritable History of the Tokugawa, Continued] covers the Shoguns to their end in 1868. The intention was to make a complete chronicle based on documents, but parts were never completed. Obviously biased towards the Tokugawa Shoguns, this study did not become the first source of reference for the Tokugawa period (as the Six National Histories are for the Nara and Heian periods). Moreover, it has a faint air of illegitimacy, because the Six National Histories established this form of writing as exclusive to the Emperors. The attempt by the Tokugawa to appropriate for themselves the imperial form of historical writing was part of their general endeavour to achieve legitimacy independently of the Emperors. This endeavour also involved the manipulation of titles for the Emperor and the Shogun, as well as the management of foreign envoys, but these efforts were ultimately unsuccessful in all areas. The Tokugawa Shogunate failed to achieve recognition within Japan as a sovereign government, despite having ruled for more than 250 years. With the Meiji Restoration of 1868, full sovereignty was returned to the Emperor, and the structure of government as set out in the Taiho Code of 701 was formally reconstituted. This arrangement was not to last, since the aims of the Charter Oath of the Meiji Emperor issued by the new regime were to seek knowledge throughout the world and to abolish 'evil customs' from the past.8 Nevertheless, the early impulse of Meiji officials was to write imperial history in the manner of the Six National Histories. They wished to recognize the continuity of the imperial government and nullify the intervening seven hundred years of military rule, taking up where the last of the Six National Histories, Nihon Sandal Jitsuroku, had left off. Hence in 1869 an order was given to Sanjo Sanetomi (1837-91) to compile a chronicle of Japan in Classical Chinese; this was followed by the establishment of a History Compilation Office in 1875. In 1882 work was begun on Dai Nihon Hennenshi [Annals of


xix

Great Japan].9 In the course of its development, the project was modified to begin in the fourteenth century, where Dai Nihon Shi had left off, thus recognizing that work as equal in status to the Six National Histories. However, Dai Nihon Hennenshi was never completed. It was terminated in 1892 by order of Inoue Kaoru, the Minister of Education, after the Kume Kunitake affair, described below. In any case, the chief compiler, Shigeno Yasutsugu (1827-90), recognized that the project went against the trend of the times, in which Japanese scholars were swiftly learning the current methods of Western historiography. The works of such influential European writers as Guizot and Buckle were soon known in Japan, and especially known were those of the great German historian Leopold von Ranke, whose disciple Ludwig Reiss went to Japan in 1887 to train Japanese scholars at the newly established Tokyo Imperial University. Reiss's instruction marked the beginning of modern Japanese academic history, which eschews theories in favour of factual narrative based on documents widely assembled and rigorously scrutinized. It may be noted, however, that this document-based approach originated not only in modern German historical method but also in the tradition of the Six National Histories, as well as in the textual scholarship of the Tokugawa period.10 The fall of the Japanese empire in 1945 signalled a new era in every area of Japanese national life, including history. Historical scholarship since 1945 does not differ from that practised in the democratic countries of the West, with university professors dominating the field and following international standards of the discipline. It is unlikely that anyone will ever again want to write a National History of Japan in Classical Chinese; nor would there be many readers. Yet there remains one area in which traces of the tradition of the National Histories may be seen. At the Historiographical Institute of Tokyo University, which was headed by Sakamoto Taro from 1951 to 1962, there are numerous projects of compilation of documents, which have been going on for many years. Dai Nihon Shiryo [Japanese Historical Materials], is a collection of documents from just after the Six National Histories to the end of the Tokugawa period. Since the inception of this project in its first form in 1869, there has been an understanding that the collection could begin after the period covered by the Six National Histories, because their coverage could not be improved upon.11

xx

Translator's Introduction TENSIONS IN MODERN HISTORICAL SCHOLARSHIP

Historical scholarship at Tokyo Imperial University in the i88os and 18908, based on new Western methodology, was known for its 'massacre' of traditional beliefs and methods in Japanese history. Shigeno Yasutsugu was known as one who 'massacred' the traditional ideas of Japanese historiography, but he still recognized the virtues of the 'positivistic' textual studies of the Tokugawa period. His disciple, Kume Kunitake (1839-1931), despite similar training in Confucian positivism, had little use for traditional historical studies. He particularly detested Rai Sanyo's celebrated Nihon Gaishi [Private History of Japan, 1830], which had inspired the generation that undertook the Meiji Restoration and was used as a textbook for Classical Chinese in pre-Second World War Japanese primary schools. Turning his attention to the Mito domain's Dai Nihon Shi, he found that it relied heavily on Taiheiki [Chronicle of Grand Pacification] as a source. Taiheiki was a medieval War Tale recounting the attempt of Emperor Go Daigo to restore imperial sovereignty in the fourteenth century. In the course of its development, Taiheiki acquired many embellishments and lost much of its historical veracity, but it never lost its status as an unimpeachable source for medieval history. Kume published a great blast against it ('Taiheiki wa Shigaku ni Eki Nashi' [Taiheiki is Worthless for the Study of History]) in Shigaku Zasshi [Journal of Historical Studies] in iSgo.12 Among his targets in Taiheiki was Kojima Takanori, a devoted retainer of Emperor Go Daigo in exile, who carved a celebrated loyalist poem on a cherry tree: Kume claimed that this medieval hero never existed.13 He was following the view of Shigeno Yasutsugu, but it was dangerous territory, because the story of Kojima Takanori was widely known as a model of loyal support of the Emperor. Even more dangerous was his article 'Shinto wa Saiten no Kozoku' [Shinto is an Ancient Custom of Heaven Worship] in the same journal, which was reprinted in the more widely read Shikai [Journal of History].14 Kume wrote that Shinto was nothing more than ancient nature worship and had not developed religious importance in the Western sense; this implied that Shinto institutions and articles associated with the imperial house had little significance. These included the Great Shrine of Ise, where the Sun Goddess is worshipped, and the sacred mirror, jewel, and sword, which are the insignia of the imperial house. Kume wrote that Japan had progressed beyond ancient primitive religion, thanks to


xxi

the advent of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Yin-Yang thought; and this implied that the trappings of the imperial house were obsolete. Shintoists and imperial loyalists were inflamed and protested to the government as well as directly to Kume, who received a threatening visit at his home from four representatives of Shinto organizations in February i8gi.15 Protest eventually resulted in Kume's recantation and his dismissal from Tokyo Imperial University by government order, as well as the temporary suspension of publication of Shigaku Zasshi and Shikai. The Kume incident set the tone for relations between scholars bent on reassessing traditional history, and the government and society at large. The imperial government was buttressed by the Constitution of 1889, which declared sovereignty to reside in the Emperor. His person was described as 'sacred and inviolable,' and the source of sovereignty was his descent in 'a line unbroken for ages eternal.' In other words, the Constitution based imperial sovereignty on the Emperor's descent from Emperor Jinmu and, in turn, from the founding deity, the Sun Goddess, as described in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki. Did the framers of the Constitution understand the difficulties inherent in affirming the Age of the Gods and the early Emperors just when Japanese scholars were beginning to questions these matters? The chief architect of the Constitution, Ito Hirobumi, wrote of his search for something that would serve as the pivot of the nation, equivalent to Christianity, which he understood as the core of nations in the West.16 Dismissing Shinto as empty of content and Buddhism as not functional for a modern ideology, Ito viewed the succession of Emperors as the sole institution that was both capacious and unique to Japan and that could focus national loyalty.17 He seems not to have contemplated the controversies that would arise from affirming myth as the basis for sovereignty and nationalism in a rapidly modernizing country. The Katsura cabinet was rocked when the Yomiuri newspaper revealed on 19 January 1911 that school textbooks in use since 1903 referred to the fourteenth century, when an imperial schism had occurred, as the 'Period of the Southern and Northern Courts.' This appellation was held to violate scandalously the dignity of the imperial house - to suggest that there could have been a time when two imperial lines existed and no legitimate line was recognized. The parliamentary opposition swiftly exploited this issue, demanding to know whether the government meant to

xxii


teach disloyalty to Japanese children: a person holding such ideas could hardly be described as Japanese and was certainly unworthy to conduct government for His Majesty. Greatly embarrassed, the cabinet decided that the Southern line was the legitimate one, and the period was retitled the 'Period of the Yoshino Court.' Since historical recognition was withdrawn from the Northern Court, the term 'Southern Court' could no longer be used to distinguish its antagonist, so the alternate name of Yoshino Court was adopted, after its location. Kita Sadakichi (1871-1939), main author of the offending text, was dismissed from the Ministry of Education.18 Part of the problem arose from the fact that the Textbook Incident followed the Great Treason Incident of 1910, in which a plot to assassinate the Meiji Emperor was alleged to have been apprehended. It was easy to connect this unprecedented event with failure to instruct Japanese youth in national values. Academic opinion had been divided, with important scholars on either side of the South-North debate. Yoshida Togo (1864-1914) of Waseda University supported the legitimacy of the Northern Court, while Kuroita Katsumi (1874-1946) of Tokyo Imperial University held out for the Southern line. The textbook's authors, unable to resolve what the leading scholars of the time could not, had simply used the term 'Southern and Northern Courts' to indicate the existence of the problem, and not out of disrespect for the imperial house. Yet the political authorities decided that such usage could not be tolerated. The facts of history were thus determined by the power of the government and not by scholarly research. In the 19303 Japan embarked upon its course of imperial expansion, beginning with the Manchurian Incident of 1931. Japan's involvement in China deepened, and by late in the decade the country had been placed on a wartime basis. Many of the world's nations would come to know national mobilization in the 19405; every citizen was required to contribute to national survival, and dissent, political or intellectual, was discouraged or forbidden. In the scholarly world, the eminent professor of law at Tokyo Imperial University, Minobe Tatsukichi (1873-1948) fell victim to the times. His constitutional theory of the Emperor as an organ of the state, widely accepted until the 19305, called forth attack in the Diet, where nationalists held that the Emperor constituted the state in its entirety. They held that relegating the Emperor to the role of an organ of the state was an insufferable insult to the imperial dignity. Minobe resigned from the House of Peers


xxiii

because he could not bear such company, but his resignation was taken as the defeat of his theories: the Emperor was the state. In the resulting Movement to Clarify the National Essence [Kokutai Meicho Undo], the Ministry of Education set about preparation of the definitive Kokutai no Hongi [Cardinal Principles of the National Essence of Japan, 1937] .19 This work was written, like the Six National Histories, by a team of bureaucrats and eminent scholars, mainly from the three imperial universities in Tokyo, Kyoto, and Sendai. It reaffirmed the 'facts' of history in the Age of the Gods and the era of the early Emperors as described in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki and proceeded through the ages to the Meiji and Taisho Emperors. In terms of adherence to contemporary scholarly standards, their work was far inferior to that of the scholars who produced the Six National Histories. At Tokyo Imperial University some historians voluntarily took up the imperial loyalist position in their studies, placing political values higher than the results of research. Nationalist studies led by Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, whose work is no longer authoritative, dominated this school. Mikami Sanji (1865-1939), who analysed the development of imperial loyalism in the Tokugawa period, had concluded that it was in the national interest to separate research from teaching. He advised incoming students that those who would go on to become teachers must teach, as historical fact, matters that had been questioned by scholars. He referred in particular to the founding of the country by Emperor Jinmu in 660 BC and to the legitimacy of the Southern Court in the fourteenth century as matters that must be taught as articles of national faith.20 Some students were extremely unhappy, as they were not allowed to study what they wanted or to hold independent opinions. Even their reading was controlled: those who read works by dissenting scholars such as Tsuda Sokichi would incur the wrath of the powerful Professor Hiraizumi. Their only option was not to go to classes. Ancient history in particular was a taboo topic: the advance of scholarship had brought into doubt numerous aspects of ancient history, and everyone knew it, but discussion was not permitted. lenaga Saburo has described how he attempted to publish in Rekishi Chiri [Historical Geography] his graduation thesis on the passage in Nihon Shoki containing the vow of the Sun Goddess to protect forever the line of her descendants, the Emperors. There was so much consternation that he decided to withdraw it because of the difficulty it would cause for the publishers and his senior colleagues.21 A single dissenting voice on ancient history was that of Tsuda

xxiv


Sokichi (1873-1961) of Waseda University. He worked at a private university, not supported by the state. As early as 1913, Tsuda published Jindaishi no Atarashii Kenkyu [New Studies on the History of the Age of the Gods], in which he laid out his theory that the tales of the Age of the Gods in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki were not historically true, but, rather, stories created around the time of composition of the works in order to justify the imperial house. In later works he also cast doubt on the existence of some of the early Emperors. Tsuda was given a rough interrogation by the nationalist scholars of Tokyo Imperial University, where he went as visiting lecturer in the autumn of 1939. In 1940, sale of four of his works was prohibited by government order, and Tsuda and his publisher, Iwanami Shigeo (1881-1946), of Iwanami Publishing Company, were charged with violation of the publications law by offering insult to the imperial dignity and were placed on trial in Tokyo District Criminal Court. Tsuda offered a written defence, pointing out a long tradition of uninhibited and controversial discussion of ancient history and the Emperors, with a wide variety of views expressed.22 He also defended scientific historical method. Even if correct results were achieved, said Tsuda, they were worthless if not arrived at by modern historical method. The court seems to have listened carefully to Tsuda, but nevertheless it convicted him on one of nine charges, on the basis of materials in Kojiki oyobi Nihon Shoki no Kenkyu [Studies on Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, 1919]. Japan in 1942 was an authoritarian state, where rough treatment of suspects and convicts was routine; yet, because of the court's failure to meet a procedural deadline, Tsuda and Iwanami never had to serve their prison sentences. The court authorities scrupulously acknowledged this failure and set them free. Nevertheless, the message was clear: to question the Age of the Gods and the origins of the imperial house was a criminal offence under Japanese law. SAKAMOTO TARO: SCRUPULOUS CONSERVATIVE

The year 1940 was the 2,6ooth anniversary of Emperor Jinmu's inauguration of imperial rule in 660 BC. All the leading historians of Japan participated in state ceremonies, thereby confirming the historical veracity of this mythical event. Yet by 1940 many historians, including Sakamoto Taro, knew that the date for the inauguration of imperial rule was historically indeterminate. Sakamoto was passionately 'devoted to truth in history, and in The Six


xxv

National Histories of Japan he strongly criticized Emperor Kanmu and Emperor Saga for deleting portions of Shoku Nihongi: Tor the court to alter the text of a National History because of contemporary politics must be considered an act of violence.' However, historians such as Sakamoto all realized that their position was different from Emperors Kanmu and Saga, who controlled the writing of the National History. In 1940 the power to decide historical truth had passed out of the hands of historians, and there was no point in publicly denying the official version. Japanese nationalism based on the imperial house had developed to the point where the truth about history was irrelevant, and only punishment awaited those who pointed it out. In his autobiography, Kodaishi no Michi [The Way of Ancient History], Sakamoto discussed somewhat ruefully the affair of Emperor Jinmu's anniversary. He offered the view that participation in state celebrations at best enabled historians to obtain financial support for research. At a time when all financial resources were devoted to war-related activities, and not one yen would be provided to scholars who wanted to disprove ancient myths, historians could thereby obtain funds for research on ancient times. They could work on sites and materials alleged to be related to Emperor Jinmu and which might contribute to knowledge of other aspects of ancient history, while withholding their view that imperial rule had not necessarily begun in 660 BC.23

Sakamoto was not damaged by the experience of celebrating an event he knew to be untrue and did not dwell on it. A rationalist, during the war he simply applied himself to pure scholarship, systematically collecting documents for projects in ancient history and publishing authoritative reports.24 Born in Hamamatsu in Shizuoka Prefecture in central Japan, Sakamoto Taro was the son of a school principal. His father was robust and abstemious, like Sakamoto, but not a scholar; Sakamoto developed- his own scholarly interests in unpromising conditions. He described his primary school in Hamamatsu as a country school, and upon graduation in 1914 he continued at Hamamatsu Middle School. In 1919, Nagoya Eighth High School was chosen because it was the closest. However, he found his calling when he entered Tokyo University in 1923 as a history student. The class in Japanese history was small there were five students in first year; the professors were distinguished - Mikami Sanji, Kuroita Katsumi, Tsuji Zennosuke (1877-1955); and the scholarly atmosphere was serious and enthusiastic. The training was intense, and the students were expected

xxvi


eventually to publish as a matter of course. Even so, writing did not come easily to him at first. His earliest publication, in 1928, was a revision of his Tokyo University BA thesis on post-stations in ancient times, a subject for meticulous research, but not of great national importance. His second book, Taika Kaishin no Kenkyu [Studies on the Taika Reform of 645], appeared in 1935. In it he displayed signs of the conservatism that would distinguish his later writings and that is evident in The Six National Histories of Japan. In the 19605 and 19705, when a controversy raged among Japanese historians on whether the Taika Reform had actually taken place, Sakamoto never changed his views on its historical reality. His first comprehensive work on Japanese history was in two volumes in 1950-1: Nihonshi Gaisetsu [Survey of Japanese History]. But from the 19505 on, because of the accumulation of vast knowledge, the writing came more easily, and his works eventually numbered more than two hundred books, articles, essays, and reviews. He became Professor at Tokyo University in 1935 and head of the Historiographical Institute in 1951, remaining until his mandatory retirement from the public university in 1962, when he transferred to Kokugakuin University. As a senior scholar he served on many historical boards and participated in numerous scholarly projects. Sakamoto's ability to read, at first sight, ancient handwritten documents became legendary: these documents in Classical Chinese often display orthographic peculiarities, contain obsolete and local terms, and refer to obscure matters. The few foreigners who become adept at reading them can never handle the great volume consumed by Sakamoto. This proficiency in the documentary materials of history made him sceptical of theory, leading to his opposition to the ideas of Tsuda Sokichi. Tsuda's views were revolutionary, emphasizing the inconsistencies and anachronisms in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki and suggesting that much of the material on most ancient times was concocted by the authors of those works in the early eighth century. But for Sakamoto and the other historians of Tokyo University, study began with documents, whose provenance had to be determined; they were not easily convinced that materials on the pre-imperial age had no basis whatsoever. Sakamoto's predecessor at Tokyo University, the eminent cultural historian Tsuji Zennosuke, criticized Tsuda, saying that he was very adept at analysing books but could work only on published materials, not documents.25 As the result of his training in historical method at Tokyo University, Sakamoto could reasonably and convincingly interpret a


xxvii

wide range of evidence. Much credit for this training must go to Kuroita Katsumi, who prepared modern editions of the great works of Japan in Kokushi Taikei [Compendium of Japanese History]; Sakamoto worked on some of these volumes.26 Finally, Sakamoto was blessed with historical imagination, enabling him to see the connections between materials that others did not and to devise alternative approaches to old subjects. These skills, together with unremitting energy and strength of character, made him the acknowledged dean of ancient historians. His study of the Six National Histories has not been surpassed.27 Contemporary scholars who identify traditional values with all that was bad about Japan might be biased against Sakamoto's conservatism. In The Six National Histories of Japan he clearly demonstrates his admiration for the Confucian values of loyalty, filial piety, and devotion to scholarship and learning, praising those authors of the Six National Histories who best exemplified these qualities. In his personal life he was upright, eschewing alcohol and tobacco, embracing the values of family life, showing gratitude towards his teachers and, in turn, reserved but genuine concern for his students. Like many Japanese scholars, he was sustained by his wife. He described his wife, Matsue, as sound in heart and body; she gave him three prized children, who in turn gave numerous grandchildren. Such conservatism naturally led to a positive view of the imperial house. Because of his respect for the imperial house, he was appointed Reader of passages from Nihon Shoki and Shoku Nihongi at the ceremonial bathing of the three grandchildren of the Showa Emperor, starting with Prince Hiro in 1960. For the Prince, he chose the Nihon Shoki volume on the ideal Emperor of ancient times, Nintoku; for Princess Saya, the volume on Empress Suiko; and for Prince Aya in 1965, the volume on Emperor Sujin, whose name, meaning 'Worship the Gods/ reflected the desire of the ancients to put sacred matters before secular matters.28 Even though he was elected a member of the Japan Academy in 1958 and received numerous other awards, Sakamoto described this imperial appointment as Reader as his greatest honour as a scholar, following in the footsteps of the Tokyo University scholars Mikami Sanji and Tsuji Zennosuke.29 Many Japanese and foreign critics might therefore find Sakamoto an old-fashioned admirer of the Emperor system, which was responsible for the tragedies of modern Japan and the pain Japan inflicted on the world in its expansionist period up to 1945. Yet Sakamoto's views were not unreflective, and those who would

xxviii


condemn him should be prepared to deal with his sophistication; he should not be consigned to narrow imperialism on the basis of generalities - for although he refused to dismiss the legends of ancient Japan in their entirety, he carefully examined the basis for each one. Sakamoto had no patience with the opinions of the National Scholars, who held that the ancient myths in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, the foundation of the modern imperialist ideology, contained literal truth. He always put evidence ahead of ideas, and if he admired the traditions of the Japanese imperial system, he also put its history under rigorous scrutiny. He did not subscribe to the overblown theories about the national essence and the national mission of Japan that emerged in the 19305 and 19405. His positive views about the imperial house were confined to affirming its reality as a central component of Japan's history in ancient times, which is difficult to deny, and its persistence into the twentieth century as part of the Japanese tradition. In other respects he was a complete rationalist.

Author's Preface

Everyone uses the Six National Histories for the study of ancient Japanese history, but few study the Six National Histories themselves. Only Nihon Shoki is a field of research for a considerable number, while the number of those who study Shoku Nihongi and the other Five National Histories (Nihon Koki, Shoku Nihon Koki, Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, and Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku) shrinks drastically. This is strange, because in modern historical research the evaluation of sources is considered an important step, with rigorous internal and external scrutiny of ancient documents and records, in assessing their historical worth. Books of historical writing are sources equally valuable as documents and records, and it is much more important that their accounts be evaluated. This is because they are compiled some time after the events they describe and strongly reflect the views of the authors and the influence of their times. The Six National Histories were official histories compiled under imperial command, mainly by bureaucrats, over a space of more than two hundred years in the eighth and ninth centuries. Their scope and character were limited even though they used authoritative government materials. Furthermore, there are errors, both intentional and unintentional, committed by the compilers in handling them; and strengths and weaknesses in structure and expression were similarly a product of the minds of the compilers. Without reading between the lines to grasp the conditions of their compilation, we cannot truly understand the entries in these works and thereby know the facts of history. Thus the study of the Six National Histories is a necessary stage before using them to study history. There are many approaches to the study of the Six National Histo-

xxx

Author's Preface

ries. The most orthodox approach is to regard them as works of historical writing by Japanese of ancient times, dealing with the question: how was their historical consciousness influenced by the thought and methods of China? What were the special characteristics of the Six National Histories in comparison to the Chinese history books? These are questions about the cultural history of Japan. They involve consideration of the ritsuryo state system and its social foundations, which produced works of such high historical and literary quality during this two-hundred-year period. The other approach is from the standpoint of historical methodology, which asks how reliable the Six National Histories are as materials for the history of ancient times. Many people have taken up Nikon Shoki from this point of view, and there are diverse scholarly theories. However, owing to their authoritative status as standard histories, there are no theories about Shoku Nihongi and the other four works. In this book, both approaches are used, where appropriate, to explain the circumstances of compilation of each of the Six National Histories and their nature and value as works of historical writing. Because of the nature of the problems, the description inevitably becomes dry as dust; so I have tried to adopt a popular style of expression. However, the substance follows the results of overall scholarly research. Looking back, I first began to think about an overview of the Six National Histories when I wrote "Rikkokushi ni tsuite" [On the Six National Histories], which was published in 1939 in Honpo Shigakushi Ronso [Essays on the History of Historical Studies in Japan], in honour of the fiftieth anniversary of the Historical Studies Association of Japan. Writing that article made me keenly conscious that very few basic facts about the Six National Histories had been clarified. In the following thirty years I tried to illuminate the basic facts of each of the Six National Histories in a number of articles and have now taken this opportunity to bring them together. I am ashamed that thirty years have produced so little; at the same time I have been alerted to the many problems that remain. In the preparation of this work I owe great scholarly debts to my seniors and friends. I failed to thank them at the time and place, so I hereby formally express my gratitude. I also fear that some works which should have been included may have been omitted, owing to my negligence. For this I can only beg the forgiveness of the respective authors. September 1970

THE Six NATIONAL HISTORIES OF JAPAN


CHAPTER ONE

Introduction

THE NAME: six NATIONAL HISTORIES The name of the Six National Histories is pronounced rikkokushi. The number six is rendered as roku in Wu pronunciation and as riku in Han pronunciation; hence rikkokushi is the Han rendering.1 When it is encountered in Buddhist or general secular materials, the number six is generally rendered as roku - the Six Ways, the Six Roots of Perception, the Six Jizo (guardian deities of the six states of existence), the Six Poetical Geniuses of Japan, the Sixty-Some Provinces, and so forth. But in relation to studies of things Chinese carried out in ancient Japan it is riku - the Six Sutras, the Six Arts, the Six Books, the Six Dynasties, the Six Classics, and so on. The Six National Histories were written in Japan but have the same style of scholarship as Chinese studies, so their name has come to be rendered riku, in the Han pronunciation. National History (kokushi) broadly refers to a book that tells the history of a nation. But this requires amplification, for the term kokushi does not always carry the same meaning. In Japanese writing, the characters for kokushi (|HJ5£D first appear in Nihon Shoki in the annals of Emperor Richu (r. 400-5) and, second, in the law codes of the Taiho (701-4) and \oro (717-24) eras. First, the record in Nihon Shoki for the eighth month, 428, in the reign of Emperor Richu contains an entry, 'Kokushi were established in each province for the first time.' In this case kokushi does not refer to a book, but to government scribes for the provinces, and the entry narrates the establishment of officials performing the function of clerks. The use of shi (5^) with reference to clerk was common in ancient China, where the Zhou Li [Rites of Zhou] lists five kinds of clerks serving the Emperor. In Japan, however, after this use of

4

The Six National Histories of Japan

kokushi in the reign of Emperor Richu, it is almost never used to refer to clerks. Second, kokushi appears in the Taiho Code of 701 and the \oro Code of 718 as follows: Among the duties of the Head of the Ministry of Central Affairs, the personnel law specifies that 'he supervises the kokushi'; in the duties of the Head of the Library Bureau it states that 'he compiles the kokushi.'2 Clearly, kokushi here refers to a book, but the context requires explanation. The Ancient Records cited in Ryo no Shuge [Collected Commentaries on the "Voro Code] is misleading. It says, 'Kokushi is the name of a book recording the events of the time. It is like the Chinese works Chun Qiu [Spring and Autumn Annals] and the Han Shu [History of the Former Han Dynasty]. They are Veritable Records.'3 But 'the time' may be any time, and identification of the Chun Qiu and the Han Shu as Veritable Records is not correct, so this cannot be considered a valid explanation. More to the point, the main text of the section 'Miscellaneous Laws' says, 'If there are omens of disaster and natural calamities, report it to the Yin-Yang Bureau. When it is finished, seal it according to seasons and send it to the Ministry of Central Affairs, to be entered into the kokushi.'^ The Shinn/o Shiki [Private Commentary on the New Laws] cited in the Sanki [Commentary on Ryo no Shuge by Sanuki Naganao] comments on the phrase 'compiles the kokushi' as follows: 'High officials as well as ordinary ones should take notes of affairs within their jurisdiction and send them to the Bureau. The Bureau will compile them, and the Ministry of Central Affairs will authorize them.'5 These records indicate that the government, in order to leave a record of its actions, ordered the Ministry of Central Affairs to obtain documents of the current activities of all officials, and that it was a practice to compile these documents. Thus the kokushi mentioned here is not the history of the distant past but, rather, a document of the present. This meaning of kokushi is quite different from our present understanding of 'National History.' In China, records of the words and activities of the Emperor were diligently kept by the Court Historian, thereby creating the Diaries of Activity and Repose (Qijuzhu; Japane'se kikyochu). These became the basis for the Veritable Records (Shilu; Japanese jitsuroku) that were written after the Emperor's death. Following a change of dynasty, a number of these Veritable Records became, in turn, the basis for compiling the history of the preceding dynasty. According to Iwahashi Koyata, the kokushi described in the Taiho and \o"ro codes were the same as the Diaries of Activity and Repose and the

Introduction

5

Veritable Records;6 but in fact they cannot be described as identical. In Japan, according to the codes, the Ministry of Central Affairs had officials called Private Secretaries to the Minister, divided into grades of upper, middle, and lower. One of their duties was 'to draft imperial proclamations and to administer the keeping of all the Records of the Palace/7 According to the 'Shaku' commentary cited by Ryo no Shuge, 'the Records of the Palace refer to the Emperor, and do not include the Three Empresses/8 Thus these Records of the Palace, and not the kokushi, are the documents that should be equated with the Chinese Diaries of Activity and Repose. They continued to be written, in later reigns, as Palace Diaries (naiki nikki). The kokushi of the Library Bureau did not merely record the activities and words of the Emperor; it was a compilation of the records of the doings of many offices and, therefore, a broader history of the government. In light of the existence of the Palace Diaries devoted to the activities of the Emperor, we cannot identify the kokushi of the Library Bureau with the Chinese Diaries of Activity and Repose. Thus, although the kokushi cited in the codes was a book of history, it was more a record of current history. However, other references scattered through the ancient documents suggest a history of the country from ancient times. This is the broadest and the most commonly understood meaning of kokushi and has persisted until later times. The first mention of a National History is in Shoku Nihongi, tenth day, second month, 714: An imperial order was given to Junior Sixth Rank, Higher, Ki Ason Kiyondo and Senior Eighth Rank, Lower, Miyake Ason Fujimaro, to compile a National History/ As we shall see later, this is a valuable document concerning the process of compiling Nihon Shoki; it is also the earliest instance of the use of kokushi to mean a history book. Iwahashi Koyata's theory that this kokushi was the one compiled by the Head of the Library Bureau also holds that it was a record of the current time.9 If this were the case, however, the work would be part of the regular duties of the Head of the Library Bureau and there would have been no need to issue a special command to Ki Kiyondo and his colleague. I believe that the work was a history book which would subsequently become Nihon Shoki. The next piece of evidence is the memorial presented by Tsu Muraji Mamichi and others in Shoku Nihongi, seventeenth day, seventh month, 790, wherein they recount the immigration of their ancestors from Paekche during the reign of Empress Regent Jingu (r. 201-69) and their meritorius service during the reign of Emperor Ojin (r. 270-310), Nintoku (r. 313-99), and Bidatsu (r. 572-85). It

6


states, 'In addition, these matters are fully recorded in the National History and the genealogies.' In this case, 'the National History' specifically means Nihon Shoki. Apparently the term 'the National History(ies) and the genealogies' was current at that time: Kogo Shui [Gleanings from Ancient Words, 807] states, 'The matter is recorded in the National Histories and the genealogies, but there remain a few things to discuss in detail/10 In this case, the term National Histories includes Nihon Shoki and Shoku Nihongi. Also, in the discussion of events from the descent of the Heavenly Grandchild to the eastern expedition of the first Emperor Jinmu, Kogo Shui states, 'The names of the officials in attendance appear in the National History.'11 Here, of course, Nihon Shoki is meant. Subsequently, the text of Nihon Koki, thirteenth day, eighth month, 794, states, 'Minister of the Right Junior Second Rank Kaneyuki, and Crown Prince's Mentor, General of the Guards Fujiwara Ason Tsugutada and others, were commanded by imperial decree to compile a National History, which they have completed.' This was the second half of Shoku Nihongi. In the same work, in the memorial to the throne from Sugano Mamichi and others presenting the completed Shoku Nihongi, thirteenth day, second month, 797, we read, 'Your ministers have compiled the National History with their own frivolous private views.' Here Shoku Nihongi is termed a National History. Also, in Volume I of Ruiju Sandai Kyaku [Classified Regulations of Three Reigns] there is an order of the Council of State for the twenty-eighth day, tenth month, 813, which cites a gloss by First Vice-Controller of the Left, Ono Ason Nonushi: 'The rise of Sarume is detailed in the National History.'12 Since there is an account in Book i of Nihon Shoki of the awarding of the title 'Sarume Kimi' to the deity Ame Uzume at the time of the descent of the Heavenly Grandchild, there can be no doubt that this also refers to Nihon Shoki.13 These examples make it clear that such works as Nihon Shoki and Shoku Nihongi were commonly referred to as National Histories during the Nara and early Heian periods. Such examples continued through later history up to the present day. The use of the term Six National Histories is, of course, based upon this meaning. Next let us consider the 'Six National Histories.' The term comprises Nihon Shoki, Shoku Nihongi, Nihon Koki, Shoku Nihon Koki, Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, and Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku. When did the concept of the Six National Histories arise? Examining the records in which the name appears, we find that it is, surprisingly, not a very ancient term. The preface to the Muromachi-period work Zenrin Kokuhoki [Record of the Treasures of Neighbouring Countries] by

Introduction

7

Zuikei Shuho states, 'In Japan there are the Six National Histories, and so on, but very few people read them.'14 This is the earliest instance. Since the last of the Six National Histories was completed in 901 this suggests a hiatus of more than 500 years in which the name was not used. However, this is hard to believe. Perhaps the name existed but simply does not appear in the surviving records. There is evidence that in early times this six-part National History was distinguished as a group from other books. This was a natural development: the imperially commissioned histories of ancient times came out one after another and then ended after these six works. Not a single volume remains of succeeding compositions, such as Shinkokushi [New National History], which was an unfinished manuscript. The earliest evidence that they were viewed as a group is found in Ruiju Kokushi [Classified National Histories] by Sugawara Michizane (845-903), which organized the entries in the Six National Histories by categories and arranged them into a single work. Also, in Oe Masafusa's (1051-1111) Gpdansho [Selections from Oe's Talks], a record of his conversations, Oe answers the question, who compiled the histories of Japan (nihongi)l (Thus the term nihongi had both the broader meaning of 'the histories of Japan' and the narrower meaning of the specific work, Nihongi, of 720.) He answered that Nihongi (the same as Nihon Shoki) was edited by Crown Prince Toneri; Shoku Nihongi, by Sugano Mamichi; Nihon Koki, by Fujiwara Otsugu; and so on. Masafusa proceeded through all the Six National Histories, naming the editor of each.15 In Nichureki [Dual History, author unknown], written in the latter Kamakura period, the Six National Histories are listed by their individual names, along with Ruiju Kokushi. As in Godansho, the term Six National Histories is not used, but they are recognized as an entity.16 A strong counter-argument has been put forward by Iwahashi Koyata. He notes that when Heian period works concerned with court affairs, such as Honcho Getsurei [Monthly Events of Japan] and Seiji Yoryaku [Brief Outline of Government], quote from the Six National Histories, material taken from Nihon Shoki is always identified as 'Nihongi says,' whereas material taken from Shoku Nihongi and the others is labelled 'the National History says.' Therefore, he holds that Nihon Shoki was not included in the National Histories. The explanation he gives is that the National Histories compiled by imperial command were the record of one period or another and correspond to the Diaries of Activity and Repose and the Veritable Records of China; while Nihon Shoki, being the history of former reigns, corresponds to the Official Histories of China. Thus he holds that to conflate the National Histories and Nihon Shoki is incorrect.17

8


This distinction between Nihongi and kokushi (National Histories) in such works as Honcho Getsurei was pointed out long ago by Sato Shigemi. He reasoned that copies of Nihon Shoki were possessed by many people, so that they quoted from these copies, whereas the other Five National Histories were difficult to obtain, so that writers quoted Ruiju Kokushi instead, which organized the same materials under topical headings.18 Iwahashi did not adopt this theory, holding that the fundamental differences between the two as works of historical writing provide sufficient reason to distinguish between them. However, the materials I have already cited provide much convincing proof that Nihon Shoki was regarded as part of the National Histories around the Enryaku (782-806) and Daido (806-10) eras. This is evident even from the name Ruiju Kokushi [Classified National History]. Within Ruiju Kokushi, under the 'National Histories' in book 147, entries regarding the compilation of Nihon Shoki are given. Similarly, under the heading of Kokokushi [Lectures on the National Histories], there are several accounts of lectures on Nihon Shoki given at the court. Thus Nihon Shoki was considered an authentic work of National History by the eminent Heian historian Sugawara Michizane. Let us take one more case. There is a theory in Man'yoshu Jidai Nanji [Problems Regarding the Date of Composition of Man'yoshu] by Kensho, the renowned scholar-priest of the late Heian-early Kamakura period. Kensho had previously written Sen Man'yoshu Jidai Jojoji [Some Matters Relating to the Date of Composition of Man'yoshu], which had been criticized by the scholars Doin and Shomy5 in Sen Man'yoshu Jidai Jojo Nanji [Problems Concerning Kensho's 'Sen Man'yoshu Jidai Jojoji']. In Man'yoshu Jidai Nanji Kensho returned the criticism and defended his position. The point in dispute was whether Man'yoshu had been compiled during the reign of Emperor Shomu (r. 724-49) or the reign of Emperor Heizei (r. 806-9). Shomyo's criticism was that the 'Heizei Tenshi' (Heizei Emperor) given in the Preface to Kokinshu [Collection of Ancient and Modern Poems] actually referred to Emperor Shomu and not to Emperor Heizei of the Daido era. In support of his position, he wrote, 'This appears in detail in Nihongi and the National Histories/ Now the accounts of Emperor Shomu and Emperor Heizei are found in Shoku Nihongi and Nihon Koki, not in Nihon Shoki. Thus it appears that the phrase 'Nihongi and the National Histories' was a common phrase, cited carelessly. It is clear that by 'Nihongi' Shomyo was referring not to the particular work Nihon Shoki but, more vaguely, to histories of Japan in general. In addition, since in later passages he writes, 'Shoku Nihongi says,' we cannot even say that he included Shoku

Introduction

9

Nihongi in the general term 'National Histories.' Kensho's precise reply to this was: The National Histories consist of: - Nihon Shoki. 20 volumes [sic.] From Emperor Jinmu to Empress Jito. 41 reigns. - Shoku Nihongi. 40 volumes. [Other notes omitted hereafter]. - Nihon Koki. 40 volumes. - Shoku Nihon Koki. 20 volumes. - Montoku Jitsuroku. 10 volumes. - Sandai Jitsuroku. 50 volumes. What then is the meaning of this phrase, 'Nihongi and the National Histories'?19

Thus Kensho considered the Six National Histories as a group and questioned the validity of the expression 'Nihongi and the National Histories/ which treated them as separate. There are many ways in which Nihon Shoki is different from the other five works of the Six National Histories. It was esteemed as the oldest work; lectures on it started in the Nara period and were held frequently at the court in the early Heian period; and many different kinds of private commentaries on it were written. In addition to differences arising from its fundamental character as a book of history, there were marked differences in the way people of later times treated Nihon Shoki. This was probably why people quoted the other National Histories separately from Nihongi. In those times, tradition exercised an influence in the scholarly world, and when someone devised a form, later people adopted it uncritically. Perhaps Honcho Getsurei intended to make a distinction between Nihongi and Ruiju Kokushi when making quotations, but later scholars were not aware of that and quoted them separately because that work had done so. We must conclude that Nihongi was considered as part of the Six National Histories. This is seen in the position of Sugawara Michizane and Kensho. Using National Histories as a general term for the Six National Histories had been the usual practice since ancient times. The name Six National Histories, which appeared in the Muromachi era and was widely used in the Edo period, became the standard term. In 1657 Tateno Shunsetsu published an edition of Shoku Nihongi and noted in the publishing account, 'In Japan there are the Six National Histories.' Miyake Kanran's preface to Hoken Taiki [Record of Japan from the Hogen Era to the Kenkyu Era (1156-98), 1712] by Kuriyama Senpo states, 'Praise and blame are not found in the Six

io


National Histories/ In Motoori Norinaga's Uiyamabumi [First Steps into the Mountains, 1798], the term Six National Histories is used repeatedly. There are cases, less common, of the use of other terms, such as 'The Six Official Histories' and 'The Six Histories.' CLASSIFICATION

The Six National Histories have at least four common characteristics. First, they are official histories compiled under imperial decree. Of course, a number of other non-historical works were also compiled under imperial decree. There are the three early Heian collections of Chinese poetry - Ryounshu [Cloud-borne Collection, 814], Bunka Shureishu [Collection of Literary Masterpieces, 818], and Keikokushu [Collection for Ordering the State, 827]. There are the three collections of regulations (kyaku) and procedures (shiki) of the Konin (810-24), Jogan (859-77), and Engi (901-23) eras. There is also Ryo no Gige [Commentary on the Laws]. And, finally, there are the poetry collections, beginning with Kokinshu [Ancient and Modern Collection], which continued through twenty-one anthologies. However, there were very few other histories compiled under imperial decree. Kojiki, which was begun under Emperor Tenmu (r. 673-86) and committed to writing under order from Empress Genmei (r. 707-15), may be said to have been compiled under imperial decree, but it is not an official history. There is also Ruiju Kokushi, compiled by Sugawara Michizane under order from Emperor Uda (r. 887-97), but it did nothing more than rearrange the entries in the Six National Histories, and, thus, it is the same as the Six National Histories except for format. Much later, for Dai Nihon Shi [Great History of Japan] of the Mito domain, the editors specifically implored the court to rank it as equivalent to an imperially commanded project, but it is different in nature from the early works compiled under imperial order. Thus official histories compiled under imperial order are confined to the Six National Histories. Second, since they were compiled under imperial order, the works were carried out by the government. They were compiled to reflect the power of the government in the period when the ritsuryo state flourished, from the eighth to the early tenth century. Other works compiled under imperial command, such as the poetry collections, were not necessarily written to reflect the authority of the government. The Six National Histories were different. The authors were the leaders of society - imperial princes and high-ranking subjects; and working with them were extremely capable, highly ranked bureaucrats and leading scholars. For the place of compilation, a

Introduction

11

Chronicles of Japan Office or, later, a National History Office was established. The materials used were records from the Library Bureau and the biographies of meritorious subjects compiled by the Ministry of Ceremonial. Materials related to the period under review were furnished by government order. Overall, the Six National Histories came about by authority of the government of the time; thus they may properly be called officially compiled history books. The government possessed such powers in the Nara period and the early Heian period, when the ritsuryo state was operating well; the Six National Histories were a glamorous achievement of that regime. Third, their format is annalistic, and they are written in Classical Chinese (kanbun). Shi Tong [Survey of Histories] is a critique of ancient histories and historians by the Tang-dynasty historian Liu Zhiji. In Volume i, in a section titled 'The Two Forms,' he explains that the ancient Chinese histories were classified into annals and biography. According to Liu, the origin of the annalistic form was Zuo Qiuming's Zuo Zhuan [Zuo's Commentary], which is a commentary on the Chun Qiu. The biography form started with Sima Qian's Shi Ji [Records of the Historian]. The Six National Histories adopted the annalistic form. There are some problems regarding details of the annalistic form, but, broadly speaking, they all narrate the facts in the order of their year, month, and day. Fourth, the style that they all used was Classical Chinese. In Nihon Shoki there are some touches of Japanese and some exegetical passages in which they attempted to have it read in Japanese, but mostly it is Classical Chinese. In this respect it differs greatly from Kojiki, which was written in a hybrid language peculiar to that work. The other Five National Histories are also in Classical Chinese. However, they also contain edicts in the imperial proclamation (senmyo) style, and some poems are recorded in Manyo-syllabary. Since Classical Chinese was the language of government, it was appropriate to use it forj)fficial works. They stand out sharply against later works, such as Okagami [The Great Mirror] and Eiga Monogatari [A Tale of Flowering Fortunes], which used Classical Japanese. The Six National Histories can be grouped in a number of ways. First, to begin with the most formal aspect, the titles of the books can clearly be divided into groups of early and late. The first four works from Nihon Shoki to Shoku Nihon Koki all use the word chronicle (ki |H)/ while the last two, Montoku Jitsuroku and Sandai Jitsuroku, use veritable record (Jitsuroku ^H<). According to the Shi Tong discussed above, the titles of works from the Han dynasty onward used four terms: book (sho ^), record (ki g2), chronicle (ki |H)/ and

12


brief account (ryaku ffi§). For the annalistic style, chronicle (ki) was used, as in Han Ji [Chronicle of Han] by Xun Yue and How Han Ji [Chronicle of the Later Han] by Yuan Hong; for the biography style, sho was used, as in Qian Han Shu [History of the Former Han] and How Han Shu [History of the Later Han]. The Six National Histories, being annalistic, used chronicle in the first four books, thus following the Chinese example. But Veritable Records, as already explained, were based on the Chinese Diaries of Activity and Repose, which described the activities of a single Emperor during his lifetime, and in name they correspond to one aspect of the Six National Histories. However, Shoku Nihon Koki was the history of the reign of Emperor Ninmyo (r. 833-50) and Montoku Jitsuroku was the history of the reign of Emperor Montoku (r. 850-8), so, from the point of view of their contents, both works are closer to the Veritable Records of China; yet Shoku Nihon Koki is not called a Veritable Record, thus producing a discrepancy between the contents and the name of the book. Second, the Six National Histories can be grouped by the scope of the period they cover: the reign of a single Emperor or the reigns of many. Nihon Shoki, apart from the special case of the Age of the Gods, covers forty reigns, from Emperor Jinmu (r. 660-585 BC) to Empress Jito (r. 690-7); Shoku Nihongi covers nine reigns, from Emperor Monmu (r. 697-707) to Emperor Kanmu (r. 781-806); Nihon Koki covers four reigns, from Emperor Kanmu to Emperor Junna (r. 823-33); and Sandai Jitsuroku covers the reigns of Emperors Seiwa (r. 858-76), Yozei (r. 876-84), and Koko (r. 884-7). In contrast are those works that cover only a single reign: Shoku Nihon Koki (Emperor Ninmyo) and Montoku Jitsuroku (Emperor Montoku). Third, the Histories can be classified according to the number of volumes they contain. The one with the most volumes is Sandai Jitsuroku, at fifty; Shoku Nihongi and Nihon Koki have forty; Nihon Shoki has thirty; Shoku Nihon Koki has twenty; and Montoku Jitsuroku has ten. Interestingly, Sandai Jitsuroku and Montoku Jitsuroku, which belong to the same group by name, go into the highest and lowest classes by number of volumes. Fourth, we can classify the Histories according to the number of years required for compilation. Nihon Shoki was begun in the tenth year of the reign of Emperor Tenmu (681), working from Teiki [Imperial Chronicles] and Kuji [Fundamental Dicta]; thirty-nine years were required to reach its completion in 720. The beginning of Shoku Nihongi is not clear, but the first thirty-volume draft came out in the reign of Emperor Junnin (r. 758-64), and from 764 to its completion

Introduction

13

in 797, more than thirty-three years elapsed. Nihon Koki was begun in 819 and was completed, after twenty-one'years, in 840. Shoku Nihon Koki took fourteen years, from 855 to 869. Montoku Jitsuroku required eight years, from 871 to 879, and Sandai Jitsuroku also took eight years, from 893 to 901. Thus Nihon Shoki took the longest time, but Shoku Nihongi was not far behind. When it comes to Nihon Koki the time drops drastically to twenty years. It drops off for Shoku Nihon Koki and the rest, and Montoku Jitsuroku and Sandai Jitsuroku, in particular, required only eight years. Sandai Jitsuroku, with the greatest number of volumes (fifty) required the least time for composition. This demonstrates that the methods of composition had become well established by that time, with the result that work proceeded more easily. TABLE 1

Form Name Nihon Shoki Shoku Nihongi Nihon Koki Shoku Nihon Koki Montoku Jitsuroku Sandai Jitsuroku

chronicle chronicle chronicle chronicle veritable record veritable record

Number of reigns

Number of volumes

Years in compilation

40 9 4 1 1

30 40 40 20 10

39 33 21 14 8

3

50

8

The foregoing classifications, as schematized in Table i, are extremely formalistic; a more substantial classification must be based on the contents of the works. There are essential questions concerning their form, authenticity as historical materials, method and processes of compilation, and contents. In these respects there are striking differences between Nihon Shoki and the other Five National Histories. Although they share the annalistic form, the text of Shoku Nihongi and the others is dense, without a single year missing, while entries are lacking for many years in Nihon Shoki. As for their authenticity as historical materials, the quality of the Five National Histories is, for the most part, uniformly high, but this is not the case with Nihon

14


Shoki. Since Nihon Shoki is full of fabrications and embellishments, it cannot be regarded as historical material without fierce scrutiny. As for method of compilation, for the Five National Histories, authentic government materials were gathered and a compilation system was set up, but it seems that this could not be contemplated for Nihon Shoki. As for contents, the Five National Histories speak about our present-day human world, but Nihon Shoki includes the world of the gods in the beginning, and there are parts of it that seem to be obscured, to be far away, as in a hazy mist. From any point of view, Nihon Shoki and the Five National Histories differ greatly. When we speak casually of the Six National Histories as a group, we must always be aware of the differences that exist in Nihon Shoki. Based on their common characteristics, Nihon Shoki is correctly included in the Six National Histories; but even among those common characteristics, Nihon Shoki is very distinctive. As the first of the Six National Histories, Nihon Shoki showed the way for the other five, but in terms of skills, the other Five National Histories advanced far ahead, so their standard as books of history is much higher. Nihon Shoki is the 'oddball' among the Six National Histories. Thus, the difference between Nihon Shoki and the Five National Histories is clear, but the respective works of the Five National Histories also differ among themselves, as discussed below. FORMAT

As already noted, the Six National Histories employ the annalistic form. However, there are variations in the application of the form, which we must now consider. In the Chun Qiu and the Zuo Zhuan, considered the originators of the annalistic form, entries are made strictly according to their year and month and are devoid of adornments. But in the Six National Histories, upon a change of Emperors, the Emperor's lineage and personal history are narrated as pre-accession history, unlike the Chun Qiu and the Zuo Zhuan. Chun Qiu begins from Emperor Yin Gong and starts abruptly: 'First year, spring, Jin, first month.' Zuo Zhuan gives some of the circumstances of the birth of Yin Gong in order to explain why the classical source work did not record his accession. Zuo Zhuan was not breaking standard practice here, as we see from the accounts of the succeeding Emperors, Huan Gong and Zhuang Gong, which start promptly from the first year of their reign. Its method was to push straight ahead, giving priority to a framework of months and years. Han ]i, by Xun Yue of the Later Han, and Hou Han ]i, by Yuan Hong of Jin, apart from the narrative of

Introduction

15

the founders, Gaozu and Guangwu, followed this format, as did the later Tang Jian [Mirror of the Tang Dynasty] by Fan Zuyu of Song. In contrast to these strict annals, some annalistic works admit other materials. For example, the Basic Annals of the Biographiesstyle histories record matters in the beginning of the Emperor's reign, including his lineage, character, and events up to his accession. Some add an Assessment at the end of a reign. This format was also adopted in the Veritable Records of the reigns of individual Emperors. It is not known when Veritable Records began. According to Jiu Tangshu Jinji Zhi [Dynastic Bibliographies of the Old Tang History], Diaries of Activity and Repose are seen for each reign, beginning with Xian of Han and continuing through the Jin, Song, Liang, Later Wei, Chen, and Tang dynasties; but the oldest Veritable Record is the three-volume Veritable Record of Liang Huang-di by Zhou Xingsi. In the Tang dynasty appear the names of the twenty-volume Veritable Record of Gao Zu and the twenty- and forty-volume Veritable Records of Taizong. These Veritable Records have not survived, so their format is not clear in a strict sense, but it can be surmised from the later Veritable Records of the Ming and Qing dynasties.20 In addition, the Veritable Record of Shun Zong of Tang, by Han Yu, which is found in Han Changli Waiji, probably illustrates the form of the Tang dynasty Veritable Records, despite a few odd characteristics. They provided the material for the Official Histories, and the Basic Annals of both the Veritable Records and the Official Histories had the same format. Since they centred upon the government of the ruler and narrated history year by year, the method was natural. Since the Six National Histories also focused on the government of the Emperors, their annalistic form was close to that of the Basic Annals and the Veritable Records. Or, more correctly, with both the Basic Annals and the Veritable Records in hand, the compilers probably strove to imitate them. In Nihon Shoki - apart from the two volumes narrating the Age of the Gods - starting from Emperor Jinmu, the account always began by reciting the ancestry of the Emperor, his qualities, and his personal history. In some cases the Emperor's character is not recorded, but in the first half of Nihon Shoki, where the details of history are scanty, the compilers scrupulously cited the time when he was invested as Crown Prince, the burial of the previous Emperor, and the naming of his mother as Empress Dowager - the same model used in the Basic Annals of the Han Shu and the How Han Shu. Let us give one example.

i6

The Six National Histories of Japan Han Shu The Annals of Emperor Xiaohui Emperor Xiaohui was the Heir-apparent of Emperor Gaozu. His mother was called the Empress Lii. When Emperor Xiaohui was in his fifth year, Gaozu first became King of Han. In Gaozu's second year, the future Emperor Xiaohui was established as Heir-apparent; in the twelfth year, the fourth month, Gaozu died. In the fifth month, on the day bingyin, the Heir-apparent took the imperial throne. He honoured the Empress, entitling her, the Empress Dowager. (Homer H. Dubs, trans., The History of the Former Han Dynasty by Pan Ku, First Division, the Imperial Annals, Chapters 1-4 [Baltimore: Waverly Press 1938], 173. Converted to piny ing romanization.) Hou Han Shu The Annals of Emperor Xiaozhang Emperor Suzong Xiaozhang's name was Da; he was the fifth son of Xianzong. His mother was the First Consort of Jia. In the third year of Yongping (60 AD) he was instituted as Crown Prince. As a youth he was generous, and enjoyed Confucian learning; this quality was esteemed by Xianzong. In the eighth month of the eighteenth year, Renzi, he took the imperial throne, at the age of nineteen. He honoured the Empress, entitling her the Empress Dowager. Nihon Shoki Emperor Kogen The Emperor Oho-Yamato-neko-hiko-kuni-kuru was the eldest child of the Emperor Oho-Yamato-neko-hiko-futo-ni. His mother's name was Hoso-bime, daughter of Oho-me, Agata-nushi of Shiki. He had been created Imperial Prince in Spring, the ist month of the 36th year of the reign of the Emperor Oho-Yamato-neko-hiko-futo-ni. He was then nineteen years of age. The Emperor Oho-Yamato-neko-hiko-futo-ni died in Spring, the 2nd month of the 76th year of his reign. First year, Spring, ist month, 14th day. The Prince Imperial assumed the Imperial Dignity. He honoured the Empress with'the title of Grand Empress (W.G. Aston, Nihongi, Vol. 1,147).

From the similarity in format, it is obvious that the authors of Nihon Shoki referred to the Han Shu and the Hou Han Shu. However, it is not likely that they referred to those works alone. Nihon Shoki used a chronological style. For example, for dates in the reign of Emperor

Introduction

17

Koan, it cites in order the year, season, month, sexagenary cycle of the conjunction, and sexagenary cycle of the day. This is almost the same format as the Basic Annals of the Standard Histories, except that none of the latter cite the sexagenary cycle of the conjunction. Such citations are found instead in the Diaries of Activity and Repose and in the Veritable Records. We do not know which of these works the authors of Nihon Shoki saw, but the method of recording chronology shows their influence. They probably referred to both the Basic Annals and the Veritable Records. According to Imanishi, 'The form of Nihongi overall follows the Standard Histories, but at the same time it is an indecisive work, taking account of the Veritable Records as well.' This criticism is a bit too severe; perhaps the authors of Nihon Shoki referred to both types of work, believing them both to be excellent, in order to create the historical format of Nihon Shoki. The authors of Nihon Shoki referred both to the Standard Histories and to the Veritable Records, but they did not blindly follow them. They did not adopt items they believed unnecessary. One example is the Assessments. The history books of China - starting from the Shi Ji and the first of the Standard Histories and including the annalistic works and the two histories of the Han - all included Assessments at the conclusion of each reign, covering its successes and failures. In the Veritable Records there were no Assessments but, rather, Essays of Praise on the accomplishments of the reign. However, both Assessments and Essays of Praise are entirely absent from Nihon Shoki. Every account ends abruptly with the Emperor's death, abdication, or burial. This contrasts with the dignified account of ancestry and so on at the beginning of the reign. Thus Nihon Shoki does not take the position that everything must be told, without omission. It tells the essential matters and leaves analysis to the judgement of the reader. The authors did not presume to write Assessments from their own point of view, considering it sufficient to let the reader form judgements on the basis of the facts in the book. The absence of Assessments is a striking feature of Nihon Shoki. The other Five National Histories are similar in outline to Nihon Shoki, but use different methods in dividing reigns, reading dates, assessing reigns, and including biographies and imperial edicts. In Shoku Nihongi, divisions between reigns are made inconsistently. For the six rulers Monmu, Genmei, Gensho, Shomu, Junnin, and Konin there is a pre-accession history, stating the ruler's genealogy and career, as in Nihon Shoki. However, for Koken, Shotoku, and Kanmu, the accession is run together with preceding and following events in the chronicle, and the change of reign is not clear. Without

i8


notice, Emperor Shomu has abdicated from the throne and Empress Koken has become the new ruler. The end of Emperor Junnin's reign is buried among the entries on the suppression of the rebellion of Emi Oshikatsu, and the authors seem to have moved on to the reign of Empress Shotoku without our clearly knowing. This was unusual for either Basic Annals or Veritable Records. It appears that the strict annalistic form exercised its influence here, rendering the work's historical method inconsistent. As for recording of dates, Shoku Nihongi differs from Nihon Shoki in not giving the sexagenary cycle for the first day of the month. It records the sexagenary cycle in only two entries - the second month of 698 and the tenth month of 783 - perhaps added in later times? This was because the compilers followed the method for Standard Histories and did not adopt the form of the Veritable Records. For the year in which an era changed, the compilers always began the new era in January, no matter what the date of the actual change. This was the method of the Standard Histories and Veritable Records of China. However, when this method was applied to a change of eras because of the accession of a new sovereign, rather than a desire to change the fortunes of the times, it resulted in an illogical numbering of the years of the former Emperor in terms of the era of the new Emperor. This happens at the end of the reign of Empress Genmei in 715. Her successor, Empress Gensho, ascended the throne on the second day, ninth month, but Gensho's era name of Reiki was extended back to the first day, first month, 715. Thus Empress Genmei is wrongly shown as having reigned during the Reiki era. The same thing happens at the end of the reigns of Empress Gensho in 724, Emperor Shomu in 749, and Empress Shotoku in 770. The historical method was so strict in its annalism that it downgraded the reigns of the Emperors. Assessments are given in Shoku Nihongi for Empress Shotoku and Emperor Konin. Emperor Konin's Assessment is: Before accession, he softened all things with his light. When he ascended to face south as Emperor and govern the multitudes, he set up the law without being harsh. The government was never wasteful, and the education of the people was simple and straightforward. Because of this, during the Hoki era, all four seas were peaceful and punishments were rarely applied. Far places as well as places nearby rejoiced. When his sickness became prolonged, he was concerned that the administration might become slack. Finally he abdicated, and the throne was passed on to the Crown Prince. He had far-reaching intelli-

Introduction

19

gence and knew well his own children, and left firm accomplishments for his grandchildren. It should be said of him indeed, that he was generous, forgiving, and had a broad heart. He was a man of such virtue that he deserved to be a ruler.

Since this consists entirely of praise, it may properly be called an Essay of Praise rather than an Assessment. For Empress Shotoku Shoku Nihongi says: The Empress revered Buddhism and strove to be merciful in matters of punishment and imprisonment. During the Shoho era, government aimed at tight spending. After Emi Oshikatsu was punished, Dokyo acquired power and capriciously set people to forced labor, and frequently rebuilt Buddhist temples. The demarcation between public and private became weak, and governance was less than satisfactory. Punishment became harsher day by day, and massacres were ordered unnecessarily. Thus those who spoke about this later, strongly asserted their innocence.

Since this criticizes the failures of the Empress, it follows the overall form of the Assessment in Chinese texts. Assessments were completely lacking in Nihon Shoki; partial Assessments are a distinctive feature of Shoku Nihongi. We do not know the reasoning of the authors, but Shoku Nihongi tried to adopt new ways and did not invariably follow Nihon Shoki. As a result, Shoku Nihongi is flawed in its historical form; mainly because the first half and the second half were compiled by different authors. Going on to the contents, there is a historical method that did not appear in Nihon Shoki: the inclusion of biographies in the annals at the time of death. As there are considerable differences between the first half and the second half, this feature does not appear throughout the book. In China it had appeared with the Biographies that were added to the Basic Annals of the Biographies-style works. However, the source for Shoku Nihongi was more probably the Veritable Records.21 Those whose biographies were included were people of the fifth rank and above, but not all of them were so treated. Within these limits, and with small variations in the later histories, the practice of including biographies was firmly established with Shoku Nihongi. The practice of including imperial edicts in their original wording (senmyo) also began with Shoku Nihongi. In Nihon Shoki the edicts were translated into Classical Chinese, but in Shoku Nihongi the

2O


authors placed the edicts, in their proclamation style, right into the Chinese text. This method was maintained throughout the rest of the National Histories. For Nihon Koki and the other National Histories, I shall discuss the items raised above without going into each work separately. Changes of reign are clearly recorded in Nihon Koki and the others, and a pre-accession history is given for each Emperor. This was natural for Shoku Nihon Koki and Montoku Jitsuroku in particular, since they cover a single reign each. In measuring time, the handling of the first days of the sexagenary cycles of the lunar calendar is diverse. In Nihon Koki they are not recorded, while Shoku Nihon Koki seems to record them as a matter of principle; parts of the surviving text are abbreviated, but its rule was to enter them. They are not entered in the first volumes of Montoku Jitsuroku, but they do appear after Volume 9, an unexplained change in practice. In Sandai Jitsuroku the first days of the sexagenary cycles of the conjunctions are entered without omission. Sandai Jitsuroku included both the sexagenary cycles and the dates the practice of its model, Chinese Diaries of Activity and Repose and was meticulous in measuring time. There are more Assessments in Nihon Koki than in Shoku Nihongi. Those at the end of the reign of Emperor Kanmu and Emperor Heizei are unreserved, even to the point of criticizing as improper the change of era in Daido (806-10). If the surviving text of Nihon Koki were complete, it is likely that we would encounter many more Assessments. In Shoku Nihon Koki and the two succeeding works, there is praise for the Emperor at the end of each reign, since, in contents, they correspond to the Veritable Records. However, in Sandai Jitsuroku this applies only to Emperor Seiwa (r. 858-76); there is no Essay of Praise for Emperor \5zei (r. 876-84) or Emperor Koko (r. 884-7). As for biographies, in Nihon Koki and Shoku Nihon Koki they are limited to persons of the fourth rank and above. In Montoku Jitsuroku they are fairly comprehensive down to the fifth rank. Sandai Jitsuroku also includes the fifth rank, but quite a few are abbreviated. The points discussed above are summarized in Table 2. HISTORICAL AUTHENTICITY

To what extent can we believe in the historical authenticity of the Six National Histories? A clear distinction must be made between Nihon Shoki and the other Five National Histories. Many scholars, beginning with Tsuda Sokichi, have written about the value of historical materials in Nihon Shoki. There was a time when people

Introduction

21

TABLE 2

Contents

Nihon Shoki Shoku Nihongi Nihon Koki Shoku Nihon Koki Montoku Jitsuroku Sandai Jitsuroku

Pre-accession history

1st day of month sexagenary cycle

yes

yes

no

no

no

part

no

yes

5th rank

yes

yes

no

yes

4th rank

yes

yes

yes

part

4th rank

yes

yes

part

part

5th rank

yes

yes

yes

part

5th rank

yes

Assessments

Biographies

Senmyo decrees

believed that Nihon Shoki consisted of historical facts, but precisely the opposite is now true. Many think that scholarship consists of doubting Nihon Shoki entirely. However, the historical value of the account in Nihon Shoki cannot be disposed of in such a simple, clearcut way. First, it is unreasonable to discuss together the ancient age of Emperor Jinmu and Emperor Sujin (r. 97-30 BC) and the new age of Emperor Tenmu and Empress Jito. One cannot say that because the early age is not historically true the same applies to the later. And if one takes a more general view of historical facts - as events that happened in a certain year and month, or as culture, thought, and living conditions - then Nihon Shoki is in places reliable in the latter sense, though not in the former. The credibility of its account could fill any number of books, so I will leave the issue until later and present here a general explanation of the historical value of the other five National Histories. Shoku Nihongi and the others were compiled by a historians' office working under imperial order and using the regular documentary materials of the government. Accordingly, most people recognize that the value of their historical materials is high. Of course, their purpose was to perform a function of government. Nevertheless, it

22


was a time when the government's power extended to every province and the people were controlled under orders from the centre. Therefore the works may truly be called National Histories - concerned with the people of the whole country. Later works of history differed considerably, telling only about the world of the aristocracy at the centre or looking only at Kyoto and its environs. While the historical value of the Five National Histories is thus recognized, they are uneven in complexity. This may be understood by comparing the ratio between the number of years covered and the number of volumes in each work. As Table 3 shows, Shoku Nihon Koki and Montoku Jitsuroku are nearly the same in that respect. Nor is there much difference between them and Nihon Koki. Shoku Nihongi, however, has more than double the coverage per volume of the former while Sandai Jitsuroku has about half the coverage per volume of Nihon Koki. Accordingly, the difference between Shoku Nihongi and Sandai Jitsuroku is enormous. TABLE 3

Coverage

Shoku Nihongi Nihon Koki Shoku Nihon Koki Montoku Jitsuroku Sandai Jitsuroku

Period covered

No. of volumes

Coverage per vol.

94 yrs., 5 mos. 41 yrs., 2 mos. 17 yrs., 2 mos. 8 yrs., 6 mos. 29 yrs., 1 mo.

40 40 20 10 50

2 yrs., 3 mos. 1 yr. + 10 mos. + 10 mos. + 7 mos. -

Thus we can suspect that a historical fact may be recorded in Sandai Jitsuroku, but one of similar nature does not appear in Shoku Nihongi. However, for such a discussion to proceed with rigour, it must be assumed that the amount of material in each volume is the same for every book. Yet, since there was no such convention, the amount of material in a volume varies according to circumstances. In the modern Shintei Zoho Kokushi Taikei edition, the number of pages devoted to each volume varies from ten to twenty, which is a fairly wide range. Therefore, to take up the trivial matter of the number of characters is pointless. But if we take the average for the whole work, then in each work the number of pages per volume is between twelve and fourteen and the margin of difference among the Five National Histories is not very great.

Introduction

23

Annual rites and ceremonies are recorded in Sandai Jitsuroku but not in Shoku Nihongi. Sandai Jitsuroku diligently records regular annual events, but they rarely appear in the other histories. We should not make a hasty judgement that because it was not recorded a practice did not exist; even though events occurred, they may not have been entered into the histories. The 'Hare-cane' ceremony at the New Year is a good example. On the first day of the Hare in the New Year, a cane made of Yang wood was worn to clear away pestilential vapours. This was a Chinese custom which had come to Japan and had become a part of court ceremony. It was established in Japan by an imperial order of 821 and, by a revised order of 833, it became part of the Dairi Shiki [Palace Procedures], so the ceremony was certainly performed during the reigns of Emperors Saga and Junna. However, if one looks at the Six National Histories, the ceremony is recorded once in Nihon Shoki, in 689 during the reign of Empress Jito, and it does not appear at all in Shoku Nihongi. In Nihon Koki it appears once in 830; in Shoku Nihon Koki it appears in 836 and 838. In Montoku Jitsuroku it is recorded five times and in Sandai Jitsuroku it appears almost every year for a total of twenty-four times. If this record were taken literally, then the 'Hare-cane' ceremony was not practised at all in the Nara and early Heian periods up to the reigns of Emperors Kanmu, Heizei, and Saga (r. 809-23). In the reigns of Junna (r. 823-33) and Ninmyo (r. 833-50) it was an occasional happening and not a regular custom. At the time of the reign of Emperor Montoku it was at last fixed as a regular custom - so one might conclude. Yet these are not the facts. In the south storehouse of the Shosoin there are two camelia-canes, 5 shaku, 3 bu, 3 zun (about 1.5 m) in length, exactly the requirements for the hare-canes as entered in Engi Shiki. There is a desk on which is written in India ink, 'Desk for imperial Hare-cane. Tenpyo-Hoji 2 (758), first month.' This makes it clear that the court had a ceremony involving the Hare-cane in the Tenpyo-Hoji era. In Shoku Nihongi not one instance of this ceremony is recorded as a matter of historical method. From this, we may surmise that isolated entries in Nihon Shoki and Shoku Nihongi do not mean that the event was irregular; in fact, it may actually have been carried out continuously. In the same vein, we can discuss the court banquet of the white horse at the New Year. On the seventh day of the first month the Emperor took his place in the Burakuin [Court of Abundant Pleasures] and viewed a white horse led out by the Stable Bureau; the purpose was to dispel pestilential vapours during the ensuing year. Nihon Shoki and the others record numerous instances of a banquet

24


on the seventh day of the first month, but only Shoku Nihon Koki explains that a white horse was led out. In Shoku Nihon Koki the ceremony is recorded on five occasions (834, 838, 839, 840, 849); in Montoku Jitsuroku seven times; and in Sandai Jitsuroku twenty-nine times, with not a single year omitted. Judging from this, the ceremony of the white horse became an established custom in the reign of Emperor Ninmyo and was not practised at all before that time. Yet in the Dairi Shiki for Konin (810-24) there is an entry regarding the banquet of the seventh day which records that a white horse was led out.22 In Volume 20 of Manyoshu, in the first month, 758, there is a poem by Otomo Yakamochi: The people who viewed the white horse today, - the colour of the wings of a white duck Will enjoy long life, it is said.

The note on the poem says, 'The above poem was written beforehand for the seventh day banquet by Middle Controller of the Right Otomo Sukune Yakamochi.' From the fact that it was written beforehand, we know that this ceremony had become an established custom.23 It was simply the practice of Shoku Nihongi and Nihon Koki not to record it. There are many similar cases among the shrine festivals, of which the Kamo festival is representative. In Sandai Jitsuroku there is a pattern of holding the festival annually during a period of three days in the middle of the fourth month. On the fourteenth day an escort of six palace guards was formed, and on the fifteenth day the festival was carried out; the escorts disarmed on the sixteenth day. However, in Montoku Jitsuroku this event appears only four times, and in Shoku Nihon Koki on only one occasion did the Emperor view the saddles, horses, and supplies of the escorts. From this one would conclude that the Kamo festival became an annual event from around the time of Emperor Ninmyo. But in the Shoku Nihongi entry for the third month of 698, crowds are forbidden to gather and to perform mounted archery on the day of the Kamo festival; this is reiterated on the fourth month of 702. In 711 there is an order that provincial governors be present to enforce this rule on the day of the Kamo festival. Thus, although the Kamo festival was a flourishing event before the Nara period, the National Histories did not record it. It is clear that whether or not the National Histories recorded annual rites and ceremonies indicates editorial practice rather than actual fact. The apparent evidence of the Six National Histories may lead to hasty judgement about the facts. We cannot make judge-

Introduction

25

ments on the basis of the Six National Histories without other evidence. This caveat does not apply only to annual rites and ceremonies; it arises in connection with other important matters. The presentation to the throne of Kojiki in 712 and the revision of the ritsuryo in the \oro Code of 718 are the most striking things not recorded in Shoku Nihongi. Therefore the fact that something is not recorded in Shoku Nihongi is not grounds for doubting the historical facts. There are many things that, from our present-day perspective, naturally ought to have been recorded, but that do not appear in the National Histories. What kinds of things are missing throughout the National Histories that we naturally think ought to have been recorded? One method of gauging this is to compare Ruiju Sandai Kyaku [Classified Regulations of Three Reigns] with the National Histories. Ruiju Sandai Kyaku collects the kyaku of the Konin (810-24), J°gan (859-77), and Engi (901-23) eras in order to transmit them to later generations and to assist the provincial officials in the performance of their duties. In the Six National Histories one expects to find these kyaku under the relevant date. In the same fashion, imperial proclamations ought to be given in their full text, while other materials, such as orders of the Council of State, imperial edicts, and memorials to the Emperor, ought to be either given in their full text or have their contents summarized. Now there are volumes missing from Sandai Kyaku; among the Six National Histories only about one-fourth of Nihon Koki has survived; and in Sandai Jitsuroku there are some abbreviations. Thus a full comparison cannot be made. Nevertheless, we can consider the materials that we do have, and get the general picture. A summary of the conclusions of the comparison is given in Table 4. A, B, and C refer to the correspondences between Ruiju Sandai Kyaku and the National Histories. The A group consists of cases in which there was a kyaku, but it was not recorded in the Six National Histories. The B group consists of kyaku that were fully recorded in the Six National Histories. The C group consists of kyaku that were recorded in the form of a brief summary or in which there were differences in wording or date. It is obvious that the rate of occurrence of the B group (inclusion of the full text of the kyaku in the National Histories) is remarkably low compared to the other rates. Montoku Jitsuroku, having the lowest rate of occurrence at 4 per cent, is particularly astonishing. The A group, in which kyaku were not recorded in the National Histories, is around one-half, with extremes of 61 per cent and 87 per cent, which

26


is surprising. From these figures we can see the incompleteness of the historical materials in the National Histories. We cannot doubt that many matters of great importance are not recorded in the National Histories. TABLE 4

Recording of kyaku No. of kyaku


Rate of inclusion (%)

A

B

C

A

B

C

64 61 69 45 95

43 16 17 2 28

42 41 27 5 103

43 51 61 87 42

29 13 15 4 12

28 35 24 9 45

NOTE: A, Kyaku not recorded B, Kyaku fully recorded C, Kyaku abbreviated or changed

Research needs to be conducted into other important matters, one of which is the record of filial children and virtuous wives. In the laws regarding forced labour there was provision for provincial and district officials to report to the Council of State cases of filial children, obedient grandchildren, magnanimous husbands, and virtuous wives. A report was to be presented to the Emperor, a notice posted on the village gate, and everyone in the same population register was to receive exemption from forced labour. The recording of these commendations for virtuous persons varied among the Six National Histories. The results are shown in Table 5, but this probably arises from the diverse attitudes of the compilers and thus does not reflect the facts with certainty. The rate of recording cases of filial children and virtuous wives shows a great change between the works up to Shoku Nihon Koki and those that follow. In Sandai Jitsuroku there is a drastic decline in the number of filial children but a sudden increase in the number of virtuous wives. Perhaps this arose from a change in the commendations policy of the government, but there is also a strong possibility that it resulted from differences in the practices of the compilers of the several works. In Nihon Koki there are no cases of filial children in the partial text that currently exists. The section of Ruiju Kokushi devoted to virtuous wives col-

Introduction

27

lects all the entries that appear in Nihon Koki, and our figures are based on these. Thus the ratio of filial children to virtuous wives in Nihon Koki has no significance. TABLE 5 Filial children and virtuous wives Filial Children No.


Rate per volume

10 0

.25

5 I

.25 .1 .08

4

Virtuous wives No.

Rate per volume

4 10 3 3 22

.1 .25 .15 .3 .44

The records of the post stations for swift official communications provide clear understanding of the differences in the compilers' practices. The number of times the term 'post station' appears in the Six National Histories is shown in Table 6. According to the Table the post stations were not very active in the Nara period, but it is obvious that they must indeed have been active with the rebellion of Fujiwara Hirotsugu (d. 740) and the expeditions to quell the Emishi in the Hoki (770-81) and Enryaku (782-806) eras. The compilers of the Six National Histories merely did not use the term 'post stations.' TABLE 6

Post-stations Mention of post stations Shoku Nihongi Nihon Koki Shoku Nihon Koki Montoku Jitsuroku Sandai Jitsuroku

1 2 12 4 24

We have seen the great range in the complexity of the several

28


works of the Five National Histories. What one work dealt with, another did not. Thus one cannot examine the text of the National Histories and make conclusions about whether or not certain facts existed. Next there is the problem of whether the facts that the National Histories did deal with are authentic. As already explained, since they were compiled on the basis of authoritative historical materials furnished by the government, their record is, for the most part, exact. When compared with other historical works such as Fuso Ryakki [Abbreviated Chronicle of Japan], which collected divergent views, or the historical tales (rekishi monogatari), which tried to draw out the reader's interest, the Six National Histories tower above them in veracity. However, a historical account is always conditioned by the subjectivity of the author. However much he may strive for objectivity, his own ideas and preferences affect the account. There is an inseparable connection between the Five National Histories and the ideas and standpoints of the compilers, and readers must make allowance for that factor. This issue is dealt with in the following chapters devoted to the individual works. In the same way, the authors inevitably overlooked many things. Such problems sometimes emerge from a diligent comparison between Ruiju Sandai Kyaku and the National Histories. Let us conclude with another kind of inference, based on a different example. The following order of the Council of State appears in Volume 2 of Ruiju Sandai Kyaku: Order of the Council of State: An order for the placement of twenty-one monks to practise austerities in the Shingon-in of Todaiji Temple. After investigation of the circumstances, on the nth day, 2nd month, 822, the Council of State gave an order to the Ministry of Civil Affairs, stating: The Minister of the Right says, in presenting an imperial edict, last year in the winter there was a thunderbolt. This may be an omen of plague and flood. Let the Monk Kukai build a purification hall at Todaiji and practise rites of tranquility and augmentation of benefits for the safety of the country, during the summer and during the three-month period for dispelling evil and practising good. By this means the country will be at peace. Now Junior Second Rank, Great Counsellor and Crown Prince's Mentor Fujiwara Ason Mimori received the Order, which says, Henceforth let twenty-one monks be set up as a permanent number in Shingon-in.

Introduction

29

They shall not go to the dining hall but shall practise austerities entirely, and the Head Monk should manage this. However, grouped names of the resident monks will be ordered according to the ranks, which will be done by supervising monks. If any vacancy arises for the monks it shall be filled accordingly. Qth day, 5th month, 836.24

The corresponding entry in the National Histories is in Shoku Nihon Koki, ninth day, fifth month, 836. On this day there was an imperial order saying, 'Last year in winter there was a thunderbolt; this may be an omen of disaster such as flood and pestilence. Let a purification hall be built in the Shingon-in of Todaiji, and twenty-one monks set up to practise rites of tranquility and augmentation of benefits during the summer and during the threemonth period for dispelling evil and practising good. By this means the country will be pacified. Let this become a regular ceremony in perpetuity.'

Comparing these two versions, since much of the wording is similar, it appears that the entry in the National History was written by following the kyaku. However, there are great differences in the contents. In the kyaku, the entry 'last year in the winter there was a thunderbolt' is dated 822. So is the rest - the order for setting up the purification hall, carrying out the rites during the summer and the three-month period for dispelling evil and practising good, conducting the rites for tranquility and the augmentation of benefit, all for the purpose of pacifying the country. What happened in 836 was nothing more than fixing the number of monks in the Shingon-in at twenty-one and setting up a Head Monk to supervise them. The text of the National History flattens out the two-step account in the kyaku into a single process, suggesting that the events of 822 were those of 836. The authors took the general sense of the kyaku when writing the National History; but they made a mistake and transmitted the wrong facts to posterity. These are the common characteristics of the Six National Histories, which are the basis for the formation of the group of history books bearing that name. Yet studying their common characteristics is not the way to gain a true understanding of the works. Each was composed in a different age and by different authors, and each is distinctive. The way to understanding the Six National Histories opens up by determining the special nature of each work.

CHAPTER TWO

Nihon Shoki

THE N A M E OF THE BOOK

Nihon Shoki O^ÎH) is also called Nihongi (EJÎE)- Since ancient times there have been various theories concerning the origin of the two names and their relation to each other. The theories fall into two major groups, depending on the understanding of the third character sho (^). One group holds that Nihongi was the original name and that sho was added later. The other group holds that Nihon Sho (0 îtf) was the original name and that Nihon Shoki arose from that. The first position was taken by Ban Nobutomo (1773-1848); he was followed by Hirata Atsutane (1776-1843), lida Takesato (1827-1900), and many others, and it continued as a popular view until recent times. According to Ban Nobutomo, in the entry for the fifth month, 720, in which Shoku Nihongi records the presentation of the book to the throne, it says, 'Nihongi was compiled.' The succeeding National Histories use names such as Shoku Nihongi or Nihon Koki, which are derivatives of Nihongi. This clearly proves that Nihongi was the original name.1 Nihongi is used in the order of the Council of State for the eighteenth day, third month, 792, recorded in Takahashi Ujibumi [Takahashi Family Documents] (quoted in Honcho Getsurei);2 and in Nihon Koki, second month, 787, and sixth month, 812, and so on. In contrast, Nihon Shoki is used in the preface to Konin Shiki [Private Commentary on Nihon Shoki, Konin Era];3 in the preface to Engi Tengyo Nihongi Kyoen Waka Jo [Preface to the Poems at the Completion Banquet for the Lectures on Nihon Shoki of Engi (901-23) and Tengyo (93S-47)];4 in 836 in Koryuji Engi [History and Legends of the Koryuji Temple];5 in Engi Koki [Lectures on Nihon Shoki in the Engi Era], cited in Shaku Nihongi [Annotated Nihongi];6 and others. Per-

Nihon Shoki

31

haps the literati of the Konin period added the character sho to Nihongi, producing the name Nihon Shoki, which eventually became the title. The two points, that Nihongi is seen in the Shoku Nihongi entry for 720 and that it appears subsequently in the other National Histories, are strong evidence that Nihongi was the original name. But why did the literati of the Konin era add the character sho to the book? If they did so arbitrarily and without.analysis, why did the title come to be used in later times as if it were the proper name of the book? The second theory recognizes a positive significance in the name Nihon Shoki. This rectifies the weak point of the first theory and is based on evidence in historical materials of the Nara period that document the use of Nihon Shoki as the title. Nihon Shoki appears in Ryo no Shuge in the section on formal ceremonies, citing the 'Ancient Records,'7 and in the left-line commentaries on Book i, number 6 of Manyoshu, which is believed to be from the later Nara period.8 The title is also seen in Nihon Koki, seventh month, 806; in Kukai's Koyasan Zappitsu Shu [Miscellaneous Writings on Mount Koya];9 and in Shotoku Taishi Den Hoketsuki [Supplement to the Biography of Prince Shotoku];10 all of which are from the early Heian period. It may be that sho was added to the original Nihongi at the time of copying, and I had formerly disregarded it, but since the number of examples is substantial, we cannot assert that sho was added later entirely without reason. Thus there have been various attempts to explain the origins of the name on the assumption that it was originally Nihon Shoki. The theory of Origuchi Shinobu (1887-1952) is among those that explain sho of Nihon Shoki in terms of the addition of a character. He thinks that the authors conceptualized a work called Nihon Sho, corresponding to the Han Shu and the Hou Han Shu. However, the idea never became reality. Only one portion came out - the Basic Annals of the Emperors; hence Nihongi. The redundant term Nihon Shoki was a mistake made by superficially learned court scholars of the Konin era and parallels such redundant terms as hanshi garni (half-paper paper) and shukiwan (cinnabar lacquered-bowl vessel).11 Origuchi's conclusion is that Nihongi is the correct name. His point that Nihon Shoki was a mistaken label is the same as that of the first group, but, in giving positive significance to the word sho, it led to the later theory that Shoki was the original name. For example, Kanda Kiichiro holds that Nihon Sho was the original name. Knowing that the Standard Histories of China must be sho, in the biographies style, the compilers took Nihon Sho for the name of their book. However, since their book consisted only of a chronicle and con-

32


tained no essays or biographies, they wrote 'chronicle' (ki) in small letters under the title Nihon Sho to indicate that the book actually was the chronicle part of Nihon Sho. Then at the time of copying, sho and ki became linked to form shoki. This is a modest and conservative theory, but it suggests that Shoki was the original title.12 Kojima Noriyuki suggests that the titles Nihongi and Nihon Shoki both existed with equal validity. According to him, the Nihon Sho of Nihon Shoki does not refer to a specific history book, as maintained by Origuchi Shinobu. Kojima thinks that Nihon sho, meaning 'a book of Japan', was used in contrast with the books of foreign countries and that the term Nihon Shoki means 'a Japanese book that is a chronicle.' 'Nihongi' was used from early on as a common term meaning a history book, and to particularize the name they chose Nihon Shoki. The former is a common term, while Nihon Shoki is the formal name.13 There are other views, but these examples show the trend away from the ancient theory that the original name was Nihongi to the theory that it was Nihon Shoki. I, too, would like to make the same shift. Extant texts use Nihon Shoki for the inner titles and the end title. In the oldest text, the Tanaka, there are no headings, but the succeeding Iwasaki, Maeda, and other Heian-period texts all use Nihon Shoki, as do the Kitano text and the Shoryobu text of the Imperial Household Agency. It is unlikely that they all added the character sho to the original name in copying the book, and so Nihon Shoki was probably the original title. Why does Shoku Nihongi use Nihongi in its account of the completion of the book in 720, as do the succeeding National Histories? This does not prove that the name Nihongi existed at the time of its compilation. The entry for 720 shows only that in 791, when Shoku Nihongi was compiled, it was a term used to refer to Nihon Shoki. All this evidence - the use of Nihongi for the title of Shoku Nihongi; recording of the term 'Nihongi' in Takahashi Ujibumi and in Nihon Koki - reveals the same thing: it was a way of referring to Nihon Shoki around the Enryaku era. Professor Kojima holds that both terms Nihon Shoki and Nihongi - existed; and this double usage was continued in later ages. At one time, Nihon Shoki is used; at another, Nihongi; and they have exactly the same meaning. However, it is not clear that this was the case at the time of compilation. I subscribe to Kanda's theory that the name Nihon Shoki was adopted because the writing corresponded to the biographies style of the Standard Histories, remaining conscious of Han Shu and Hou

Nihon Shoki

33

Han Shu. Kanda holds that it was called Nihon Shoki because it was the chronicle aspect of the Standard Histories. However, this does not mean that the authors intended to write in the biographies style of the Standard Histories. In format, the compilers searched for a method, and, in the end, followed both the Basic Annals of the biographies style and the chronicles of the several Veritable Records. To leave a record of their labours, they hit on the strong title Nihon Sho, in the style of the Standard Histories. Nihon Shoki is a somewhat imposing name, providing an unsuitably ostentatious appearance. Nihongi, plainly indicating an annalistic history, was adopted widely and continued in use as a generic term for national histories. The fact that Shoku Nihongi uses Nihongi and not Nihon Shoki shows the difference in the times between 720, when Nihon Shoki was written, and the Enryaku era at the end of the eighth century, when Shoku Nihongi was written. Compared with 720, the cultural level of the Enryaku era was much higher and formal display of culture was unnecessary. It was a time of cultural confidence, when the authors could refer to the formally titled Nihon Shoki as just Nihongi - a chronicle of Japan. This was a term that Japanese people had come to prefer. COMPILATION

How was Nihon Shoki compiled? What kind of people were the compilers? There are no historical materials that answer these questions in detail. In the case of the Five National Histories, the memorials presenting the works to the throne and the prefaces remain, seemingly describing the circumstances of compilation. However, these do not exist for Nihon Shoki. There remain only the preface to Kojiki and partial accounts in Nihon Shoki and Shoku Nihongi, and interpretations inevitably differ among scholars. According to the Preface to Kojiki, Emperor Tenmu was deeply interested in history and lamented that the Imperial Chronicles (Teiki) and Fundamental Dicta (Kuji) possessed by the various clans had lost their veracity. He wished to eliminate their errors and establish the truth, so as to hand down to later generations a correct history. Therefore he made use of the great memory of a court attendant, Hieda Are, and had him learn the Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta. However, Emperor Tenmu died before the task had been completed, and Empress Genmei came to the throne. Fearing that what Hieda Are had learned would become forgotten

34


and useless, she commanded O Yasumaro to transcribe it. This was presented to the throne in three volumes, as Kojiki, on the twentyeighth day, first month, 712. Since the above pertains to Kojiki, it would appear to have no relation to Nihon Shoki, but this is not the case. According to the entry in Nihon Shoki for the third month of the tenth year of Emperor Tenmu's reign (681), the Emperor took his place in the Great Hall of Audience, and, gathering together twelve members of the imperial family and the noble houses (starting with the Imperial Princes Kawashima and Osakabe), he ordered them to commit to writing 'a chronicle of the Emperors and of matters of high antiquity.' The fact that Emperor Tenmu gave the command indicates that this 'chronicle of the Emperors and of matters of high antiquity' was the same thing as the Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta referred to in the Preface to Kojiki. What, then, is the relationship between the tasks he gave to the twelve people (Nihon Shoki) and Hieda Are (Kojiki)? Hirata Atsutane held that it was the same undertaking, recorded from different standpoints, but I cannot agree. For the same assignment there is too much variance in the statements. Kojiki speaks of a single court attendant; Nihon Shoki of an assembly of twelve princes and aristocrats. The attendant is commanded to memorize and recite the materials; the twelve to commit them to writing. In Kojiki the place is not clearly recorded, while in Nihon Shoki it is the Great Hall of Audience where formal ceremonies were conducted. Clearly, one was a personal endeavour, and the other, a large-scale government undertaking. Doubtless they were carried out at different times, because, I believe, of changes in the thinking of Emperor Tenmu during the interval. Emperor Tenmu employed Hieda Are in a private capacity to try and put in order the Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta, but no doubt there were difficulties, and the task was not easily accomplished. Thereupon the Emperor gathered representatives of the imperial princes and the aristocracy at a formal assembly and turned the task into a government project. The method of memorizing and reciting materials was also changed into recording each item and creating an authentic text. However, this project too was filled with difficulties. The emperor soon passed away, and the text was not completed during his lifetime. His successor, Empress Jito, inherited the task of elaborating many of Emperor Tenmu's projects. At about this time, the compilers went beyond putting the Imperial Chronicles and the Fundamental Dicta in order and planned a broader history that would

Nihon Shoki

35

contain those materials. In the eighth month of 691, in an effort to obtain new historical materials about the various families, eighteen clans, starting with the Omiwa, were commanded to submit their ancestral records.14 This could have been for no other purpose than to use them as historical materials. In the reign of Emperor Monmu, who succeeded Empress Jito, the court was occupied with writing the ritsuryo law codes, and no one wrote any history. In the next reign, that of Empress Genmei, it was recorded in Shoku Nihongi that on the tenth day, second month, 714, Ki Kiyondo and Miyake Fujimaro were chosen to compile a National History. The project of compiling a history started in Emperor Tenmu's reign was taken up afresh, and two more men were added to the compilation team. Later, in Empress Gensho's reign, Ki Kiyondo was given a hearty welcome as a scholar in 717 and was endowed with one hundred koku (about 18,000 litres) of grain; in 721 he was awarded silk cloth and thread for his literary attainments. This addition of the most outstanding literary stylist of the time shows the government's high expectations for the project. On the twenty-first day, fifth month, 720, in the reign of Empress Gensho, six years after Empress Genmei's command in 714, Nihongi was presented to the throne under the name of Imperial Prince Toneri. It consisted of thirty volumes plus one volume of genealogies. It is not known when Prince Toneri was appointed to the project. Shoku Nihongi says only, 'Previously Imperial Prince Toneri, First Grade, received a command to compile Nihongi.' According to Wada Hidematsu, 'previously' refers to 714, when Ki Kiyondo and others were commanded to compile a National History. The name of Prince Toneri originally appeared before that of Ki Kiyondo but was dropped at the time of copying.15 However, this is entirely theoretical and cannot be accepted without other evidence. Prince Toneri was the third son of Emperor Tenmu. In the eighth month of 720, three months after the presentation to the throne of Nihon Shoki, he was appointed Deputy Prime Minister, which he remained until his death in 735. He occupied an important position among the imperial princes in the reigns of Emperor Monmu and Empress Genmei: when additional land grants were given to the imperial princes in the first month of 704, Second Grade Prince Naga, Prince Toneri, and Prince Hozumi, and Third Grade Prince Osakabe altogether received two hundred households. Prince Kawashima and Prince Osakabe had been appointed to Emperor Tenmu's 681 project of compiling the Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta, but Prince Kawashima died in 691 and Prince Osakabe in 705. Prince Naga died in the sixth month of 714 and Prince Hozumi in the

36


seventh month of that same year. Thus, during the reigns of Genmei and Gensho, there was no suitable imperial prince remaining from the time of Emperor Tenmu, other than Prince Toneri. In the foregoing I have viewed the work of setting down the Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta as having begun in 681 (with thirty-nine years elapsing to the completion of Nihon Shoki) and as being one continuous project, and I have described some of the historical materials that point to this. However, quite a few scholars are opposed to this theory. The strongest opposition comes from Hirata Toshiharu, who holds that the compilation of Nihon Shoki had nothing to do with Emperor Tenmu's 681 project. According to Hirata, Emperor Tenmu's project of 681 was the beginning of Kojiki. In 681 he assembled a number of imperial princes and aristocrats and set them to putting in order the Imperial Edicts and the Fundamental Dicta. However, the results were not satisfactory, and he himself undertook to organize them and ordered Hieda Are to learn what he produced. This effort further developed into Kojiki. Nihon Shoki had no connection with these events. After Kojiki had come out in 712, the authors of Nihon Shoki attempted to compile a Standard History, inspired by the Standard Histories of the Tang dynasty, and they set about doing this in 7i4.16 This theory that 714 was the starting point of Nihon Shoki is also held by Wada Hidematsu,17 Iwahashi Koyata,18 and others, and it appears reasonable. However, compilation of Nihon Shoki could not have been completed in the short space of just six years. It involved putting into order the difficult Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta, researching, and searching for a style suitable for a Standard History of Japan, as well as accumulating historical materials. All this must have required the hard work of the scholars and literati of several reigns. One reason for choosing 714 is that many people saw Nihon Shoki as supplementing Kojiki, which had come out in 712 but had left something to be desired. However, this is based too much on the ideas of modern people about the relationship between the two books. When Kojiki was presented to the throne it must have given stimulus to the enterprise of compiling Nihon Shoki and injected new vigour into a project already underway. If we compare the two books, it is clear that Nihon Shoki does not take Kojiki as its target and set out to surpass it and correct it. For the most part, the places where it is connected to Kojiki arise from connections with the Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta on which Kojiki is based. The existence of Kojiki as a finished work is not mentioned at all in Nihon Shoki. The latter was written independently, with no concern for the

Nihon Shoki

37

form and content of Kojiki. It ought to be seen as a project of historical compilation with a long tradition from the time of Emperor Tenmu. One piece of evidence indicating that Kojiki and Nihon Shoki were being written during the same period is the fact that the Preface of Kojiki relies on the text of Nihon Shoki. This argument is presented by Ota Yoshimaro. The Preface of Kojiki records the outline of history from the Age of the Gods to the reign of Emperor Tenmu but at many points follows the account in Nihon Shoki. The Preface to Kojiki says, 'When Heaven and Earth first divided/ but the wording resembles that of one version in Nihon Shoki, 'Heaven and Earth were first divided/ rather than the text of Kojiki, 'At the time of the beginning of Heaven and Earth.' In Kojiki, there is no corresponding entry that touches on the deeds of Emperor Jinmu as 'the barbarians were dispersed by the arrayed dancers/ as in Nihon Shoki. Special terms such as 'gaitei' (easy and quiet disposition) are found in both works. Words such as 'reigen' (people), 'juyaku' (retranslation), 'koyo' (later generation), 'oka' (education of the people with the Emperor's merciful governance), 'koki' (the basis of a grand project), and 'teiiku' (to raise and keep) appear in the Preface to Kojiki and in Nihon Shoki.19 Although the case is not completely proved, it appears that Nihon Shoki existed in an early form at the time that O Yasumaro recorded Kojiki. On the basis of this material Ota argues that O Yasumaro, who recorded Kojiki, also helped compile specific portions of Nihon Shoki. Of course the figurehead in compiling Nihon Shoki was Prince Toneri. Yet he did not participate in the actual work. In later times, when the system for compiling National Histories was developed, sometimes a minister of state supervised the work as head of the project; Prince Toneri apparently occupied a similar position with respect to Nihon Shoki. He was not involved with the project from its inception but was given responsibility either late in the reign of Empress Genmei or early in the reign of Empress Gensho. It is customary to read the Prince's name as Toneri, but at the Fujimori Shrine in Kyoto, where he is enshrined, the name is rendered 'lehito/ There are no examples in ancient texts of pronouncing these characters Tehito.' Perhaps the shrine found it distasteful to pronounce the name of its majestic deity the same as the noun that means a low-ranking servant in the ancient system - 'toneri' - and they pointedly changed it. The famous Edo period Confucian scholar Yamazaki Ansai (1618-82) held Nihon Shoki in the highest regard, praised Prince Toneri for his great achievement in compiling it, and paid special respect to the Fujimori Shrine.

38


As for the people who did the actual work of compilation, I have mentioned Ki Kiyondo and Miyake Fujimaro. There exists no historical materials to confirm the circumstances under which Kiyondo and the others were assigned to write Nihon Shoki. We have already seen how Ki Kiyondo was praised as a man of letters unrivalled in his time. Thereafter, in 732 he became Assistant Mayor of the Right Capital, and in the seventh month of 741 he became First ViceMinister in the Ministry of Civil Affairs and Doctor of Letters. In the fifth month of 746 he was appointed Governor of Musashi. Thus we may surmise that in the Tenpyo era (729-49) he was advancing as a bureaucrat. In the seventh month of 753 he died, holding the position of Dispersed Rank, Junior, Fourth Grade, Lower. The career of Miyake Fujimaro is completely unknown. Perhaps he was an outstanding man of letters and may have concentrated on polishing and ordering the sentences in Nihon Shoki. While each chapter has a fairly independent style and use of words, the Confucian order of names and positions is maintained throughout. The word Emperor is written tenno without exception. The correct usage of the characters 0 and ffp for mikoto (deity) is preserved, as well as the characters $[£ and $H for hime (princess). No doubt the compilers concentrated on such points. Based on the case of O Yasumaro, we may propose that Kiyondo and the others each polished particular volumes. According to the findings of Ota Yoshimaro, since the words that recur in the Preface to Kojiki are found only in Volumes_3-i3, 22, and 23 of Nihon Shoki, they may have been worked on by O Yasumaro. _ It was the Preface to Konin Shiki that first named O Yasumaro, who recorded Kojiki, as one of the authors,20 followed by the Preface to Nihongi Kyoen Waka [Poems of the Banquet on Completion of the Reading of Nihongi],21 and this identification was widely accepted. There is a suspicion that O Hitonaga, Lecturer at the Konin reading of Nihon Shoki, deliberately put the name of his own ancestor into the Preface to Konin Shiki, and we cannot take the sources very seriously. Nevertheless, Ota's investigation indicates a possible connection between 6 Yasumaro and Nihon Shoki. Further research is needed on these points. None of the other compilers is named. The people who compiled the Taiho Code - Imperial Prince Osakabe, Fujiwara Ason Fuhito, Shimotsukeno Ason Komaro, Iki Muraji Hakatoko, lyobe Muraji Umakai, and so on - all deserved to be appointed to work on Nihon Shoki, but no document clearly states that they were. All that is clearly recorded are the names of the twelve people commanded by Emperor Tenmu in 681 to set in order the Imperial Chronicles and

Nihon Shoki

39

the Fundamental Dicta. They organized the original materials of Nihon Shoki. Of these twelve people, two were imperial princes, four were princes and six were ministers of state. The ministers of state were Kamitsukeno Kimi Michiji, Imbe Muraji Obito, Azumi Muraji Inashiki, Naniwa Muraji Okata, Nakatomi Muraji Oshima, and Heguri Omi Ko Obito. In the subsequent Eight Rank Reform of 684, three of these families received the second rank of Ason (Kamitsukeno Kimi, Heguri Omi, and Nakatomi Muraji), two received the third rank of Sukune (Azumi Muraji and Imbe Muraji), and one received the fourth rank of Imiki (Naniwa Muraji). From the point of view of lineage, two were Imperial clans (Kamitsukeno and Heguri), three were Divine clans (Azumi, Imbe, and Nakatomi), and one was a Sundry [immigrant] clan (Naniwa). Since each possessed a rich inheritance of ancestral tradition, their selection seems both appropriate and fair. We can imagine Emperor Tenmu's great expectations for the enterprise. Next let us consider the divisions within Nihon Shoki. The thirty volumes were not all written by one single person; it appears that they were apportioned out. On the basis of the use of words and characters in each volume, they can be grouped by characteristic usages, and close examination of the thirty volumes yields eight to ten groups. In recent years numerous scholars have investigated this matter. Their conclusions have been almost the same, and so we are persuaded to adopt a theory that the writing was apportioned. For example, Fujii Nobuo finds ten groups, based on analysis of the sentences used in each reign to describe enthronement and selection of the site for the capital: 1 Volumes i and 2: The Age of the Gods, Parts i and 2 2 Volume 3: Emperor Jinmu 3 Volumes 4-13: Emperors Suizei to Anko 4 Volumes 14-16: Emperors Yuryaku to Buretsu 5 Volumes 17-19: Emperors Keitai to Kinmei 6 Volumes 20 and 21: Emperors Bidatsu to Sushun 7 Volumes 22 and 23: Empress Suiko and Emperor Jomei 8 Volumes 24-27: Empress Kogyoku to Emperor Tenji 9 Volumes 28 and 29: Emperor Tenmu, Parts i and 2 10 Volume 30: Empress Jito22 Also, Konosu Hayao has examined the word usage for 'ancestors/ studying the distribution of the terms shiso (£pîl), koso (Iflffi), and sen (5fc). In Parts 2 and 3 of the chart above (Volumes 3-13), shiso

4O


and koso are used. In Parts 4, 5, and 6 (Volumes 14-21), only sen is used. In Parts 7 and 8 (Volumes 22-7), Koso is again used exclusively.23 Various other indicators have been studied: - The set phrases used to record songs: he made a song, he sang a song, he made up a song. - The use of particles: kore, nari, ya, zo, ni oite, u. - The phonetic script used for recording songs, the supply of notes to the text, the phrases used to introduce quotations (one book says, one book states, one states, a certain book states, one work states, and so on). Combining the above results, we get four major divisions: A Volumes 3-13, B Volumes 14-21, Al Volumes 22 and 23, and Bl volumes 24-7. Although A and Al, and B and Bl are distant from each other, they display the same tendencies.24 Whether division be rough or detailed, the lines of demarcation remain the same. What are the reasons for such divisions of the text? Some might have arisen from differences in the original materials, but the main cause is the peculiarities of style of the people assigned to each portion. Each compiler of Nihon Shoki held responsibility for his portion, and this had its effects on his compilation. Thus sections A (Volumes 3-13) and Al (Volumes 22-3), and sections B (Volumes 14-21) and Bl (Volumes 24-7) respectively may have been assigned to particular compilers. Why were such jurisdictions decided upon? We cannot know whether particular compilers were restricted to materials that they could effectively utilize or whether they had a special feeling for a certain historical period. The relation between compilers and divisions of the text is a subject for development. Another theory holds that the apportionment of texts was more three-dimensional. In a text like Nihon Shoki, drafted over a long period, successive compilers probably replaced each other over time, and different strata of people probably contributed to each chapter. In Nihon Shoki, words differing somewhat from the main text appear under such headings as 'One text says/ 'A certain text says/ and An old text says/ which might indicate that several manuscripts were created during the long process of compilation. For example, the entry on the death of Emperor Keitai is clear evidence that "a certain text' refers to one of the manuscripts of Nihon Shoki. The extant version says that he died in the twenty-fifth year of his reign (531). However, an explanatory note is added: 'A certain book says: - "The Emperor died in the 28th year of his reign. The statement in the text that he died in the 25th year of his reign is taken from a passage in the Paekche Pon'gi [Original Record of

Nihon Shoki

41

Paekche]. This passage runs as follows: [the rest omitted]/" This illustrates that prior to the theory that it was the twenty-fifth year (as given in the extant text), a previous text gave the twenty-eighth year. Later compilers came to doubt the correctness of the twentyeighth year in the manuscript, so they changed it to the twenty-fifth year, as cited by the Paekche Pon'gi. However, they hesitated totally to disregard the theory of the twenty-eighth year, so they inserted the explanatory note indicating that it was the theory of 'a certain book.' The ascension of Emperor Tenji is given as the third day, first month, seventh year of his reign (668). There follows an explanatory note: 'One book says that he assumed the Dignity in the third month of the sixth year (667).' The version given in 'one book' was not adopted for the manuscript but was recorded as worthy of consideration. Since the third month of the sixth year of his reign was the time when the capital was moved to Omi, the theory that his ascension took place at that time was not unnatural. This 'one book' was probably one of the manuscript versions of Nihon Shoki. There are cases, as in the reign of Emperor Kotoku, where two types of 'one book' are cited in one passage. In the entry for the ninth month of 645, when Imperial Prince Furuhito rebelled, the text gives the twelfth day: 'Naka no Ohoye straightway sent Uda no Yenomuro no Furu and Koma no Miyachi with a considerable force to attack the Imperial Prince Furubito no Ohoye and his companions.'25 There follows an explanatory note: 'One book says: "3Oth day, nth month. Naka no Ohoye sent Abe, Kosobe no Omi, and Sahekibe no Komaro, these two, with a force of thirty men to attack Furubito no Ohoye. They slew Furubito no Ohoye and his children. His consorts strangled themselves." One book says: - "eleventh month. Prince Yoshino no Ohoye plotted rebellion, but the matter having become public, he was executed." '26 The two 'one books' differ in complexity and were probably manuscripts from different stages in the compilation of Nihon Shoki. The text used other historical materials to record the date of the punitive expedition, the names of the commanding officers, and so on. Thus a single historical incident may have inspired any number of versions. For completely different reasons, repetitions were included in the writing. The record of Emperor Tenji contains many repetitions. The granting of the rank of Lower Shokin to the Paekche immigrant Kuisil Chipsa is given in the second month of 665 and again in the first month of 671. The building of castles in Nagato and Tsukushi is given in the eight month of 665 and repeated in the second month of 670. The appointment of Prince Kurikuma as Governor of Tsukushi appears in both the seventh month of 668 and the sixth month of

42


671. The arrival of the Tang Envoy Guo Wusong appears in the twelfth month of 669 and the eleventh month of 671. Emperor Tenji succeeded Empress Saimei upon her death and conducted the government. However, he was not enthroned and for six years discharged his functions as Crown Prince. Thus his much later enthronement seems to have caused confusion in the historical materials because of historians' inconsistencies in numbering the years of his reign. Many apparent repetitions of events in his reign must have arisen from such a cause; many such cases could easily have been discovered by checking some years before or after the event. Possibly such repetition was not the work of a single person. Perhaps a succession of compilers viewed the materials, and mistakes arose from their assigning of events to seemingly appropriate years and times. They did not look fore and aft and made no effort to eliminate repetitions. Instead they had respect for the record made by their predecessors and confined themselves to introducing fresh materials. Because of the great length of time taken to compile Nihon Shoki, final elaboration of the text was conducted close to its completion in 720. As testimony to this we have the record of the transmission of Buddhism to Japan in 552, in the reign of Emperor Kinmei. There is a scholarly theory that the entry recording the transmission was constructed by following the scripture, Konkomyo-Saisho-O-Gyo [Golden Light Excellent King Sutra], which was translated in 703 by Yi Jing of Tang (635-713). This was pointed out at an early stage in Nihon Shoki Tsushaku [Complete Commentary on Nihon Shoki, 1852] by lida Takesato. Later it was strongly held by Fujii Akitaka;27 and Inoue Kaoru argued that this scripture was brought from China to Japan in 718 by Doji and suggested that Doji himself may have written the entry.28 Further, Kojima Noriyuki points out that passages that originated from the Golden Light Excellent King Sutra are found in the reigns of Kenzo, Buretsu, Keitai, Bidatsu, Sushun, and others, in addition to the reign of Emperor Kinmei.29 According to these theories, the entry concerning the arrival of the Buddhist sutra was written in 718, only two years before completion of the work, which seems to allow the conclusion that Nihon Shoki was written in a short period of time. However, this was probably the final polishing of the text, and a number of versions must have existed before. Such manuscripts facilitated the adjustment of rhetorical flourishes. Where explanations were noted as derived from 'a certain book' or 'one book' it is clear that the compilers used various documents as historical materials and faithfully transcribed what was written.

Nihon Shoki

43

They also took left and right from the literary classics of China to weave their sentences; thus the Chinese classics should also be seen as a source. SOURCE M A T E R I A L S

It is necessary to divide the sources of Nihon Shoki into two categories: historical materials, that is, old documentary materials that became the data for the contents of the entries; and Chinese writings - ancient and more recent - which provided authority for the composition. Of course, the former were more important. ANCIENT MATERIALS

Compared to Kojiki, the historical materials for Nihon Shoki are abundant. In contrast to Kojiki, which had only the Imperial Chronicles and the Fundamental Dicta, Nihon Shoki had, in addition, records of government and the traditions of the various families, from which a great deal is taken. This is why the contents of Nihon Shoki, as a book of history, are so much richer than those of Kojiki. A brief description of each type of ancient historical material follows and includes the Imperial Chronicles, Fundamental Dicta, family records of ancestral tales, and regional tales. Imperial Chronicles

Imperial Chronicles appears as the title of a book in the Preface to Kojiki and in the entry for the third month of 681 in Nihon Shoki. In the Preface to Kojiki the title is used interchangeably with Succession of the Emperors (Sumera Mikoto no Hitsugi) and Record of Former Emperors (Senki). In the Nihon Shoki entry for the eleventh month of 688, various ministers pronounced eulogies at the burial of Emperor Tenmu in the mausoleum. Among them was Taima Mahito Chitoko, who 'recited the succession to the throne of the Imperial ancestors.' To this an explanation is added, 'In ancient times this was called Hitsugi.' Thus 'Hitsugi' indicates the succession of Emperors reign after reign, so we may surmise the nature of the Imperial Chronicle known as Sumera Mikoto no Hitsugi. In the entry for the third month of 541, a note on the passage that lists the Emperor's sons and daughters says that in 'the original record of the Emperors' (Teio Hongi) there are many old characters; later men, in learning to read them, modified them to suit the meaning. Also, in the process of copying the text, errors arose and the order of elder brother and

44


younger brother was disturbed. This 'original record of the Emperors' must be another name for the Imperial Chronicles. This observation that various errors had arisen in the 'original record of the Emperors' must refer to the same thing pointed out in the Preface to Kojiki, that many discrepancies had arisen in the Imperial Chronicles and the Fundamental Dicta. The actual contents of the Imperial Chronicles may have included the Emperor's name, his lineage, the names of consorts and children, the location of the palace, important events during his reign, his age, the number of years of his reign, and the location of the imperial mausoleum. However, not all the records listed these entries; undoubtedly some entries were missing. In particular, documentary records pertaining to the Emperor's age and the number of years he ruled were incomplete. The style of writing place names and people's names varies among the texts, with mixed Chinese pronunciation and Japanese pronunciation of the characters, and differing orders of imperial sons and daughters. However, there are no discrepancies in the names of the Emperors and the order of their succession, and the entries in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki coincide. No doubt the tradition handed down was unusually certain regarding such important points. The Imperial Chronicles and the Fundamental Dicta both consisted of materials that had been transmitted orally and were committed to writing around the sixth century, and it was as a book that the Imperial Chronicles became historical materials for Kojiki and Nihon Shoki. However, the oral traditions also persisted and probably served as a source of reference. The title 'Imperial Chronicles' appears in Jogii Shotoku Hod Teisetsu [Imperial Chronicle of Prince Shotoku],30 in Hozumi Mitate Shujitsu [Tax Return of Hozumi Mitate], twenty-fifth day, intercalary ninth month, 746,31 and in Shashoso Mokuroku [Catalogue of Transcribed Sutras], tenth day, sixth month, 748.32 Thus we know that in the Nara period copies were made of a work with the title 'Imperial Chronicles,' but it is not clear whether this was the work used as historical material in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki. Therefore we must be cautious about using the Nara period copies to guess at the original form of Imperial Chronicles. Fundamental Dicta

In the Preface to Kojiki, the Fundamental Dicta are also known as Fundamental Dicta of Former Reigns (Saki no Yo no Furugoto) and Original Words (Honji). Like the Imperial Chronicles, they were

Nihon Shoki

45

transmitted orally and committed to writing around the sixth century. Their contents can only be assumed to be what is left in Kojiki after excluding portions thought to have come from the Imperial Chronicles, but they seem to include tales of the Age of the Gods, tales of worship of various deities, historical tales of Emperors and heroes, tales of the arts centring around songs, tales of the origins of place names and names of objects, and so on. Such tales end with Emperor Kenzo (r. 485-7) in Kojiki and with Emperor Keitai (r. 50731) in Nihon Shoki, so that we can almost guess the time when the Fundamental Dicta were written down. It appears that during the process of transmission, various changes occurred in the Fundamental Dicta, particularly in concepts of time. For example, the tale of conquest by Izumo Takeru contains the following poem: The sword girt on By the warrior of Idzumo (Where many clouds arise) There is the sheath enwound with creepers, But, alas! there is no blade.33

This occurs in Nihon Shoki in 38 BC in the reign of Emperor Sujin as the story of a battle between Izumo Furune and his younger brother li-irine. However, in Kojiki it appears in the reign of Emperor Keiko (r. 71-130) as a deed of Yamato Takeru.34 The tale of the government ship Karanu appears in Nihon Shoki at the time of Emperor Ojin (r. 270-310), where it is a tribute ship from Izu Province, but in Kojiki it is a ship constructed in the Kinai (vicinities of Yamato) and the time is the reign of Emperor Nintoku (r. 313-QQ).35 Records of Tales of Ancestors Transmitted by Families

The Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta possessed by families at the time of Emperor Tenmu were transmitted by the imperial house; and their stories naturally centre on the imperial house. The families probably also transmitted tales about their own ancestors: some were taken into the Fundamental Dicta and fused with those of the imperial house. However, occasional passages in Nihon Shoki recount the achievements and heroic deeds of the families' ancestors which are not found in Kojiki. Thus what is not in Kojiki was not in the Fundamental Dicta either, and additional materials were taken into Nihon Shoki from recorded traditions of the families. _ I have already discussed Empress Jito's order in 691 to the Omiwa

46


and seventeen other families to submit their ancestors' epitaphs, which were different than the records of the families' traditions. However, the epitaphs could have been acquired only for use as historical materials; the families were probably asked also to present their records transmitted from the ancient past. These records were perhaps collected by the office for compiling Nihon Shoki, although it is not certain at what date. Records of Regional Tales Numerous traditions probably flourished in the outer provinces. In 713 the government commanded that accounts be written of the origins of names of mountains, rivers, fields, and moors, and of the words of elders, of events, and things heard, and these resulted in the local gazeteers known as Fudoki [Records of Climate].36 Comparison of the texts does not prove that the Fudoki were used as source material by Nihon Shoki. However, only five Fudoki survive today from the Nara period - those of Harima, Hitachi, Izumo, Bungo, and Hizen - and so it is difficult to ascertain the relation between the Fudoki and Nihon Shoki. Since the government ordered recording of historical tales, probably a great number of them were transmitted in the provinces. Such regional tales were collected in the Nihon Shoki office and included in the text. Occasionally, some tales in Nihon Shoki not found in Kojiki are about regional place names or have a deep connection with a region. It is unjustified to think that these tales were all inventions of the intellectuals of the centre. They were born and nurtured in the regions and transmitted there. The preceding four kinds of historical materials have mainly to do with the most ancient past; but for the more recent past, other kinds of materials were used: government documents, memos by individuals, temple records, and documents related to Paekche. RECENT MATERIALS Government Documents

In keeping with the progress in methods of recording, the government documented its own acts, probably in order to provide for later reference. We can only imagine when the daily chronicles called hinamiki were started - perhaps around the time of Empress Suiko. However, most of these daily chronicles were no longer extant when Nihon Shoki was compiled. A few surviving documents, classified by

Nihon Shoki

47

topics - the award of ranks, contacts with foreign diplomatic envoys, and the changes in the Taika Reform of 645 - may have been used by the compilers. The comparative paucity of recent entries in Nihon Shoki in the chronicle of Emperor Tenji, and so on, suggests that the daily chronicles of government were scattered in the Jinshin War of 672. For the chronicles of Emperor Tenmu and Empress Jito authentic government documents apparently remained and the entries differ little from those of the succeeding Shoku Nihongi, becoming a chronological record. Memos by Individuals

Various memos by individuals were used. The most striking is the one quoted in a note in the reign of Empress Saimei, called Tki no Muraji Hakatoko Sho' [The Book of Iki Muraji Hakatoko]. In 659, Hakatoko was sent as an envoy to Tang, and the memo records in exhaustive detail his journey, his sojourn there, and his return to Japan in 661. The entries follow the dates, but it is not a pure diary. It is more a record with entries written in order later to publicize his own achievements.37 In the reign of Empress Saimei, 'Naniwa Kishi Ohito Sho' [The Book of Naniwa Kishi Ohito] is also quoted, and in her reign and that of Emperor Tenji, 'K5rai Shamon Doken Nihon Seiki' [Record of the Reigns of Japan by the Korean Buddhist Priest Doken] is quoted. These were also memos by individuals. In the account of the Jinshin War in the time of Emperor Tenmu, there are records by attendants in the army during the war, 'Ato no Sukune Chitoku Nikki' [Dairy of Ato Sukune Chitoku] and 'Tsuki no Muraji Omi Nikki' [Diary of Tsuki Muraji Omi]; we learn from Shaku Nihongi how these were used as historical materials.38 They were described as diaries, but materials were added later. Possibly they were submitted to the Nihon Shoki compilation office. Temple Records Among temple records, the Gangdji Engi, [History of the Gangoji Temple] is used the most. The Gangdji Engi, which survives at the present day, is a Heian period collection of documents pertaining to important temple matters. It contains a stone monument inscription from the reign of Empress Suiko relating to the dew-catching bowl on the pagoda, the inscription on the back of the nimbus of the nearly five-metre buddha, and so on. These inscriptions are used in the entries during the reigns of Sushun and Suiko of Nihon Shoki. In

48


the reign of Emperor Bidatsu, the accounts of the worship of the Buddha by Soga Umako and the persecution of Buddhism are closely related to the text of the ancient documents in the Gangoji Engi. Elsewhere, the accounts of the origins of the Buddha images of the Yoshino Hisodera Temple in the reign of Emperor Kinmei and of the Minabuchi Sakatadera Temple in the reign of Emperor "Vomei are taken from the records of those temples. The selection of materials was limited to these particular temples; the compilers did not search widely through the temple records of the whole country. Much valuable historical material undoubtedly existed in many temples, such as the Horyuji and the Daianji. If the compilers had collected such materials from the Horyuji for the account of Prince Shotoku, for example, Nihon Shoki as it exists today could have been quite different. However, they used only temple records obtained by chance, and did not search out others. Documents Related to Paekche Documents concerning Paekche are much used in Nihon Shoki. The names of three books are known: Paekchegi [Japanese: Kudara Ki, Record of Paekche], Paekche Sinch'an [Japanese: Kudara Shinsen, New Record of Paekche], and Paekche Pon'gi [Japanese: Kudara Hongi, Original Record of Paekche].39 Paekchegi is the oldest, being quoted in the reigns of Empress Regent Jingu and Emperors Ojin and Yuryaku. Paekche Sinch'an is next, being quoted in the reigns of Emperors Yuryaku and Buretsu. Paekche Pon'gi is quoted in the reigns of Emperors Keitai and Kinmei. In most cases the name of the work being quoted is clearly written, but other parts of the text were obviously written by following one of these works without attribution. Especially in the accounts of Emperors Keitai and Kinmei, the greater part of the chapter is based on Paekche Pon'gi. Theories vary concerning these three works. However, it is unlikely that they were simply histories written when Paekche still existed. Records written in Paekche may have formed their core, but the works quoted in Nihon Shoki were made by people who fled Paekche after its fall, perhaps to documeht how Paekche aided Japan in the past, and were turned in to the compilation office. Japan is treated as a respected country in Paekchegi, an unnatural stance for people writing the history of their own country. Also, Tenno is used for Emperor and Tencho for imperial court. Use of the term Tenno is thought to have been adopted in the reign of Empress Suiko; thus its use in entries prior to Suiko is anachronistic. This is clearly a way of

Nihon Shoki

49

writing in order to show respect for the court of Japan, implicitly expecting a return of some kind. In Paekche Pon'gi, Japan is referred to as 'Nihon.' Since 'Nihon' was adopted in Japan as correct usage around the time of Taika, we know that this was not a contemporary record. Although later hands, probably from Paekche, worked on the accounts, the character of the original documents remained unchanged. Thus Paekchegi contains many legendary entries, while in Paekche Pon'gi time is measured both by the number of days and by the sexagenary cycles, abundant evidence of its original character as a Veritable Record. It appears that the compilers of Nihon Shoki relied heavily on these books; I have already pointed out that they corrected the year of Emperor Keitai's death by referring to Paekche Pon'gi. Chinese Books Last among historical materials, we must consider Chinese history books. Chinese classics were frequently used as authorities in composition and, in this broad sense, served as historical sources. But Chinese history books were used also as materials for the content of history. An example is found in the record of Empress Regent Jingu. Events in the thirty-ninth, fortieth, and forty-third year of her reign are taken from three places in Wei Zhi [History of Wei], and one event from the sixty-sixth year is taken from the Jin-dynasty Diary of Activity and Repose. They all refer to a woman ruler of Wa; the compilers of Nihon Shoki, seeing that these accounts about a woman ruler corresponded to Empress Regent Jingu, assigned the record of her activities to the appropriate place in the chronology. These straight quotations, without any assimilation into the historical context, report the facts as contained in Chinese books of history. However, this was a singular case, and not the general practice. The facts about contacts with the king of Wa in the Song Shu [History of Song] do not appear at all in Nihon Shoki, nor do the contacts with Wa from the Sui Shu [History of Sui]. The Sui Shu is quoted in other parts of Nihon Shoki for rhetorical reinforcement, but without reference to the facts of history. Apart from the case of Empress Regent Jingu, Chinese history books were not used as sources of historical material. Let us now say a word about the Chinese works used for the rhetorical flourishes of the work. Taking the position that the sentences in Nihon Shoki 'edited the ancient writing/ Kawamura Hidene, in his Shoki Shikkai [Complete Commentary on Nihon Shoki],

5O


searched in Chinese books for the sources of individual passages. Kojima Noriyuki published his fine research on the Chinese books actually consulted by the authors. According to him, the writers of Nihon Shoki consulted the encyclopedia Yiwen Leiju [Classified Arts and Literature] compiled by Ouyang Xun and others in the Tang dynasty and composed their sentences by gathering up the words they needed, one after another. For example, in 527, during the reign of Emperor Keitai, the words of the Emperor and of Mononobe Arakabi during the rebellion of Tsukushi Kuni Miyatsuko Iwai were taken from the parts on attacks and generals in the section on the military in Yiwen Leiju and pieced together to form the sentences. The authors could have used such works as ShangShu, Huangshigong San Lue, and Huainanzi, but they relied on Yiwen Leiju, which brought them all together - a convenient source for the beautiful passages from many books. Of course, they used other single works, including Shi ]i, Han Shu, Hou Han Shu, San Guo Zhi [History of the Three Kingdoms (History of Wu and Wei only)], Liang Shu [History of Liang], and Sui Shu. Han shu is preferred most, followed by Hou Han Shu and San Guo Zhi, while Liang Shu and Sui Shu are each cited in only one part. Wen Xuan [Anthology of Literature] was used as a literary work, mostly in the accounts of Emperor Yuryaku and Empress Saimei and the preceding and following volumes. Further, the Golden Light Excellent King Sutra was a Buddhist authority outside these canons of Confucianism and Taoism.40 In this way the compilers freely used Chinese writings to embellish their work, but process and methods differed among the several writers assigned to separate portions. A different Chinese work was used in each volume, thus accounting for the various shadings of embellishment. For the most part, authors added embellishments when the style of the original source material was predominantly Japanese, as was the case with the Fundamental Dicta. It was not necessary to add much when the source material was originally Chinese. Thus, although the text of Nihon Shoki contains much Chinese embellishment, it has value as a history book. We must scrutinize the source materials; if we find none and suppose a fictitious entry, we can conclude that the portion in question has little historical value. Such cases exist; let us consider one or two examples. In 486 in the reign of Emperor Kenzo is an entry, '6th day, loth month, Winter. The Emperor entertained his Ministers. At this time the Empire was at peace; the people were not subjected to forced labor, the crops reached maturity, and the peasantry was prosperous. A measure of

Nihon Shoki

51

rice was sold for one piece of silver, and horses covered the moors.'41 This is taken from Hou Han Shu, Annals of Emperor Ming, 69 AD, but 'millet' in the original was changed to 'rice,' 'thirty' was changed to 'one piece of silver/ and 'cows and sheep' was changed to 'horses.' Obviously, this entry is totally fictitious. In 568, in the reign of Emperor Kinmei, it says, '28th year. There were floods in the districts and provinces, with famine. In some cases men ate each other. Mutual assistance was rendered by transporting grain from the neighboring districts.'42 This account was taken from the entry in Han Shu, ninth month of the second year of Emperor Yuan, 48 BC, with a change of one or two characters; it has no relation to historical facts. In these cases, embellishment with Chinese rhetoric was taken to an extreme in an attempt to imitate the Chinese Standard Histories. From the standpoint of the present day, this only lessens the historical value of Nihon Shoki. However, this judgement need not apply to every entry in the work that has Chinese rhetorical embellishment. CONTENTS

For those who have not yet read Nihon Shoki, an introduction to its thirty volumes is in order. I shall also touch briefly on its relation to historical fact. To what degree does Nihon Shoki express historical truth? The question is an important topic of research and scholars differ considerably in their evaluation. In light of these differences, we must consider the circumstances of each volume individually. Volumes 1 and 2: The Age of the Gods

Volumes i and 2, comprising Parts i and 2 of The Age of the Gods, differ greatly in nature from the other volumes. First, though Nihon Shoki is thoroughly annalistic, giving the day, month, and year for every entry whatsoever, in The Age of the Gods the dates are not entered at all. The stories are recounted as tales of historical processes. It is likely that the ancient legends of Japan did not have dates clearly affixed, so in this way Nihon Shoki accurately portrays these ancient legends. Second, the annalistic method of Nihon Shoki would not be suitable to the Age of the Gods. The books on that period form one unit and do not lend themselves to partition. Perhaps the compilers felt that the history of the Age of the Gods should not be measured in the same way as the age of humans.

52


Third, there are many selections from various texts. Versions from other texts are recorded under the heading 'One book says/ In the section on the birth of the Eight Great Islands of Japan there are ten variations, and there are eleven in one section on the appearance of four deities. Around the time of Emperor Tenmu there were many different versions in the texts of the Imperial Chronicles and the Fundamental Dicta, and this also seems to be the case with the Age of the Gods. The compilers showed caution in their handling of the Age of the Gods by recording many different versions. They did not unify all the versions into one but tried to preserve as many as possible to transmit to later ages. In modern editions the words 'one book says' are written continuously with the text, indented by one character, in the same size as the text. However, we know from old manuscripts of The Age of the Gods and from the chapters on the Age of the Gods in Ruiju Kokushi that they were originally written in small letters as notes to the text. Since these variants are long, notes in small characters are hard to read. Perhaps they were changed into the present format in order to make them easier to read; it shows that people were indeed reading the chapters on the Age of the Gods. Fourth, in volumes on the Age of the Gods there are many passages that explain the origin and history of things: - 'This is why people at the present day avoid using a single light at night, and also avoid throwing away a comb at night' ('Birth of the four deities/ Sixth variant). - 'This is the reason that herbs, trees, and pebbles naturally contain the element of fire/ (ibid., Eighth variant). - 'This was the origin of the practice of keeping off evil spirits by means of peaches/ (ibid., Ninth variant). - 'This is the reason why the people of the world are careful in the disposal of their own nails' ('Origins of the divine mirror/ Third variant). - 'This was the origin of the general saying, "Fear a returning arrow"' ('Descent of the Heavenly Grandchild/ Main text and first variant). - 'This is why people take care not to mistake a living for a dead person' (ibid., main text). - 'This is the reason why people dislike to be taken for a dead person' (ibid., Main text and first variant). - 'So this was the origin of the male and female Lords of Sarume being both styled Kimi' (ibid., Main text and first variant). - 'This is the reason why the life of man is so short' (ibid, Second variant). [The above translations are all from Aston, Nihongi, passim.]

Nihon Shoki

53

These ideas about natural phenomena and social customs arising from the activities of the gods occupy a general place in mythical thought. Similar stories in Volume 3 and following are mainly about the origins of the names of people and place names or of the hereditary occupations of various families. Unlike myths of the Age of the Gods, they may be historically true. There is a theory that these tales were created by the court in later times to justify the rule of the imperial house, but this phenomenon of accounting for the origins of beliefs seems to have been in the interest of the ancient people, not the intellectuals of later generations. Next we must look at the contents of the tales of The Age of the Gods. The text first recounts the origins from the beginning of Heaven and Earth and then the birth of seven generations of deities. The last to appear were Izanagi and Izanami, who descended to Onokoro Island, married, and gave birth to the islands of Japan. The names of the islands thus created - Honshu, Shikoku, Kyushu, Oki, Sado, and so on - are listed in all versions of the text. Other islands are listed in variant texts. These two deities next produced the seas, rivers, mountains, grasses, and trees, followed by the chief deity, the Sun Goddess, and then Tsukiyomi (the moon deity) and Susano-o (the storm deity). The sun and moon deities ascended to Heaven to take up their rule, while Susano-o was sent to the netherland on account of his violent acts. The account of the births of these three deities differs greatly from that in Kojiki. In Kojiki, Izanami had to depart from this world after giving birth to fire and went to the Land of the Dead. Izanagi also went to the Land of the Dead, following Izanami. There was a dialogue between them, but in the end Izanagi escaped, and when he was cleansing himself of the pollution acquired there, three deities were born. Before retiring to the netherland, Susano-o went up to the Plain of High Heaven to say farewell to his elder sister, the Sun Goddess. She was afraid that he was coming to seize the Plain of High Heaven from her, so she put on armour and waited for him. He dispelled her doubts by making a vow with her and reciprocally producing children.43 Then Susano-O, feeling pleased, proceeded to do violent acts on the Plain of High Heaven, making the Sun Goddess angry. She withdrew into the Heavenly Rock Cave and would not open the Rock Door. Thereupon the whole world became dark, and there was no distinction between day and night. The eight million deities consulted together and performed a great festival in front of the Rock Cave, inviting the Sun Goddess out. This story has common elements with those of various peoples of

54


Southeast Asia. It is speculated that it may have originated either from rites at the time of solar eclipse or from a festival to restore power to the sun during the winter solstice. The gods passed judgement on the crimes of Susano-o and expelled him from the Plain of High Heaven. He went to the headwaters of the river Hi in Izumo, where local deities asked for his help to subdue an eight-forked serpent. He then built a palace in Izumo and fathered the deity Onamuchi., With this, Nihon Shoki concludes Volume i, whereas Kojiki adds numerous other stories about Onamuchi. Nihon Shoki is extremely indifferent to such myths of Izumo origin. As the standard history of the country, it consistently considered as secondary the myths of the Izumo people, who had opposed the Heavenly Grandchild, and did not recount them in detail. Volume 2 is the second part of The Age of the Gods. It starts with the deity Ninigi [hereafter the Heavenly Grandchild], grandson of the Sun Goddess, who left his heavenly rock-seat and clove his way through the eight-fold clouds of Heaven to descend upon the peak of Takachiho at So in Hyuga. Efforts were made to clear the way to the Central Land of Reed Plains for the Heavenly Grandchild; the second attempt failed, but the third try was successful. The deity Onamuchi presented to the Heavenly Grandchild the spear that he had used to subdue his own land and prayed for the future of the Heavenly Grandchild; then he retired into the distant land of hades. This story was well known as the ceding of the country. It has a richly mythical character, but many believe that the central portion - the unification of the country by the heavenly Grandchild - may contain historical truth concerning negotiations by the rulers with previously settled people. That such an important task was accomplished not by battle, but by negotiation, shows the peaceful nature of the myths of Japan.44 The Heavenly Grandchild married Princess Kashitsu, the daughter of the deity Oyamazumi. She became pregnant in a single night. The Princess, angry that the Heavenly Grandchild doubted that the child was his, set fire to the parturition hut. The three deities that were born were Honosusori, Hikohohodemi, and Hoakari. The elder brother, Honosusori, had a talent for fishing, and the younger brother, Hikohohodemi, had a talent for hunting. They exchanged their talents, but the younger brother did not catch anything and lost his brother's fish-hook. Accused harshly by the brother who missed the fish-hook, the frustrated younger brother followed the advice of an old man and plunged into the sea, where he went to an underwater palace. There he retrieved the fish-hook and married

Nihon Shoki

55

Princess Toyotama, daughter of a sea deity. After three years, Hikohohodemi returned to his land, and, with the jewel of the flowing tide and the jewel of the ebbing tide that he had received from the sea deity, he forced his elder brother into submission. Honosusori is said to be the ancestor of the Hayato. A grandson of Hikohohodemi became Emperor Jinmu, the first Emperor of Japan. Stories of this type are widespread among oceanic peoples of the south; possibly it was transmitted by the Hayato, who lived in southern Kyushu. In the end the Hayato people became subjects of the Yamato court. Their ancestors were thus inserted into the genealogy of the imperial house, and this genealogy was transmitted as unimpeachable truth in later ages; this was possible because of the comprehensive nature of the Japanese myths. The three generations of deities at Hyuga after the Heavenly Grandchild have more human qualities than do the preceding deities, and the location of their mountain tombs is clearly recorded. As the volumes on the Age of the Gods draw to a close and the age of humans grows near, it seems that the dawn of history is faintly glimmering as the account continues towards Emperor Jinmu. The account of the Age of the Gods is not a random collection, but a body of myths united by a central theme. Emperor Tenmu's purpose of cutting out the falsehoods and determining the truth in the Imperial Chronicles and the Fundamental Dicta was natural enough, and probably no one would deny that the materials were manipulated to achieve the ends he desired. The question is, were the Imperial Chronicles and the Fundamental Dicta, which were the basis of Nihon Shoki, themselves concocted works? Tsuda Sokichi was foremost among those who thought so; he held that when the Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta were committed to writing around the sixth century, they were actually created by those who wrote them down. According to Tsuda, the imperial house established its hereditary rule over Japan around the sixth century but transposed that reality into the past, explaining it as the result of an agreement in the Age of the Gods. Many progressive scholars hold this view, but I do not agree. I recognize a process of ordering the materials through selection at the time of Emperor Tenmu and after, but I think that the Fundamental Dicta had been written down and were not invented. To think that the compilers invented such myths in order to justify the rule of the imperial house over Japan is to impute too much modern consciousness to the people of ancient times. The most effective part in demonstrating this legitimacy would have been the divine vow of the Sun Goddess to protect the imperial line forever, but this is not

56


even entered into the main text; it appears only once in 'one book/ and eight such 'one books' are cited in the text. The main figure who dispatches the Heavenly Grandchild is the deity Takamimusubi, and the Sun Goddess is seen in a secondary position; this is hard to explain by the theory of invention. The tales about Susano-o, the myths about the talents for hunting and for fishing, and so forth do not serve much purpose in this theory of concoction. The 'facts' in the tales of the Age of the Gods certainly were not concocted by a few intellectuals of the late seventh and early eight centuries. They grew out of a long period of history during which the Yamato people united various clans and families, and they reflect the process of growth and development as the Yamato people settled in this land. Myths of southern and northern peoples are mixed in - of sun worship, of the descent of an ancestor to a mountain peak, of drifting on the sea, and so on. To insist only on the historical process of mixing and to ignore the mythical element is a narrow attitude. It is simple-minded to consider the Age of the Gods actual history; however, to regard these tales completely as inventions is an error of over-intellectualism. The tales of the Age of the Gods were the product of the Yamato people and contain some myths that doubtless retain the memory of historical facts. Volume 3: Emperor Jinmu

Volume 3 covers the reign of Emperor Jinmu. At Hyuga he determined on an eastward expedition and set out in the tenth month of 667 BC. Passing through Oka harbour in Tsukushi, the Enomiya in Aki, and Takashimanomiya in Kibi, he arrived at Naniwa in 663 BC. Next he passed through the port of Aokumo Shirakata in the town of Kusaka in Kawachi, but as he tried to enter Yamato his way was blocked by Nagasunehiko. Intending to proceed with the dignity of the Sun Goddess at his back, he went south to Osaka harbour and travelled around the Kii peninsula. Then he travelled through Yoshino and various towns, subduing those who resisted. He attacked Nagasunehiko at Tomi, and by then almost all of Yamato was pacified. In the third month of 662 he issued a decree making Kashihara, southeast of Mount Unebi, the site for constructing a capital, and in the first month of 660 he ascended the imperial throne in the Palace of Kashihara. This marked the first year of his reign. Thereafter he reigned for seventy-six years, passing away in the palace on the eleventh day, third month, seventy-sixth year. This is a summary of the record of Emperor Jinmu. The systematic recording of years, months and days was based on calculations made

Nihon Shoki

57

in later ages, and it is established in the scholarly world that it cannot be accepted as fact. Originally there were no firm traditions concerning the chronology of the ancient period, but around the sixth century calendrical experts came to Japan and the chronology of Japanese history was determined by making calculations based on the knowledge they brought. This is thought to have taken place in the reign of Empress Suiko. The year 601 was a Kanoto-bird year, a year of revolutionary change in the Chinese system of interpreting astronomical phenomena as the cause of earthly matters. Using this as the starting point, they calculated backwards by twenty-one cycles to a year designated as ippo, that is, a year of revolutionary change, and thus determined the time of Emperor Jinmu's ascension to the throne as the Kanoto-bird year, which occurred 1,260 years prior to 601. By identifying the woman ruler Himiko, who is mentioned in the Wei Zhi, with Empress Regent Jingu, they also established a middle point in the chronology. A calculation of this nature, using the most sophisticated knowledge of the time, is far from historical reality. The unnaturally long lives of the Emperors, exceeding one hundred years, arose from elongation of the chronology. Since the years are given this way, the months and days are, of course, suspect as well. Even if ancient legends within the imperial house recounted such things as the days on which Emperors died, other matters, such as the day on which Emperor Jinmu set out on his eastern expedition and the days on which he arrived in various places, were guessed at by later generations. The fact that the dates are not actual is not grounds for doubting the reality of the eastern expedition. However, people sometimes confuse chronology with facts and find even the facts unconvincing. Tsuda Sokichi lined up the chapter on Emperor Jinmu with the chapters on the Age of the Gods and concluded that both were concoctions and that his eastward expedition from Hyuga was entirely unhistorical. During the Second World War, Emperor Jinmu's edict on Bringing the Eight Corners of the World under One Roof (hakko ichiu) was used as propaganda even in foreign countries. This is why the measures of the American Occupation struck particularly severely at Emperor Jinmu.45 Japanese scholars also took up the cause, and many joined in the massacre of Emperor Jinmu. More recently, however, the eastward expedition has been connected with the record of the country of Yamatai in the Wei Zhi, and more people now accept it to varying degrees. The details have many legendary aspects and cannot be taken as historical, but the main outline can be accepted.

58


At numerous points in the eastward expedition, legends related to the origin of place names are recorded. Some examples are the name Onominato, which is related to the brave conduct of the deity Itsuse; the village name Tobi, which is related to the appearance of a kite bird (a good omen), its sound now corrupted into Tomi (seeing a bird). Kuroita Katsumi inferred that the Yamato Fudoki had been used as a source for the chapter on Emperor Jinmu because of similarities in legends about place names. However, such legends were not confined to the Fudoki. It seems that a fair number were also contained in the Fundamental Dicta, so that the bulk of them in the volume on Emperor Jinmu could have been taken from there. In addition, they could have been taken from the legends of such families as the Otomo and Mononobe. Since Jinmu was the first Emperor, ancient legends were unified into a record of praise for his accomplishments. But to conclude that they were all later inventions is to think that scientific method consists in obliterating ancient traditions. Volume 4: Emperors Suizei to Kaika

Volume 4 covers eight reigns, from Emperor Suizei to Emperor Kaika. Apart from the account of a struggle over the succession at the beginning of Suizei's reign, almost no information is historical. It is entirely a record of the Emperors, giving such things as a preamble with the Emperor's lineage and personal history; the interment of the previous Emperor in a tomb; the naming of the former Empress as Empress Dowager; moving the capital to a new palace; establishing the Empress and obtaining heirs; investing a Crown Prince; and the death of the Emperor. This is almost the same as Kojiki, so what was transmitted in the first part of the Fundamental Dicta must have been extremely sparse. Historians called this a period devoid of history, and many think that these eight Emperors did not actually exist but were invented later. However, for invented stories they have an abundance of names of capitals, Empresses, and so forth. In particular, the Empresses came from such clans as Shiki Agatanushi, Toichi Agatanushi, Owari Muraji, and Hozumi Omi. These are the names of lesser chieftains of Yamato; the imperial house had not yet extended its authority over the whole country, which implies that this account contains historical truth. If these accounts were later inventions, the inventors would have chosen families that flourished later. Although the Fundamental Dicta were empty in places, the Imperial Chronicles contained portions that superbly transmitted the material. To

Nihon Shoki

59

argue that because the Fundamental Dicta were blank the Imperial Chronicles were also invented is to take another tack. The genealogies of these eight reigns ought to be respected as ancient tradition. Volume 5: Emperor Sujin Volume 6: Emperor Suinin

When it reaches Volume 5 on Emperor Sujin, the narrative in Nihon Shoki suddenly becomes lively. The main events are: in 94 BC, an edict on the care of the government for men and spirits; in 92 BC, removal of the Sun Goddess and Yamato Okunitama from the palace to another place; in 91 BC, entrusting the worship of the deity Omononushi to his son Otataneko, and entrusting the worship of Yamato Okunitama to Ichishi Nagaochi; in 88 BC, dispatch of generals to the four regions; in 86 BC, levying of men's bow-end tax and a women's finger-end tax; in 81 BC, construction of ships; in 50 BC, on the basis of fortune-telling in dreams, establishment of Ikume as Crown Prince and the dispatch of Toyoki to pacify the eastern provinces; in 38 BC, worship of the divine treasures of Izumo; in 36 BC, encouragement of agriculture and the opening of ponds and runnels; and in 33 BC, arrival in Japan of Sobang Kalch'ilchi from Imna. Here we see in outline the most important matters of domestic government and foreign affairs that would become problems in later times. The most striking among them pertains to the gods of heaven and earth. The choice of the Emperor's name, Sujin, meaning worship the gods, was probably made to highlight this point of valuing godly matters over governmental matters. As the matter of the deity Omononushi and the sending of the generals to the four regions are also in Kojiki, they must have been recorded in the Fundamental Dicta. The edict on the care of government for men and spirits, the edict on encouragement of agriculture, the construction of ships, and so on look like creations by the compilers of Nihon Shoki and cannot be taken as fact. A great many scholars recognize that Emperor Sujin actually existed, but the record of his accomplishments in Nihon Shoki cannot be believed. The record of Emperor Suinin is closely connected to that of Sujin, and many things that are recounted are the outcome of matters recorded in the reign of the latter, such as the return of Sobang Kalch'ilchi to Imna, the worship of the Sun Goddess at Ise, and the building of ponds and runnels. Other matters, such as the worship of the divine treasures at Isonokami Shrine and the appointment of Mononobe Muraji to administer it, the arrival of the Silla envoy Ch'onilch'ang and his presentation of divine treasures, and the story

60


in Emperor Sujin's reign of the divine treasures of Izumo were collected together as a group of similar stories. The special features of this volume are the rebellion of Sahohiko, elder brother of the Empress; the wrestling match between Taima Kehaya and Nomi Sukune (which is considered the origin of sumo); the story of Prince Hontsu Wake (who finally gained the power of speech as an adult); the origins of haniwa (clay tomb ornaments); and the story of Tajima Mori (who obtained the orange trees).46 Observing the stories of Nomi Sukune wrestling and the story of haniwa, we may surmise that the legends were selected by the Haji Muraji, who claimed Nomi Sukune as their ancestor. Also, the story of the rebellion of Sahohiko, in which the achievement of Yatsunata, ancestor of the Kamitsukenu Kimi, is specially noted, is similar to the story of Toyoki (the ancestor of the Kamitsukenu Kimi and the Shimotsukenu Kimi) in the volume on Emperor Sujin. This indicates that in both volumes the legends of the Kamitsukenu Kimi family were selected. Volume 7: Emperor Keiko and Emperor Seimu

Volume 7 is mainly about Emperor Keiko, with the record of Emperor Seimu added on. Each of them reigned for sixty years, but there is considerable difference in the density of the material. Emperor Keiko's sons and daughters numbered eighty; more than seventy were sent out to become administrators of provinces. This is found in congruent entries in both Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, so it may be assumed that it was contained in the Imperial Chronicles. The important regional families looked up to these imperial sons and daughters as their ancestors. The greatest portion of the record of Emperor Keiko concerns his son, Yamato Takeru. He attacked the Kumaso in the west, made an expedition against the Emishi in the east, and then passed away at the age of thirty at the moor of Nobono in Ise. This is the tale of a representative hero, in the period when the ancient state was being formed, whose purpose was to inspire admiration and sympathy. No doubt it is a concoction, with various legends added. The historicity of elements of the narrative has long been doubted, but on a macroscopic level the story confirms the need for the deeds of such a hero to help unify the state. In comparing the accounts of Yamato Takeru in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, Kojiki displays his human weaknesses, while Nihon Shoki emphasizes his heroic aspects. It appears that the compilers, conscious of Nihon Shoki's position as a Standard History, were remark-

Nihon Shoki

61

ably solicitous about portraying the hero of the country all the more heroically. Prior to Nihon Shoki's account of Yamato Takeru's expedition against the Kumaso, it records an eight-year expedition against them by the Emperor himself, from 82 AD to 89 AD. It is almost as if the Emperor made a royal progression through Kyushu. For this the compilers must have used as reference the Fudoki of Bungo and Hizen and the dispersed text of the Hyiiga Fudoki, which have accounts of imperial tours; Nihon Shoki's account resembles them closely, even in the sentences. As these Fudoki were compiled after Nihon Shoki, they must have referred to it. However, for the Kyushu region Fudoki there are two variants, A and B. A is later than Nihon Shoki, but B may be earlier. The account of Emperor Keiko's imperial tours was probably taken from B version or some similar collection of the region's legends. It is unlikely that the compilers made up legends about the origins of place names or stories of imperial tours that contained songs. Perhaps in Kyushu there were stories from an unknown time about Yamato Takeru's expedition against the Kumaso which were raised up to become a story about the accomplishments of his father, Emperor Keiko, and were developed to emphasize the connection between the Emperor and the region. This may have been submitted to the Nihon Shoki compilation office. Also, it is recorded that Emperor Keiko made a tour of the region of the eastern provinces, thirteen years after Yamato Takeru's death, in his memory. As there is nothing in this account that looks like tales handed down in the region, it seems to be an invention made by transposing to the eastern provinces the twofold structure of the expedition against the Kumaso. The tale of Takeshiuchi Sukune being made to tour the eastern region, prior to Yamato Takeru's expedition against the Emishi, seems to have been similarly invented. In the account of Emperor Seimu, miyatsuko-osa were established in the provinces and districts, and inaki in the villages.47 This has been given serious consideration as an ancient tale, but it corresponds to the entry in the account of Emperor Keiko giving the provinces to his children as fiefs, and so has no special significance. Volume 8: Emperor Chuai Volume 9: Empress Regent Jingu

Of these two volumes, the main one is Empress Regent Jingu, and Volume 8, Emperor Chuai, takes the position of introduction. The account of Chuai is filled with achievements on busy travels and expeditions. His tour to Kashihi Palace in Tsukushi is the only event

6a


which is also recorded in Kojiki. It is doubtful if this portion was based on ancient traditions. However, as the story of Ito Agatanushi welcoming the Emperor was in the dispersed text of the Chikuzen Fudoki, it is possible that other parts may also be based on similar regional legends. While the Emperor was thus occupied he did not hear the oracles of the great gods of Ise and of Sumiyoshi, did not take seriously the worship of the gods, and died in a temporary palace. It is difficult to deny the feeling that Chuai was handled particularly lightly in order to show the great achievements of Empress Regent Jingu. The account of Jingu is very full. It moves from the expedition to Tsukushi, inherited from her predecessor, to an expedition against Silla, and on her return she put down the rebellion of Prince Kagosaka and Prince Oshikuma. The action is splendid. The expedition against Silla is also recorded in Kojiki, although most of it is like a fairy tale, divorced from reality. It may indeed be what people handed down for a long time, but it is far from historical fact. People of later ages, who tried to subjugate a stubborn Silla, deliberately placed such an imaginary tale into the past. The most important part of this chapter is the account of relations with Paekche and Silla, using the Paekchegi as a source. The Paekchegi is clearly quoted and acknowledged in a note on the expedition against Silla in 262, but it is also thought to be the source for other entries. These are entries in 246, 247, 249, 250, 251, 252, and so on, concerning Paekche sending tribute to Japan, Japanese generals going to the peninsula to fight Silla, Japan and Paekche making an everlasting alliance, Paekche sending valuable treasures such as the seven-branched sword and the seven-projections mirror,48 and so forth. Korean place names and names of people had to be derived from some sort of records, and the compilers of Nihon Shoki did not make them up. In addition, the Paekchegi used the sexagenary cycles to record the years, as did Nihon Shoki. However, Nihon Shoki puts events back into the past by only two cycles, or 120 years, so that the real date is arrived at by adding 120 years to the date in Nihon Shoki. For example, the forty-sixth year, 246, is actually 366; and the forty-seventh year, 247, is 367. Thus the change of reign in Paekche from King Kuisu to King Ch'imnyu is given as the sixty-fourth year (264) of Empress Regent Jingu, and the change of reign from King Ch'imnyu to King Chinsa is her sixty-fifth year, (265); and these are taken from the Paekchegi. The actual dates were 120 years later, namely, 384 and 385. At any rate, we gain a rich harvest of understanding by clearly recognizing that Nihon Shoki stretched out time by 120 years. Also,

Nihon Shoki

63

there is now an object in the Isonokami Shrine that corresponds to the seven-branched sword that Paekche presented in the fifty-second year of Empress Regent Jingu (actual date 372), and the date inscribed on the sword of Taiwa 4 (369) tallies with the date in Nihon Shoki. Thus we have entered the era in which the correctness of the dates in Nihon Shoki is corroborated by artifacts. The record of Empress Regent Jingu occupies an important place in Nihon Shoki: the connection of events with verifiable history can be clearly ascertained. The curtain rises upon an expedition to Silla that seems like a fairy tale, but around the middle it strongly approaches reality. The nature of Nihon Shoki changes after the halfway point of this volume, and it becomes an annalistic book of history. Tsuda Sokichi argued that the character of Nihon Shoki shows marked differences before Emperor Chuai and after Emperor Ojin. How Empress Regent Jingu should be viewed if this is the case is not clearly stated by Tsuda, but judging by the position of Kojiki, it seems that Jingu is included in the account of Emperor Chuai. However, the account of Jingu clearly falls into a first part and a latter part; the first is a legendary story, and the latter approaches history based on documents. However, movement of the narrative towards the later volumes does not go smoothly. Even in the volumes following Ojin there are many things that have the same character of invention as the volumes before Chuai. As mentioned previously, in the thirty-ninth, fortieth, and fortythird years of Jingu the compilers quoted the Wei Zhi, which shows that they equated the Queen of Wa with the Empress Regent. Here, too, their concern for chronology is visible, though retained within the framework of Nihon Shoki. It was so deep that they went as far as consulting foreign books for reference. Volume 10: Emperor Ojin Volume 11: Emperor Nintoku Volume 12: Emperors Richu and Hanzei Volume 13: Emperors Ingyo andAnko

Emperor Ojin's name was Homuta, and Emperor Nintoku's name was Osazaki, indicating that after Ojin there was a noticeable change in the names of the Emperors. Heretofore they had used impressive names, such as Oyamato Nekohiko Kunikuru Tenno (Emperor Kogen) and Wakayamato Nekohiko Ohihi Tenno (Emperor Kaika). This is one important piece of evidence for Tsuda's theory that the nature of Kojiki and Ninon Shoki changes after Emperor Ojin.

64


However, Nihon Shoki retains legends from the Fundamental Dicta after Emperor Ojin, and accounts like those in the latter half of Empress Regent Jingu, which were based on the Paekchegi, appear only in some entries at the beginning of Emperor Ojin's reign and then disappear. This is because the Paekchegi, used as the source, went only that far. Of foreign relations in the volume on Ojin, the immigration of Yuzuki Kimi and Achi Omi catch the eye, but these legends were handed down by their respective descendants, the Hata family and the Yamato Aya Family, and did not come from solid historical materials of other countries. The arrival of these ancestors is also reported in Kojiki, so it was probably transmitted in the Fundamental Dicta. However, the report of their bringing with them the people of one hundred twenty districts and seventeen districts, respectively, arose from competition between the two families, in which they exaggerated the number of people given in their traditions. And the account of the year 297, in which the king of Koguryo sent tribute, and Crown Prince Ujinowaki Iratsuko criticized the letter as impolite, cannot be taken as fact. At that time Koguryo was an enemy of Japan and would not likely have sent tribute. The point of this story is that the Crown Prince was learned, and it is connected with the account of A chik ki and Wang nim coming to Japan and giving instruction to the Prince.49 Their coming to Japan was in the legends of such families as the Achiki Fuhito and Fumi Obito, of whom A chik ki and Wang nim were the ancestors. Putting the time of their immigration in the reign of Emperor Ojin must have come from the congruence of recollection in the two families. Of course, Paekche and Japan had established an alliance and were co-operating with each other, so many people did come to Japan from the peninsula. Otherwise, many items in Ojin's reign came from the Fundamental Dicta. In the volume on Emperor Nintoku, the Emperor is exalted as a sage, and many elements of the story are legendary, starting with the explanation of his virtue of humility and love for the people and including such things as his being afflicted by the bitter resentment of the Empress Iwano Hime. She complained because he gave tax relief to the people at the cost of having the palace deteriorate. In foreign relations, there are scattered stories of tribute sent by Koguryo and Silla and the rudeness of Paekche, but these were certainly put in to try to establish continuity with the previous volume, and it is hard to believe that they have any factual basis. However, the digging of canals and waterways and construction of roads and bridges were doubtless carried out in this period, using skills brought by immigrants. In particular, since the Emperor's palace

Nihon Shoki

65

was the Takatsu Palace in Naniwa, the stories of digging the Naniwa canal and the Manta embankment have an authentic character. The Emperors Richu, Hanzei, and Ingyo were all sons of Emperor Nintoku. The account in all three reigns is low-key. Many personal words and deeds of the Emperors and the imperial family are recounted, such as the struggle for the succession between Emperor Richu and Prince Suminoe Nakatsu, the love between Emperor Ingyo and Sotoori Iratsume, and the immorality of Crown Prince Kinashikaru,50 but only a few matters of significance for the state, such as Richu's appointment of Local Recorders and the regulation of families in the reign of Ingyo. The most important is the assassination of Emperor Anko by Prince Mayuwa, the recording of which appears to be genuinely disinterested. The details are relegated to the succeeding account of Emperor Yuryaku, and it is hard to dispel the impression that the compilers treated this event as a happening within the imperial house, with no consequences for the nation, and handled it too lightly. The Yamato court, which_had reached its height of power during the reigns of Nintoku and Ojin, began to show signs of decline, as reflected in these chronicles. They sent occasional envoys to the Southern Song court, but not a fragment of that is given in these accounts. No reference is made to the histories of other countries. Volume 14: Emperor Yuryaku Volume 15: Emperors Seinei, Kenzo, and Ninken Volume 16: Emperor Buretsu

In the Fundamental Dicta, legends were transmitted describing Emperor Yuryaku as a hero full of accomplishments, and in both Kojiki and Nihon Shoki the volumes are accordingly full. The hero is naturally praised for his bravery and daring. In addition to slaying Prince Mayuwa for the assassination of Emperor Anko, he successively killed those families who opposed his will. If that were all, this Emperor would be no more than a tyrannical dictator. However, in other respects, he respected the gods, loved the people, and understood human sentiment. In one place, Nihon Shoki frankly evaluated him as an evil ruler, and in another it recorded the voice of the people, who praised him as a virtuous ruler. This volume, in addition to the materials concerning the Emperor in the Fundamental Dicta, is full of stories of ancestors thought to be taken from legends transmitted by the various families, as well as tales related to foreign countries such as Paekche, Silla, and Wu. However, it is extremely difficult to determine the historicity of

66


these stories. With respect to Paekche, the Paekche Sinch'an and Paekchegi are cited in the notes as having been quoted, but the extent of use is not clear. There were also materials in the families' legends related to the sending of troops to the Korean peninsula. The story of sending an expedition against Silla in 465 seems to be based upon legends of the Ki family, and the Otomo family, who supplied the generals. The coming of envoys from Wu also appears - a rare trace in the traditions of Japan regarding diplomacy with the Southern Song during this period. The Japanese envoys were Musa Ao and Hinokuma Hakatoko, both favourite subjects of the Emperor. Since they were both descendants of immigrants, the account was probably taken from traditions handed down in their families. At this time the Wu envoys presented skilled workers, the Aya weavers and Kure weavers, as well as the seamstresses Ehime and Otohime, but the same things appear in the account of Ojin. This repetition resulted from uncritical selection of the legends that the seamstresses of each locality had about the immigration of their ancestors; nevertheless, as real history, the account of Yuryaku has much greater credibility than that of Ojin. The narration contains much more Chinese rhetorical embellishment than before. In the theory of the apportionment ofNihon Shoki, discussed previously, there is an important boundary between Volume 13 and Volume 14. From Volume 14, on Emperor Yuryaku, to Volume 16, on Emperor Buretsu, the sentences show the same tendencies, thus forming a distinct group. The story of Tanabe Fuhito Hakuson encountering a swift horse at the Honda imperial tomb in 46j51 was written following the poem 'Zhe Bai Ma' in Wen Xuan, and the Emperor's dying command in 479 was transferred from that of Emperor Wen Di in Sui Shu. In the volumes that follow, the compilers' zest for Chinese writing was indeed great. The account of Emperor Seinei is attached to that of Emperor Yuryaku and overlaps that of Emperor Kenzo. It appears that the authors laboured without source materials, and most of the events of 482 and 483 were transferred from the account of Emperor Wen in the Sui Shu. We cannot look for historical truth in such portions. In the account of Emperors Kenzo and Ninken, the bulk of the volume is occupied by the dramatic story of how the two Emperors escaped from Naniwa and wandered about Harima, entering the service of the Obito of the Shijimi granaries and revealing their true identities at the ceremony of opening a new storehouse. This was transmitted not only in the Fundamental Dicta but also in the Fudoki of Harima, so it must have been handed down in the region and enjoyed by the people of old as a tale of the wandering of a

Nihon Shoki

67

person of high status. With no successor to the imperial throne, and the Emperor being welcomed in the regions as' a wanderer, this was not a period when the imperial house was flourishing. Nihon Shoki's record confirms more strongly the decline of the Yamato Court. In the account of Emperor Buretsu the decline of this imperial court is symbolized by the violent actions of the emperor. There is a song tale from the Fundamental Dicta about the fight with Heguri Matori and his son Shibi while the Emperor was still Crown Prince.52 In a succeeding entry, the Emperor ripped open the womb of a pregnant woman in order to inspect the fetus. Here Nihon Shoki departs from its usual companions as a book of history. For a long time this has been explained in terms of error in recording the immorality of King Malta of Paekche as it appears in the cited source, Paekche Sinch'an, but such an error is not without significance. Here the compilers of Nihon Shoki were overly conscious of meaning. When the blood line of Emperor Nintoku, whom they considered a sage, ended with Emperor Buretsu, they regarded the termination of the line as retribution for his immorality and constructed this record of atrocities as an admonition to later ages. The passage about the pregnant woman is the same one found in Lushi Chunqiu [Spring and Autumn Annals of the Lu Family], and the sources for other entries are also to be found in Chinese books. Volume 17: Emperor Keitai Volume 18: Emperors Ankan and Senka Volume 19: Emperor Kinmei

As works of history, these three volumes are full of problems. After the line of Emperor Nintoku ended with Emperor Buretsu, Emperor Keitai was welcomed from Mikuni in Echizen as a fifth-generation descendant of Emperor Ojin and ascended the throne. Kojiki and Nihon Shoki agree on the point, and they are supported by Joguki [Prince Shotoku's Chronicle],53 but some consider it untrue that Emperor Keitai was a fifth-generation descendant of Ojin. However, the fifth generation from Emperor Ojin was indeed remote; if the compilers were making up a connection, they probably would not have put forth such a distant one. Almost all the entries in the record of Emperor Keitai have something to do with_Paekche, apart from the passage concerning Crown Prince Magari Oe, which comes from the Fundamental Dicta, and the rebellion of Tsukushi Kuni Miyatsuko Iwai, which is adorned with material from Yiwen Leiju. Paekche begged for the four districts of Imna, and Omuraji Otomo Kanamura gave permission; next the

68


territories of Kimun and Taesa were also given to Paekche, whereupon Omi Kena raised an army of sixty thousand men to proceed to Imna. They tried to re-establish Nam Kara and Yon'git'an, which had been conquered by Silla; Kena stayed in Imna, and through diplomacy with Paekche and Silla he attempted, without success, to revive Imna. In addition to Paekche Pon'gi, the chief source, it seems that the compilers also referred to other records of the Korean peninsula and of Japan. The names of people and places are extremely detailed, and it appears to be a record of actual history. As stated previously, the time of the death of the Emperor was determined from the Paekche Pon'gi. The records of Emperors Ankan and Senka, sandwiched between the reigns of Emperors Keitai and Kinmei (which are bursting with important events), cast a faint shadow. The compilers did not pay enough attention to the record of Ankan and left alone a period of two years at the beginning of the volume when the throne was mistakenly portrayed as empty. In their first draft the death of Emperor Keitai was given as 534, but this was later amended to 531, according to the Paekche Pon'gi. Accordingly, this required correcting Emperor Ankan's beginning to 531, but they left it at 534, as in their original draft. The mistake lay in changing the year of Keitai's death and not taking the next step of altering Ankan's beginning.54 When we reach the reigns of Ankan and Senka, we have gone beyond the period covered by the Fundamental Dicta. The entries in Kojiki do not go beyond the Imperial Chronicles. But Nihon Shoki gathers materials concerning granaries (miyake) from whatever source available. In addition to entries about the establishment of granaries in all the provinces, there are granaries established here and there to show atonement by the kuni no miyatsuko, as well as to perpetuate the name of one or another Empress or princess.55 The establishment of granaries throughout the country at this time cannot be taken as historical fact; it means only that the compilers gathered together in this volume all materials concerning them. This method of gathering together all similar materials, while formally continuing an annalistic narrative, was preferred by the compilers. Kinmei continued the legitimate line of Keitai and obtained twenty-five children from his consorts; four among them succeeded one another as Emperor. His situation with respect to successors to the imperial throne resembled that of Emperor Nintoku. His palace was at Shikishima in Shiki district, which Kojiki specially emphasized by writing in the characters 'The Great Palace of Shikishima'; in later times Shikishima was well known as the 'pillow word' (standard epithet) for Yamato.56 This was because Kinmei's reign was

Nihon Shoki

69

looked to as a time that should be specially remembered. The entries in this reign, even more than the reign of Keitai, are filled with matters related to Paekche. The Paekche Pon'gi is most used as the source. Since it was a precisely detailed record, right down to the year, month, and day, the compilers of Nihon Shoki were able to use it and make a detailed account. However, things impossible to translate, such as the names of people, were left as they were. Some names in the Paekche Pon'gi were changed into Japanese renderings, with Kabujibi Chik becoming Kawachi Atae, _Yuji Sin becoming Uchi 6mi, and Ohop'a Sin becoming Ikuha Omi, but other names, such as Tsumori Muraji Kimanogwe, Ki Omi Naesolmima, and Mononobe Muraji Yonggida, were left in Korean. Japan tried to restore Nam Kara, which had been invaded by Silla, but Paekche did not put many resources into the joint effort and remained indifferent, calculating the benefits and losses to itself. The relations between the three Korean kingdoms were inconstant; for example, Paekche made an alliance with Silla against Koguryo, but in the end separated from Silla and sought alliance with Japan as an independent kingdom. Then King Songmyong of Paekche died in battle against Silla, and the provinces of Imna also fell to the Silla armies. Thus the rule over territory in southern Korea that Japan had boasted of for two hundred years was utterly destroyed, and this was described most concretely in Nihon Shoki. Notable is the new culture that Paekche presented on the occasions when it sought Japan's help, including the presentation of Buddhist images and scriptures, the coming and going of scholars of medicine, divination, calendar, and the like. And a new phase began in the Emperor's later years with the arrival of envoys from Koguryo and the opening of formal relations. There is a great deal of rhetorical embellishment from Chinese books, although not so much from Paekche Pon'gi. Where king Songmyong of Paekche presents the scripture, the rhetoric is taken from the Golden Light Excellent King Sutra; the imperial decree criticizing Silla upon the fall of Imna comes from the biography of Wang Sengbiang in the Liang Shu; Kawara Tami Ataimiya of Imaki district in Yamato getting a good horse is taken from Wen Xuan; and the entry of the death of the Emperor comes from Emperor Ming, first month, 239, in the Wei Zhi. Volume 20: Emperor Bidatsu Volume 21: Emperors Yomei and Sushun

The central part of the accounts of Emperors Bidatsu, \omei, and

7O


Sushun is concerned with how to realize Emperor Kinmei's dying command to restore Imna and how to handle the Buddhist religion, which was transmitted to Japan during his reign. This is woven together with the story of how the Oomi Soga family came to the fore and how the Soga and Mononobe fought each other. However, compared with the elegantly written account of Kinmei, it is all lowkey. In the account of Bidatsu we see how he strived to restore Imna, and there is a detailed account of how Nichira, the son of Ashikita, Kuni Miyatsuko of Hizen-Higo, who had served at the Paekche court, was summoned and questioned about its government. With respect to Buddhism, as worship by the Soga family developed, the anti-Buddhism of the Mononobe grew fierce. In light of the appraisal of the Emperor - 'the Emperor was not a believer in Buddhism, but was fond of literature' - it was not a good time for the spread of Buddhism. In the reign of Emperor Yomei, Buddhism advanced, but turmoil arose within the imperial house, with Prince Anahobe aspiring to the throne. In the reign of Emperor Sushun there is a military struggle between the Soga and Mononobe, with the Soga victorious. Thereby the pro-Buddhist party gained power and began the great temple construction of Hokoji in the continental style. An expeditionary army was gathered in Tsukushi to regain Imna. Just when Emperor Sushun was beginning to see prospects of settling the two grave problems bequeathed by Emperor Kinmei, he was assassinated by Yamato Aya Atai Koma. The events relating to Buddhism clearly came from the Gangdji Engi. The story at the beginning of Emperor Bidatsu's reign, of Wang Chini, who was able to read the Koguryo envoy's message on a crow's feather,57 was almost certainly recorded by the Fune Fuhito family, of whom Wang Chini was the ancestor. No doubt each event had some such source. The accounts contain some legendary materials, but for the most part they can be believed. Volume 22: Empress Suiko Volume 23: Emperor Jomei

As there are many stone inscriptions surviving from around the time of Empress Suiko that can be used for the study of history, the verification of events in Nihon Shoki becomes easier. The account of sending envoys to Sui in 607 and 608 is not based on any Sui sources, but the chronology tallies exactly with the account of the country of Wa in the Sui Shu [History of Sui]. This means that we

Nihon Shoki

71

can search for facts in the chronology of Japanese sources as well. Still, errors arise from ineptitude or carelessness. For example, dating the completion of the sixteen-foot Buddha at the Gangoji at 606 is a mistake caused by wrongly deciphering the back inscription of the Buddha recorded in the Gangoji Engi; it should have been 609. Placing the death of Prince Shotoku in 621 came about because the compilers did not consult the historical materials at the Horyuji, for, according to the inscription on the image of the Buddha housed therein, the date should have been 622. Yet since the dates are more reliable, in many cases the truth of the item itself can be verified. Of course, legendary materials remain, as well as the compilers' method of assembling similar materials in one place, so the narrative is still not acceptable as being entirely historical. Although Empress Suiko was the first female ruler, the entries in Nihon Shoki do not show any special method of handling her. The authors sought to write in exactly the same form as for a male ruler. When Nihon Shoki was written, female rulers came one after another, so the general perception was that they were nothing special. However, in the first year of Empress Suiko's reign, Prince Shotoku was raised up to Crown Prince and made into something resembling a Regent. This incident is well known, but during Shotoku's time the office of Regent was different from that of the later Regents, who exercised the power of the reigning Emperor. In some cases the Prince oversaw the government in place of the Emperor, and in others he presented the decrees of the Emperor and conducted the government together with the ministers of state. In the account of Empress Suiko it is often recorded that the Empress herself commanded the Crown Prince, the princes, and the ministers of state. A number of entries in Suiko's reign record something as a matter of specific policy. These include the establishment of a twelve-rank cap system, the setting down of Prince Shotoku's Seventeen-Article Constitution, the exchange of envoys with Sui, the sending of visiting scholars and scholar-priests to China, a planned expedition against Silla, and the reception of envoys from Silla. The rank system and the constitution represent the revolutionary government of the court under Empress Suiko and symbolize dramatic cultural progress. The rank system was changed a number of times, and each time Nihon Shoki recorded it in detail, as if by policy; perhaps special records summed it up. The entire text of Prince Shotoku's constitution is given, and no doubt records also existed about this, perhaps in a biography of him. There is a theory that the constitution was a later forgery, but who in later times could have written such a docu-

72


ment? It could indeed have been the Prince who drafted it. The account of sending Ono Imoko as envoy to Sui is reflected in the Sui Shu, corroborating its truth. The first sovereign's letter is in Sui Shu and the second is in Nihon Shoki; this may be called chance, but at any rate rare records are preserved. The story of Imoko, on his first return passage, having the Emperor of Sui's letter seized from him in Paekche in 608 is very strange, and it raises the suspicion that this material was written by someone opposed to Imoko. There is strong evidence that records of the Naniwa Kishi family were an effective source for the account of Empress Suiko. The story of the Naniwa Kishi family stands out, starting with Naniwa Kishi Onari, who was appointed Vice-Envoy in the second Envoy to Sui in 608. In particular the expedition against Silla in 623 shows Naniwa Kishi Iwakane's party joining their efforts in diplomatic negotiations and harshly criticizes Ono Imoko for advocating the position of the prowar group. The biography of Prince Shotoku was an important source for the chapter on Suiko, but it must have been rich with legendary material depicting the Prince as a sage. This includes such tales as the legend that he could listen to the suits of ten men at one time and judge them all without error; the story of his meeting (at Kataoka) the starving man who was a sage; and the story of the Koguryo priest Hyeja, who resolved to die on the same day of the same month of the year following Shotoku's death, and did so. However, to doubt the entire biography because of these legends is going too far. As a matter of course, historians ought to sift through the legends of the sage and take from them the true biography of the Prince. In this period Buddhism was promoted as state policy, to be worshipped by the sovereign and the people together. It may be doubted whether the Empress's decree in 594 to promote the prosperity of the Three Treasures of the Buddha, the law, and the priesthood was actual, but it reflected the main policy towards Buddhism and expressed the intent of the compilers. There are many entries indicating the acceptance of Buddhism, such as item two of Prince Shotoku's Constitution, which enjoins reverence for the Three Treasures; the completion of the copper and embroidery Buddhas at Gangoji; and the lectures on the Lotus Sutra and the Queen Srimala Sutra. The figures in the religious census of 624, showing 46 temples, and 816 priests and 569 nuns, totalling 1,385, give the first concrete evidence of the development of Buddhism in this period. However, the entry which states that in 607, because of an imperial decree requiring Shinto worship, the Crown Prince and the min-

Nihon Shoki

73

isters led the government in worshipping Shinto Gods, lacks the concreteness of the decree on the Three Precious Things in 597. It is possible that the compilers, dismayed by the excessively large number of entries pertaining to Buddhism, invented this. In the record of Emperor Jomei, the account of complications before he ascended the throne is extremely detailed. A story with such an abundance of details obviously used as a source a special record devoted to that subject alone. Otherwise, the account of his reign is simple, as if there remained nothing from the blaze of Empress Suiko's reign but smouldering embers. Volume 24: Empress Kogyoku Volume 25: Emperor Kotoku Volume 26: Empress Saimei Volume 27: Emperor Tenji

These four volumes cover the period before and after the Taika Reform, with the Taika Reform at the centre. The volume on Empress Kogyoku relates the strain on the eve of reform, and the volume on Emperor Kotoku narrates the process of the accelerating reform. In the volume on Empress Saimei, there is the collapse of the spirit of reform and the development of explosive events, and the volume on Emperor Tenji tells of the disposal of matters thereafter. It was a definable period of time, and in the theory of the apportionment of composition of Nihon Shoki these volumes constitute one group. The volume on Empress Kogyoku opens with accounts of the arrival of envoys from Paekche, Koguryo, and Silla, but the heart of the chapter is the actions in defiance of the imperial house by Soga Emishi and his son Iruka. In particular they wiped out the family of Prince Yamashiro Oe, a possible candidate for^ succession to the imperial throne, and this aroused Prince Naka Oe and his party to plan the massacre of the Soga, which was carried out in the Great Hall of Audience. The text describes these events in explicit detail; it is like watching the enactment of a drama. With disastrous natural phenomena occurring, while wizards portended good for the future of the Soga, the turbulence of the time is vividly portrayed. The first half of Emperor Kotoku's reign was the Taika era, in which the process of reform was carried out from beginning to end. From 645 through 647 the components of the reformed government were announced in the form of imperial edicts, which came out in enormous numbers. An edict would be followed by another in the next year to spell it out in detail. In those pertaining to such matters

74


as the bell-and-box system for receiving complaints from the people, or the administration of the provincial governors of the eastern provinces, the names of places and people are written in detail. This not only shows the veracity of the account but conveys the enthusiasm that the court created for its new government. Although all these imperial edicts were later amended the gist was not changed. As stated previously, there must have been a source work, probably the Record of the Taika Reform, which described the reform process. The second half of Kotoku's reign was the White Pheasant era. The auspicious appearance of a white pheasant and the arrival of envoys from Tang are recorded, and at length discord arose between the Emperor and the Crown Prince. Enthusiasm for government reform suddenly evaporated. In the volume on Empress Saimei there are murky accounts of lapidary engineering projects and the affair of Prince Arima, who pretended insanity, but the greater part is taken up by Abe Hirafu's expedition against the Emishi and by the fall of Paekche and the rush to rescue it. There is a foretelling song in which the order of characters is mixed up and cannot be deciphered to this day. Emperor Tenji ruled for six years as Crown Prince, during which time there was no Emperor, and then ascended the throne. At first there are the complications of the relief of Paekche, but after 664, when defeat was certain, the work becomes an account of domestic politics. However, the many repetitions in the account lead to speculation as to whether the manuscript was ever completed. Volume 28: Emperor Tenmu, Part 1 Volume 29: Emperor Tenmu, Part 2 Volume 30: Empress Jito

The course of the Jinshin War of 672 is found in the volume on Emperor Tenmu. The account is extremely detailed and has the authenticity of a Veritable Record. There can be no doubt that it was written on the basis of reliable historical sources. In Emperor Tenmu, Part 2, and Empress Jito, daily records of the government were used as source materials, and the account can be called a pure historical record. G E N E A L O G I E S OF NIHON

SHOKI

Such are the contents of the thirty volumes of Nihon Shoki that remain at the present day. However, the account in Shoku Nihongi of the presentation of the book says that it consisted of 'Chronicles, 30

Nihon Shoki

75

volumes; Genealogies, i volume.' Since this volume of genealogies is not now appended to Nihon Shoki, we can only speculate about its nature. The preface to Konin Shiki serves as a clue. It says, 'Prince Toneri, Yasumaro, and others . . . edited this Nihon Shoki, thirty volumes, and Genealogies of the Emperors, one volume/ and a note explains, 'At the present time it is both in the Library Bureau and in the possession of people.'58 Thus what Shoku Nihongi referred to simply as 'Genealogies' was actually genealogies of the Emperors. If it were simply genealogies, it would deal with various families, but a genealogy appended to Nihon Shoki and consisting of only one volume would probably contain only those of the imperial house. As additional evidence, Sugawara Michizane's Ruiju Kokushi was accompanied by three volumes of genealogies of the Emperors. This is no longer appended to the extant Ruiju Kokushi, but Kanke Godenki [Biography of Sugawara Michizane], edited by Michizane's fifth generation descendant Sugawara Nobutsune, says that Ruiju Kokushi consisted of 'The History, 200 volumes; Index, two volumes; Genealogies of the Emperors, three volumes/59 The Five National Histories did not have genealogies, and so, at the time of compiling Ruiju Kokushi, Michizane probably created anew the three volumes of genealogy, on the model of Nihon Shoki. It seems reasonable to conclude that one of the three volumes on genealogies of the Emperors was the Nihon Shoki volume of genealogies. Assuming the genealogies of Nihon Shoki to be genealogies of the Emperors, what form did they take? Hirata Atsutane held, in Koshi Cho Kaidai Ki [Signs of Ancient History: Topics], that it was the genealogies of the Emperors found in Volume 4 of Shaku Nihongi.60 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku [Catalogue of Books in Japan, later thirteenth century] records 'GENEALOGIES OF THE EMPERORS, 1 VOLUME; compiled by Prince Toneri/ which indicates that in the Kamakura period the genealogies of Nihon Shoki circulated independently of the book.61 However, because they used entirely Chinese-style posthumous names for the Emperors, it is difficult to accept Hirata's theory that the genealogies given in Shaku Nihongi were those of Nihon Shoki. They also contain many facts from the time after Nihon Shoki was written, and, even if we suppose that these were all added after the time of original composition, we cannot explain away the horizontal format. We know that the ancient form of genealogies was vertical, as seen in such works as Amabeuji Keizu [Genealogy of the Amabe Family] at Kono Shrine in Tango and the Enchin Zokusei Keizu [Genealogy of the Enchin Secular Family] at Miidera Temple. It is natural to expect the genealogies of Nihon Shoki to be in the vertical

76


style. The genealogies of the Emperors in Shaku Nihongi may have recorded the genealogies of Nihon Shoki, as handed down at that time, but we must conclude that they were far from being the real genealogies of Nihon Shoki. L E C T U R E S ON NIHON

SHOKI

From the Nara period into the Heian, lectures on Nihon Shoki, and that work alone, were held at court. The facts about these lectures, including years and dates, are found in Nihongi Korei [Account of Lectures on Nihongi] of 965, by Geki Kanshin, cited in the Introductory Materials of Shaku Nihongi.62 Nothing further is known about Nihongi Korei. The account records year, month, and day; name of the lecturer; location; year, month, and day of the concluding banquet; person who introduced the poems at the banquet; number of poems, and so forth. These data are recorded for seven occasions in the Yoro, Konin, Jowa, Gangyo, Engi, Johei, and Koho periods. Let us further explain each one. For the Yoro lectures there are no source materials; only the year 721 is given, not the month or day; the name of the lecturer is also missing. There is no relevant entry for the same year in Shoku Nihongi. Similarly, for the Konin lectures only the year 812 is given, not the month or day. However, the entry in Nihon Koki, second day, sixth month, 812, says, 'On this day the reading of Nihongi began, with more than ten persons attending, starting with Consultant, Junior Fourth Rank Lower, Ki Ason Hirohama, and Head of the Yin-Yang Bureau, Senior Fifth Rank Lower Abe Ason Makatsu. Dispersed Rank, Junior Fifth Rank Lower O Hitonaga took notes of the lectures.' Also, at this time the lectures were recorded into the three volumes of Konin Shiki, which was probably used as a reference in the later lectures. However, the book now transmitted as Konin Shiki may not correspond to this record. The present-day book consists of the Chinese Preface, the text in which some terms from The Age of the Gods to Empress Jito are accompanied with side notes, and a postscript by Nyuso Rakuhaku Inshi Morikata [Morikata, the hermit in reduced circumstances who entered Song]. This is the 'A' text of the Kokushi Taikei edition.63 However, Konin Shiki has not been preserved in its original form. The very fact of inserting side notes in katakana is strange, and there are anachronistic errors of kana usage. In the Preface there are doubtful places, and the text contains additions in red ink, which are explained as follows: 'Words are explained by using Japanese pro-

Nihon Shoki

77

nunciation; and the insertion of red dots clarifies their relative importance.' Tsukishima Hiroshi has concluded that this could not have been done in the early Heian period.64 Thus the present form of the work is degraded; either it is entirely a forgery or there was an original to which later changes were added. I hold to the latter theory; it is a task for scholars to distinguish the original work and addenda. Kasuya Koki draws back from the theory that the Preface and the text are both complete forgeries. He argues in close detail that the Preface was written, not long after the late Konin era, by someone who knew all about the lectures on Nihon Shoki, and that while the text was subjected to many impurities and distortions, there was an authentic original.65 The Jowa era readings are recorded as having taken place on the first day sixth month, 839, with Sugano Takatoshi as lecturer, but 839 is a mistake for 843.66 Shoku Nihon Koki, first day, sixth month, 843, says, 'Dispersed Rank, Senior Sixth Rank Upper, Sugano Ason Takatoshi, who is learned about the past, began the reading of Nihongi in the Library Bureau.' On the fifteenth of the sixth month of 844 it says, 'The reading of Nihongi was concluded.' Probably 843 is the correct year. Since it was concluded in precisely one year, it must have been a comparatively simple reading. The year 843 was thirtyone years after the Konin reading of 812. Thereafter readings were held at intervals of about thirty years, with the Jowa reading being the first such example. There is also a temporal relationship to the compiling of the National Histories; Nihon Koki was completed in 840, and the reading was held three years after its completion. The Gangyo era reading was held on the twenty-fifth day, second month, 878, with Yoshibuchi Chikanari as lecturer. There is a detailed account of this reading in Sandai Jitsuroku. There followed a period when it was suspended; on the seventh day, fifth month, 879, it was resumed. The reading was completed on the twenty-ninth day, sixth month, 881, and the completion banquet was held on the twenty-ninth day, eighth month, 882. The reading took three years; Fujiwara Mototsune attended first as Minister of the Right and later as Chancellor, taking a keen interest, and for this reason a very conscientious reading was carried out. What Shaku Nihongi cites as a 'private record' may have come mostly from the above. The Gangyo reading could be done so conscientiously because the great peace of Heian was still continuing and historical and literary scholarship was flourishing and we cannot overlook the stimulus given by the love of scholarship of the Chancellor Mototsune. The year 878 was thirty-five years after 843; in addition, 879 saw the compiling of Montoku Jitsuroku. This was the

78


first completion banquet, a carryover of the custom carried out when reading Chinese classics. For the latter, people composed Chinese poems, but in this case they recited Japanese poems. According to Nihongi Korei, there were thirty poets at this occasion, starting with Head of the War Ministry Prince Motoyasu,67 but only three of the poems are extant. The Engi reading began on the twenty-first day, eighth month, 904; Head of the University Fujiwara Harumi was lecturer. According to the preface to the poems of the completion banquet, the reading finished on the twenty-second day, tenth month, 906, and the banquet was held on the seventeenth day, intercalary twelfth month of the same year. Those who attended took themes from deities and people in Nihon Shoki and recited poems. The thirty-six poets included Head of the War Ministry Prince Sadayasu. As some poets contributed two poems, there were forty poems in all. An account of this reading was handed down in Engi Kinmochi Shiki [Kinmochi's Private Account of the Engi Era], which was used in Shaku Nihongi.6B Kinmochi was the historical-literary scholar Yatabe Kinmochi; he attended this reading as one of the scholars who reviewed the material explicated by the lecturer. The Johei reading took place on the eighth day, twelfth month, 936, with the above-mentioned Yatabe Kinmochi as lecturer. According to the preface to the poems of the completion banquet, lectures had to be temporarily suspended because of uprisings in both the east and the west in 939. The lectures concluded in the ninth month of 943, and the banquet was held on the twenty-fourth of the twelfth month. Thus the reading took seven years. There were thirty-seven who recited poems at the concluding banquet, starting with Prince Shigeakira; there were forty-one poems, about the same as at the Engi reading. One of the private records of the occasion is quoted in the Introductory Materials of Shaku Nihongi and has been handed down as an independent volume. This is the Shiki Teibon [Private Commentary, 'D' Manuscript] in Kokushi Taikei.69 The Koho reading started on the thirteenth day, eighth month, 965, with Tachibana Nakato as lecturer. This date coincides with that given in Nihon Kiryaku, so it is probably correct;70 but the date of the completion banquet is nowhere recorded. The year 965 is precisely thirty years after 936. For Emperor Murakami, who always followed the precedents of the Engi era, it was a fitting project for his later years, but, perhaps because of excessive formality, the court lost the energy to hold a completion banquet. Thereafter readings of Nihon Shoki ceased entirely, perhaps as part of the end to the uniform culture of the ritsuryo period, in which compilation of kyaku

Nihon Shoki

79

and shiki and of National Histories, minting of coins, and so on all ceased. These readings of Nihon Shoki took place seven times over a period of 244 years between 721 and 965, at intervals of about thirty years. They transmitted to later generations the traditions of how to read Nihon Shoki. From the beginning there have been many old readings transmitted by thorough immersion in the text. According to the preface to the poems of the completion banquet of Engi, by Mimune Masahira, there had been no reading for more than twenty years since the Gangyo reading, and people secretly feared that the theories of the teacher would be dropped. One reason for carrying out these readings one after another was this ideal of transmitting to later ages the theories of the teacher. In addition they passed on the traditions of historical-literary scholarship.71 These readings greatly influenced the culture of the Heian period. As is well known, from the Nara period on, Tang culture was widely copied, but in opposition a critical spirit began to appear in the early Heian period, based on the history and traditions of Japan. It was manifested concretely in the founding of the new Buddhism of Saicho and Kukai, in the prospering of faith in the deities of heaven and earth, and in the current of Japanese poems. In the world of scholarship, historical-literary studies flourished, and resulting respect for the Japanese essentials directly shaped the readings of Nihon Shoki. Treating Kidendo (which studied history and literature) more highly than Myogyodo (which studied the moral principles of the classics) was the product of an original preference of the Japanese. They did not simply study in detail the history and literature of China but also displayed deep scholarship in the history and traditions of Japan. Such men as Mimune Masahira, Ki Haseo, Miyoshi Kiyoyuki, Oe Asatsuna, and Oe Koretoki were not only skilled at composition in Chinese poetry; they were also scholars with a strong concern for Japanese history and culture. Not by chance were they chosen to compose poems for the completion banquets of Engi and Tengyo. Of course Sugawara Michizane and others attended the readings, and it is a pity that the poems of the Gangyo completion banquet have not survived. Interest in Japanese history was not confined to scholars of history and literature but extended also to high-ranking officials. We have already mentioned the enthusiasm of the Chancellor Fujiwara Mototsune for the Nihon Shoki readings; he was always in attendance, asking questions and responding to the lecturer. His sons Tokihira and Tadahira, and Tadahira's son Saneyori, attended the Engi or

8o


Johei readings, as we know from the completion poems. Tokihira's poem took Emperor Nintoku for its topic: Takadono ni Noborite mireba Ame no shita Yomo ni keburite Ima zo to minuru

Climbing his high tower And gazing out. He saw that smoke was rising At last From all the people's houses.

[Emperor Nintoku, seeing no smoke rising from the houses of the people, realized that they were so poor they had no food to cook. He gave a tax remission for three years, whereupon prosperity returned, evident by the smoke rising from the houses.] Tadahira's poem took Empress Suiko for its topic: Tsutsumi o ba Toyora no miya ni Tsukisomete Yoyo o henuredo Mizu wa morasazu

The Toyora Palace Is circled around With embankments. Though generations have passed, The water has not leaked through.

[In 601 Empress Suiko had been flooded out and forced to move to a temporary palace. The poem celebrates the success of the engineering projects of the period.] Saneyori's poem was about Emperor Suinin: Ike mizu ni Kuni sakaekeru Makimuku no Tamaki no kaze wa Ima mo nokoreri

With the waters of the ponds The country prospered. The breeze of the Tamaki Palace At.Maki-muku Blows even today.

[In Suinin's reign, much pond construction was done, leading to prosperity.] Each poem took as its theme some accomplishment of the Emperor that was praised by later generations; it demonstrates a healthy awareness of their authors' responsibilities as minister of state. Even though the readings of Nihon Shoki had a purely formal side, they influenced early Heian culture and politics. We do not know the reason for thirty-year intervals, but each adult would experience a reading at least once in his lifetime. Aristo-

81

Nihon Shoki

crats and officials had the opportunity to review Japanese history with the lecture theories based upon tradition and their own understanding. This nourished their concern for Japanese matters without specifically articulating that purpose. For easy reference, the seven readings of Nihon Shoki are shown in Table 7. TABLE 7

Nihon Shoki readings No. Emperor 1 2 3 4

Gensho Saga Ninmyo Yozei

5 Daigo

Year Interval 721 812-3 843-4 878-81

91 31 35

904-6

26

6 Suzaku 936-43 7 Murakami 965

32 29

Lecturer

Completion banquet

none 6 Hitonaga none Sugano Takatoshi none Yoshibuchi 29/8/882 Chikanari Fujiwara Harumi 17/intercal. 12/906 Yatabe Kinmochi 24/12/943 Tachibana Nakato none

No. of. poets

30 36 37

RESEARCH

We have discussed how lectures in ancient times attached much importance to the method of reading, but another aspect deeply concerned them. In Johei Shiki [Private Commentary of the Johei Era on Nihon Shoki] there is discussion of the origins, materials, and name of Nihon Shoki, and in Gangyo Shiki [Private Commentary of the Gangyo Era on Nihon Shoki] there is justifiable criticism of the omissions and errors in words. These commentaries made a splendid beginning of studies on Nihon Shoki as a history book. In telling the story of research on Nihon Shoki, we start with the ancient readings and the private records that were their product. It is regrettable that these private records have not been transmitted to the present in complete form. Of those that are known as independent volumes, apart from Johei Shiki [Shiki Teibon], the form is fairly disintegrated, and even Johei Shiki has gaps. For this reason the Kamakura-period work Shaku Nihongi, which collects the private records, has great significance. Shaku Nihongi was a collection of the private records of Nihon

82


Shoki readings made by Urabe Kanebumi for the former First Minister Ichijo Sanetsune and his son the Regent letsune; it was compiled in the latter half of the thirteenth century by Urabe Kanekata, son of Kanebumi. They consulted many Heian private records for reference, and a great number of them are quoted. The private records of ancient times simply followed the volumes of Nihon Shoki in order and made notes on the words. In Shaku Nihongi, however, the texts were divided into seven categories: preface, notes on kun pronunciation, disorderly omissions, genealogies of the Emperors, narrative interpretation, secret readings, and poems; and it considers the origins of Nihon Shoki, distinguishes correct text from corrupt, and attempts detailed description of the words and how to read them, as well as explanation of poems. In addition to preserving the private records, it demonstrates one type of comprehensive research on Nihon Shoki. In Kanebumi's discussion we observe the drift of Shinto thought, which was dominant in the Middle Ages, but the ancient exegetical spirit was well preserved, and it set a high standard as the first work of commentary on Nihon Shoki in its entirety. In particular, because it contains many ancient texts that are otherwise now lost, starting with the Fudoki, it has great value for scholars. It thus occupies a position similar to Preceptor Sengaku's Man'yoshu Chushaku [Commentary on Man'yoshu], which was written around the same time; they demonstrate the standards attained in study of the classics in the Kamakura period. After Shaku Nihongi, five hundred years passed with no comprehensive commentary on Nihon Shoki. But interest in Nihon Shoki continued. In the period of cultural stagnation in the Middle Ages, it was a source for the Way of Japan, more specifically a Shinto scripture; it was read by Shintoists, Buddhists, and the general intelligentsia. Accordingly, some works of commentary appeared. However, they focused on the volumes on the Age of the Gods or the three volumes on Emperor Jinmu and made philosophical or religious interpretations from the viewpoint of Confucianism or Buddhism. In terms of exegetical or investigative study, they nowhere surpassed Shaku Nihongi. Medieval commentaries include Imbe Masamichi's Kamiyo no Maki Koketsu [Oral Interpretations of the Volumes on the Age of the Gods], Ichijo Kanera's Nihon Shoki Sanso [Interpretation of Nihon Shoki], Yoshida Kanetomo's Nihon Shoki Jindai Kojutsu Sho [Excerpts from The Age of the Gods in Nihon Shoki], and Kiyowara Nobutaka's Nihongi Jindai Sho [Excerpts from The Age of the Gods in Nihongi]. In the later works Japanese nationalist consciousness, based on Shinto

Nihon Shoki

83

and expressed in Confucianism, is perceptibly higher. This is made clear in Yoshida Kanetomo's argument on the root, leaves, blossoms, and fruit ('Shinto is the trunk and origin of all things. Confucianism is the branches and leaves. Buddhism is the flowers and fruit.') This concept is further developed by Kiyowara Nobukata. For example, he explained the historical form peculiar to Nihon Shoki. According to his Jindaisho, in the history of foreign countries narratives of the rulers are called Teiki ['rfrfE/ Chronicles of the Emperor], and narratives about subjects are called Retsuden [Biographies]: 'Nihon Shoki is generally called a chronicle (ki IE) because in our country since the time of the descent of the Sun Goddess, the Emperor above and the subjects below have all been the descendants of deities. Therefore they should not be divided into Basic Annals and Biographies. This is quite different from foreign countries.' The attitude of the medieval Shintoists towards searching in Nihon Shoki for the traditions of Japan was correct. However, as their methods of commentary contained twisted meanings and confusions, we cannot expect much in terms of scholarship from their research. Early modern times was a continuation of medieval scholarship, with studies on the Age of the Gods. The main works are Watarai Nobuyoshi's Nihon Shoki Jindai Kojutsu Sho [Selections from the Narrative on the Age of the Gods in Nihon Shoki, 1672]; Yamazaki Ansai's Jindai no Maki Fuyoshu [Collection of Leaves Scattered by the Wind in the Volumes on the Age of the Gods]; and Tamaki Isai's Jindai no Maki Moshiogusa [Collection on the Volumes on the Age of the Gods, 1739]. The estimation of Nihon Shoki as a history book was heightened. Yamazaki Ansai praised the attitude towards compilation in Nihon Shoki, saying, Tn ancient theories about history, we find that some matters are presented in detail; some are abbreviated; and there are variances and convergences. Prince Toneri widely assembled and truthfully recorded this information; he did not presume to make selections. This was extremely respectful.'72 I hold the same view: there are numerous cases where Nihon Shoki widely collected materials and recorded the theories of both the original text and the 'one book.' In Moshiogusa, Tamaki Isai did not quote any Confucian or Buddhist works and commented on Nihon Shoki, searching for evidence mainly in the classics of Japan, such as Manyoshu, Kogo Shui, and Ruiju Kokushi. Here we see the independent modern spirit breaking free of the long-standing restraints of Buddhism and Confucianism. Building on such a foundation, the tendency became stronger, and around the mid-eighteenth century there finally appeared a book of

84


commentary on the whole of Nihon Shoki: Tanikawa Kotosuga's Nihon Shoki Tsusho [Complete Commentary on Nihon Shoki, 35 volumes, 1762]. Volume i explains the general principles of the whole book; Volumes 2-7 explicate the Age of the Gods; and the remainder discuss the reigns of the Emperors. This structure broke from medieval tradition by not being restricted to the Age of the Gods and by considering the volumes on the Emperors a proper subject of study. Kotosuga's commentary is a collection of theories on ancient times, as is apparent in the chapters on the Age of the Gods. However, as there are few ancient theories on the chronicles of the Emperors, it is mainly his own ideas which appear. Citing copious references, he comments on words and investigates historical fact. As we know from his other publication, Wakun Shiori [Guide to Japanese Readings of Characters], he was deeply learned in the Japanese language, and he introduces interpretations in the study of the language by taking up the old readings for words. He also had noticeably good ideas about historical research. For example, he thought that Emperor Tenji actually ascended the throne in the sixth year of his reign because three years of mourning for Empress Saimei were followed by three more years of mourning for Empress Dowager Hashihito. Such ideas are valid theories, acceptable at the present day. Nihon Shoki Tsusho also has weaknesses. The author was not able to escape from the theories of Suika Shinto, yin-yang and five-element theory, or Song-dynasty theories of principle and spirit; it was not easy to cast off the remnants of medieval thought. The next complete commentary on Nihon Shoki was Shoki Shikkai [Collected Commentaries on Nihon Shoki], by Kawamura Hidene. Hidene was from Nagoya in Owari and studied Shinto under Yoshimi Yukikazu, becoming absorbed in positivistic research on the classics. He called the scholarship of his school the study of the history classics, and this included history, law, administration and customs, and linguistics. Nihon Shoki was accorded respect as the greatest history. Hidene resolved to do a commentary on it and rewrote his manuscript any number of times; his son Masune joined in, and father and son together produced Shoki Shikkai in thirty volumes, probably around 1804. This work recognized Nihon Shoki as being totally in Classical Chinese, and an enormous amount of energy was spent in digging for sources to give definitive explanations of words. Hidene did not rely upon later explanations but sought directly in the Chinese classics for principles to apply to the text. This method for classical studies arose in modern times, and this book dramatically advanced

Nihon Shoki

85

the method as applied to Nihon Shoki. Accordingly it did not place high value on traditional renderings. Shoki Shikkai unjustly overlooked the linguistic aspects of Nihon Shoki. The massacre of the notes in Nihon Shoki is exceptionally arbitrary, as is seen in Hidene's contention that Nihon was not originally part of the title. This conclusion is manifested in the title of his own book, Shoki Shikkai, on the basis that in the ancient texts the title is simply Shoki. Sometimes excellent opinions are accompanied by dogmatism. From the modern viewpoint, Shoki Shikkai is far more appealing than Tanikawa Kotosuga's Nihon Shoki Tsusho, but its theories cannot be completely accepted. The eighteenth century saw the appearance of Nihon Shoki Tsusho and Shoki Shikkai, but it was also the era of the development of National Studies by Kamo Mabuchi, Motoori Norinaga, and others. How did they view Nihon Shoki? The monk Keichu (1640-1701), founder of National Studies, esteemed Man'yoshu very highly, but he gave equal place to Nihon Shoki. In his three-volume work Kogansho [Impertinent Selections], the first two volumes cite the poems of Nihon Shoki and give commentaries, while the third volume deals with the poems of Kojiki. This ratio shows that he thought more highly of Nihon Shoki than of Kojiki. Kada Azumamaro (1669-1736) also believed in the superiority of Nihon Shoki and sometimes gave lectures on the chapters on the Age of the Gods. Rejecting the interpretations of later ages, he sought for understanding directly in the text and the variants given. However, with Kamo Mabuchi (1697-1769) there was a change in the relative evaluation of Nihon Shoki and Kojiki. Since Kojiki was mainly in Japanese, it was useful for learning about the customs of ancient antiquity and for learning ancient Japanese words and script, while Nihon Shoki clung to Classical Chinese and, therefore, was remote from ancient reality. Accordingly, Mabuchi had a deep interest in how to read Nihon Shoki and wrote JVi/zongi Kunko [On Japanese Readings of Characters in Nihongi], which is concerned exclusively with how to read the text from The Age of the Gods to Emperor Sujin. Mabuchi's argument for the superiority of Kojiki over Nihon Shoki, backed up by Motoori Norinaga's detailed proof, generalized the view that Nihon Shoki occupied a lower rank than Kojiki. In 'Discussion of Nihon Shoki' in 'Introduction to the Classics' in his Kojikiden [Commentary on Kojiki], Norinaga (1730-1801) pointed out all the shortcomings of Nihon Shoki. Putting the name of the country in the title was no good.73 Writing it in imitation of Chinese was to adopt

86


the Chinese spirit rather than the Japanese spirit. This is further demonstrated by putting in events that never happened in Japan. Honouring Empresses by calling them Empress Dowagers was not the practice in ancient times. Recording the day and month of the chronology was a Chinese custom. Apart from the name of the work, all these criticisms were valid, so that in these areas Nihon Shoki may be acknowledged inferior to Kojiki. However, in other respects Nihon Shoki has strengths that Kojiki could not attain. Norinaga had to disregard its strong points and raise only its weaknesses in order to establish National Studies, but in the present day the argument appears biased. Discussion of the relative merit of the two works has little meaning today, but Norinaga's theories are implicitly retained by some. In Norinaga's own time he was opposed by Tachibana Moribe (1741-1809), who argued for the superiority of Nihon Shoki. In his twelve-volume hu no Chiwaki [Discriminating the Way of Imperial Majesty] he used unique methods to comment on the volumes on the Age of the Gods and the account of Emperor Jinmu. In his Introduction, Discussion of the Ancient Classics, he praised Nihon Shoki, 'It is indeed comprehensive, deep, and sufficient, and thus infinitely superior to Kojiki. However, Norinaga in his Kojikiden does not give it credence, and unnecessarily slanders and belittles it because it is written in Classical Chinese. Elsewhere, in his Uzu no Yamakage [Flower Hair-ornaments in the Mountain Shade], Norinaga takes it up sentence by sentence. It hardly needs saying that this is sacrilegious and rude. This is a heartless act, with no understanding of the meaning of the ancient traditions, and the original reason for construction of Nihon Shoki.'74 According to Tachibana, the Classical Chinese in Nihon Shoki came about because Chinese influence was at a height around the period from Emperor Kotoku to Emperor Tenji, and historians accordingly rendered the ancient words into Classical Chinese. Prince Toneri then compiled it disinterestedly, and that is all there was to it. Moreover, as a means to interpret the classics, account must be taken of the fairy-tale element, rhetorical element, and abbreviation and encapsulation, to distinguish between ancient meanings and later additions.75 Here we see in Tachibana striking progress towards a rational position. Norinaga's disciple Hirata Atsutane (1776-1843) also quietly went about correcting the teachings of his master and valued Nihon Shoki more highly than Kojiki. In the section 'Two Classics of History' in his Koshicho Kaidaiki he discussed Nihon Shoki first and Kojiki second. The compiling of Nihon Shoki was a formal public undertaking, while

Nihon Shoki

87

Kojiki was a private work and therefore not a Standard History. It is a variant of Nihon Shoki.76 Norinaga's argument is fond of Kojiki and disfavours Nihon Shoki. Atsutane says, 'People who entirely esteem only the theories of our teacher Norinaga lack self-determination, do not think deeply to help clarify matters, and regard Kojiki as completely without error, while Nihon Shoki is filled with them. They conclude that the chapters on the Age of the Gods are not worth looking at. This is extremely stupid/77 He also praised Emperor Go \e>zei, who had Nihon Shoki published in 1599, saying, 'Everyone who was born in Japan should take as his own the heart of this Emperor, and in all his studies should put first the respectful reading of Nihon Shoki, to study and clarify the way of antiquity; this is the main duty of scholarship.'79 In this way he exalted Nihon Shoki. Atsutane wrote detailed arguments on such things as the origins of Nihon Shoki, which influenced later generations. The scholarly opinions of Ban Nobutomo (1773-1846) affected Atsutane's research on Nihon Shoki. Atsutane's ideas about the name of the book and later alterations were based entirely on the theories of Nobutomo. Atsutane first thought that Nihon Shoki was the original name and that the name Nihongi resulted from the excision of Sho. However, he changed his theory to follow Nobutomo's idea that Nihongi was the correct name and that the character Sho was added by intellectuals around the Konin era. This theory appears in the chapter 'Nihon Shoki K6' [Thoughts on Nihon Shoki] in Nobutomo's Hikobae.79 Nobutomo also wrote 'Jinshinki Shochu' [Commentary on the Chapter on the Jinshin War of 672] as an appendix to Nagara no Yamakaze [The Mountain wind of Nagara], presenting a detailed commentary on the Nihon Shoki chapter about Emperor Tenmu; and in 'Nihongi Nenryaku Ko' [On the Chronology of Nihongi] he argued that the chronology of Nihon Shoki was fabricated.80 He greatly advanced modern research on Nihon Shoki. In the Meiji period, Nihongi Hyochu [Standard Commentary on Nihongi] was published in 1880 by a National Scholar, Shikita Toshiharu, who lived in Osaka. This was a complete commentary on Nihon Shoki, in twenty-six volumes. However, since it was written as top-notes to the text, they are brief and not given thorough attention. In this respect, lida Takesato's Nihon Shoki Tsushaku [Complete Commentary on Nihon Shoki] is far superior. lida (1827-1900) was a samurai of Takashima domain in Shinano, who studied in Atsutane's school. In 1852 he decided to write a commentary on Nihon Shoki, which he published in seventy volumes in 1899, after forty-eight years of diligent labour. Taking the essence of the theories of his

88


predecessors, he added appropriate commentaries; but there are few original ideas. However, such a compendium of theories was needed, so the work is useful, just as were Shaku Nihongi, of the Kamakura period, and Nihon Shoki Tsusho, of the Edo period. After lida, there were no major works of commentary. lida Sueharu's three volume Nihon Shoki Shinko [New Lectures on Nihon Shoki] was a rehash of the commentaries of lida Takesato, and the head-notes in the Asahi Shinbunsha edition of Rikkokushi contained little that was original. More recently, the edition in Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei [Compendium of Classical Japanese Literature] published by Iwanami Shoten provides commentary based on new scholarship, but it is limited by the space allowed for head-notes and supplementary notes; while much was intended, the number of words allowed seems insufficient to convey it.81 Research on Nihon Shoki has not been confined to commentary. Since Meiji, much research has been done on other aspects, such as the literary work and the form of the argument. In the early period, various writers concentrated on the extension of chronology in Nihon Shoki and mistakes therein. Starting with Naka Michiyo's 'Josei Nenki Ko' [On Ancient chronology, Shigaku Zasshi, no. 8], the studies of Hoshino Hisashi, Yoshida Togo, Suga Masatomo, and others produced a rich harvest in such matters as the extension of chronology by two sexagenary cycles in the reigns of Empress Regent Jingu and Emperor Ojin, and the calculation of the revolutionary year of the beginning of Emperor Jinmu's reign. Others, such as Hirako Takurei and Kita Sadakichi, discussed the doubtful year of the arrival of Buddhism and errors in the chronology of Emperors Keitai and Kinmei. Meiji and Taisho research resolved many problems in chronology. Other research was the fruit of the new scholarship of the Meiji era - for example, the explication of place names and names of persons in Nihon Shoki by use of the Korean language (research by Miyazaki Michisaburo, Shiratori Kurakichi, Nakada Kaoru) and the explication of the myths through knowledge of Western studies in mythology (research by Takagi Toshio). Tsuda Sokichi threw his energy into advancing research on Nihon Shoki in the early twentieth century, overturning the prevailing understanding and opening fresh vistas. Tsuda's views were published in three related works: Jindaishi no Atarashii Kenkyu [New Research on the History of the Age of the Gods, 1913; later retitled Jindaishi no Kenkyii]; Kojiki oyobi Nihon Shoki no Shinkenkyu [New Research on Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, 1919]; and Jodai Nihon no Shakai oyobi Shiso [Thought and Society in Ancient Japan, 1933]. In addition

Nihon Shoki

89

to research on the circumstances of composition of Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, he presented thorough criticism of the texts. He concluded that the accounts in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki were not records of history, as hitherto believed, and that they had been created by court officials around the sixth century to legitimize the rule of the imperial house over Japan. Before Tsuda there had been some concerns that portions of the text were false. Rhetorical flourishes were recognized, but Tsuda's work was the beginning of the insistence that Nihon Shoki was a fabrication in its entirety. At the time Tsuda's views were too distant from the prevailing ideas, so they were not accepted in the scholarly world. However, after the Pacific War there was a wave of freedom to criticize the imperial system, and Tsuda's theory suddenly came to dominate the academic world. Now it is accepted as established theory, even though many opposing arguments on detail have been presented. Thus in post-war research on Nihon Shoki, it is usual to write on the basis of Tsuda's theories. However, many post-war scholars have been studying ancient history by using Nihon Shoki, rather than studying Nihon Shoki itself. In this they are blindly following Tsuda Sokichi and are content simply to review ancient history by denying the Nihon Shoki account. But even Tsuda had no divine gift; some of his theories were arbitrary, and some were insufficiently thought out. In the end, one must make use of Nihon Shoki by doing one's own research on it and forming one's own judgements. A general discussion of post-war research on ancient history would be interminable. Most of the works that focus on Nihon Shoki itself have already been mentioned in the text. Scholars have examined composition and materials, sources, usages of characters, sidenotes in kana, variant texts, and relations with Korea, as well as preparing some overall studies. Finally, there is Matsumura Takeo's Nihon Shinwa no Kenkyu [Studies in Japanese Myths, 1953-60], which does not fit into any of the above categories. This is a systematic study of the Japanese myths which is unparalleled in both quality and quantity and offers serious criticism of Tsuda's view of the accounts of the Age of the Gods.

CHAPTER THREE

Shoku Nihongi

COMPILATION

As discussed in Chapter i, the first twenty volumes and the last twenty volumes of Shoku Nihongi were separately compiled. We know this from the memorials to the throne of Fujiwara Tsugutada in 794 and of Sugano Mamichi in 797, both recorded in Nihon Koki. The 794 memorial is missing from the text, but it is found in Volume 147 of Ruiju Kokushi, which records the compilation of the National Histories under 'Literature': 13th day, 8th month, 794. Minister of the Right, Junior Second Rank, Crown Prince's Mentor, General of the Guards Fujiwara Tsugutada and others who had received a command to compile a National History, completed the work. They presented a memorial to the Emperor and said: As we respectfully consider, His Majesty Emperor Kanmu seeks the true way, pursuing it to the utmost and his reign is permeated by the three principles of Heaven, Earth, and Man. Each day, brightness is equally dispensed, as His Majesty's governance extends over the Eight Islands of Japan. Afar there is tranquility, and near there is joy. The arts flourish equally well; there is longevity, and the times are peaceful unto everlasting. Fame is received by all the imperial ancestors, as His Majesty's virtue and merit ever extend. However, His Majesty sat on high in dignity before the screen, and gave wide consideration to compiling a National History to fill in the deficiencies in the chronicles of the Emperors. Hereupon his subject Tsugutada, together with Senior Fifth Rank, Upper, Assistant Minister of Popular Affairs, Scholar to the Crown Prince, Assistant General of the

Shoku Nihongi

91

Left Guard, and Governor of lyo Sugano Ason Mamichi; and Lesser Counsellor Junior Fifth Rank, Lower, and concurrently Head Chamberlain, Assistant General of the Right Guard, Assistant Governor of Tanba Akishino Ason Yasundo, received the imperial command to place matters in order and continue the imperial chronicles. Between the founding of the country at Mount Sono and the reigns of the Kiyomihara rulers Emperor Tenmu and Empress Jito, the great achievements in the archaic era of the Age of the Gods, and the protection of the people by the Emperors are narrated in the preceding history [Nihon Shoki], so that we know them clearly. From Emperor Monmu to Emperor Shomu the records are not obscure, and we know the meritorious deeds of our ancestors. However, from the Hoji era to the Hoki era (757-70) there was the abdication of Emperor Junnin, and with strict respect for custom Emperor Konin ascended the throne, but there was no continuous account of the abundant events of this time. Therefore the late Middle Counsellor, Junior Third Rank, and Head of the War Ministry Ishikawa Natari, and Head of the Accounting Bureau Junior Fifth Rank, Lower, Kamitsukeno Okawa compiled the history according to imperial command, which became a work of twenty volumes. However, it was a research memorandum, without classifications or outlines. His Majesty's ministers received a renewed imperial command and once again started work. By pruning what was redundant, we have retrieved the essential and important; we have collected information to complement what has been lost; we have adjusted the contradictions and corrected discrepancies in the over-all narrative. With regard to the seasonal ceremonial events held every year, there are respective experts; there are also numerous occurrences of many kinds, some of temporary importance and not meant to become precedents; these are not compiled in the present edition. Matters dealing with courtesy visits from foreign countries, or informal decrees relevant to enlightenment and learning culminating in didactic principle, are recorded in their entirety in order to establish them as orthodox practices. Under our control it has become a book of fourteen volumes, which begins where the preceding history [Nihon Shoki] left off. The table of contents follows below. Your ministers apologize for their research and are ashamed of the quality of their writing. Much time has passed since we received the imperial command, so we worked to our utmost. The work is stored in private government archives according to imperial command.

The above account is all that is given about the compilation of the history in 794, and the memorial conforms to documents of the type.

92


First it speaks about the utility of history books; then it praises the virtue of the reigning Emperor Kanmu; then it speaks about his intention to compile a National History; and next it talks about the actual execution of the work. First, Fujiwara Tsugutada, Sugano Mamichi, and Akishino Yasundo were ordered to compile a continuation of a previous text. What text was this? On the history of ancient times, Nihon Shoki had come out, and there were clear records of the time from Emperors Monmu to Shomu. However, because records were lacking on the period from Emperors Junnin to Konin, Ishikawa Natari, Kamitsukeno Okawa, and others had compiled a twenty-volume work. But they simply lined up the materials, and theirs could not be described as a finished work. Fujiwara Tsugutada and the other two cut out what was unnecessary in these twenty volumes, supplemented what was lacking, and organized them into a history book of fourteen volumes. The history book of 794 by Tsugutada and the others was this work. Perhaps it covered the period from the accession of Emperor Junnin in the eighth month of 758 (Volume 21) to Emperor Konin in the twelfth month of 777 (Volume 34). Thus the compilation of one part of Shoku Nihongi stopped at Volume 14 and was not a work of great consequence. To start with, it had not yet been decided to call it Shoku Nihongi. Was there a special significance in presenting it grandiosely to the throne together with a memorial? And who was chosen to compile the next portion, covering the period 778 and after, and when were they chosen? To answer these questions, we must examine the next memorial to the throne, that of 797. His Majesty Emperor Kanmu commanded Mamichi and others to place these matters in order and raise up the deeds of our ancestors. In a previous year this had been presented as a work of twenty volumes, covering the thirty-four years from 758 to 791. However, for the first part - the sixty-one years from the first year of Emperor Monmu's reign, 697-757, there was a draft of thirty volumes, filled with many words and many trivial matters; moreover, there were omissions. The previous Emperor Konin had commanded the late Middle Counsellor, Junior Third Rank, Ishikawa Ason Natari; Head of the Punishments Ministry Junior Fourth Rank, Lower, Omi Mahito Mifune; and Assistant Minister of Punishments, Junior Fifth Rank, Upper, Taima Nagatsugu to study Japanese books and compile a history that would be continuous from Nihon Shoki. However, they followed old drafts and in the end did not publish a proper work. What they presented consisted

Shoku Nihongi

93

of only twenty-nine volumes, with the record of the year 757 completely missing. Your ministers searched for old materials in government offices, consulted with elders on their remembrances, patched together fragmented works, and thereby filled in what was missing. All matters relevant to righteous discourse and superior designs, as well as principles that are to be inherited by our descendants, are included. Neither detailed accounts of ordinary matters, nor events that do not conform to orthodox practices, are included. It came out to be twenty volumes, which together with the previous work makes forty volumes covering ninety-five years. From the beginning of our writing to the conclusion has taken seven years. The compilation has been completely finished. The table of contents is given separately. We present splendid and excellent matters, which are the teachings of heaven and earth to manifest the good and admonish the bad, and hand them down for all ages as a mirror. Your ministers have compiled the National History with their own frivolous private views. Because of our ineptitide, it has taken much time; hence we worked to our utmost. We now respectfully present the work for deposit in the Book Bureau.

This memorial was presented by Sugano Mamichi and the others. In the previous memorial, that of 794, Mamichi had been appointed under Tsugutada to help compile a National History. This memorial of 797 says, 'His Majesty Emperor Kanmu commanded Mamichi and others to place these matters in order and raise up the deeds of our ancestors/ while the command in the previous memorial of Tsugutada and the others said, 'Place matters in order and continue the imperial chronicles/ They seem to be referring to the same task. Even so, the name of Fujiwara Tsugutada does not appear in the second memorial, because he had died in the seventh month of 796. Thus Mamichi, who had worked with him, succeeded Tsugutada to complete the project. Accordingly, Tsugutada did not leave this project after the fourteen volume history was presented in 794. This is explained in the second memorial: 'Twenty volumes covering the thirty-four years from 758 to 791 were previously completed and presented.' Furthermore, notes indicating that the compilations were carried out by Tsugutada and others were incorporated at the beginning of each of Volumes 21 through 40. Or it may be that Mamichi actually supervised the work but simply entered the name of Tsugutada out of respect for the elderly minister of state. Shortly after the presentation of fourteen volumes in 794, another six volumes were added to bring the total to twenty, which came to

94


cover the period up to 791. In the current texts of Shoku Nihongi, Tsugutada's position from Volumes 21 to 35 is given in the volume headings as 'Minister of the Right, Junior Second Rank, Crown Prince's Mentor, General of the Guards Fujiwara Ason Tsugutada/ while from Volumes 36 to 40, Junior Second Rank is changed to Senior Second Rank throughout. Since he was promoted to Senior Second Rank on the twenty-seventh day, tenth month, 794, if we take the format for recording ranks and offices as correct, it means that the text up to Volume 35 was written before the twenty-seventh day, tenth month, 794, and from Volume 36 on was written after that date. Since the text up to Volume 34 was presented in a ceremony in the eighth month of 794, Volume 35 must have been written between the eighth month and the tenth month. However, as it was unusual to complete a volume in such a short time, it is easier to explain it the other way around, by taking the Junior Second Rank given in this volume as an error for Senior Second Rank. In any case, if the last six volumes were written after the presentation in 794, when would that have been? The second memorial refers to '(a) previous year(s)'; if this is taken to mean 'last year/ it refers to 796, the year of Tsugutada's death. There is no major difficulty in taking the view that in 794 Tsugutada had completed the work up to 777 and that he then continued the work for two years, covering the period from 778 to 791. However, why was 791 taken as the terminal year of the coverage? It may be because that was the time when Emperor Kanmu commanded the compilation of a National History. In his 797 memorial, Mamichi reflected upon the past when he himself had been ordered to compile the work, saying, 'From the beginning of our writing to the conclusion has taken seven years,' which gives 791 as the beginning of the work. Of this beginning, both memorials say the same thing; that Mamichi received the imperial command to put matters in order and continue the previous work. This cannot refer to anything but Emperor Kanmu's command to compile a National History. Originally the work was to cover up to Emperor Konin, but it may be that as the work progressed, the Emperor came to desire inclusion of his own reign, with the result that 791 was made into the target year. The latter twenty volumes of Shoku Nihongi were written in this fashion in 794 and 796; but what became of the first twenty volumes? The second memorial tells us. A rough draft soon came into existence, covering the sixty-one years from the first year of Emperor Monmu (698) to 757. This is probably what is referred to in the first memorial as an account from Emperor Monmu to Emperor Shomu,

Shoku Nihongi

95

in which 'the record is not obscure.' It also says it was 'filled with . . . many trivial matters; moreover, there were omissions/ which tells us that it was unsatisfactory as a history book. Even so, as it took 757 as its terminal year, apparently it was compiled during the reign of Emperor Junnin. The time of Junnin was when Emi Oshikatsu was conducting Confucian-style government, so it is credible that they would consider the compilation of a history. Thus in the reign of Konin, Ishikawa Natari, Omi Mifune, and Taima Nagatsugu were commanded to revise this rough draft. However, these three were indecisive and could not make the revisions quickly; moreover, they performed in such a slip-shod way that they lost the account of the year 757, presenting a work of twenty-nine volumes. For ministers of state, who had been commanded to compile a National History, to lose a volume of the existing manuscript was far too slack. In 757, with the deposition of Prince Funado as Crown Prince, the establishment of Prince Oi in his place, and the rebellion of Tachibana Naramaro, the world of high politics was much disturbed. It must have been very difficult to give expression to this in a National History. If the manuscript were written during Emperor Junnin's reign, naturally Emi Oshikatsu must have been praised from beginning to end. However, that would not have been acceptable at the court of Emperor Konin, since Oshikatsu's regime ended in civil strife and disgrace. Also, the compilers Ishikawa Natari and Omi Mifune seem to have been men of very strong character, and perhaps they may not have been able to reconcile their views. Perhaps, unable to reach a conclusion in this volume, they evaded the issue by saying that they had lost it. Mamichi and his team inherited this unfinished work on Emperor Konin and revised the thirty volumes from Emperor Monmu to Empress Koken, releasing it as a twenty-volume work. As discussed previously, if they began this portion after finishing the latter twenty volumes of Shoku Nihongi, then the remaining time was too short for such a project. Consequently, they must have carried out the revision of the latter twenty volumes concurrently with correction of the first part. Thus Emperor Kanmu's command to compile a National History should be understood as intending to carry out both aspects of the works simultaneously. Fortuitiously, completion came in two parts, but this is probably because the latter portion went faster, and the chief compiler, Tsugutada, was already getting old (he was sixty-six in 794), and so they hurried to present the finished work. We can summarize the compilation of Shoku Nihongi by dividing it into three stages. Stage i consisted of the records made in the reign

96


of Emperor Junnin, covering the period from the first year of Emperor Monmu's reign (698) to 757 in thirty volumes. Stage 2 consisted of the compilation at the court of Emperor Konin, which was divided into two projects. One project was the revision of the thirty volumes from Emperor Junnin's reign, but this was not a major accomplishment, with the number of volumes left as they were and one being lost altogether. The second project was the compilation of twenty volumes, covering 758-70. Stage 3 consisted of the compilation at the court of Emperor Kanmu, and this can also be divided into two projects: re-editing of the material up to 758 in twenty volumes and re-editing of the latter twenty volumes into fourteen, with the addition of six more volumes, to make a total of twenty. Thus the entire work ended up as forty volumes. If we count from the reign of Emperor Junnin, there were thirtythree years from the end of his reign in 764 to 797, but within the reign of Emperor Kanmu, seven years were necessary, as stated in the latter memorial. Therefore, during Kanmu's reign, Sugano Mamichi and Akishino Yasundo were involved from beginning to end, and their contribution to Shoku Nihongi was very great. It must have been their idea to wrap it up as a work of forty volumes and give it the title Shoku Nihongi. On the thirteenth of the second month, when Shoku Nihongi was presented, there was a special imperial edict in senmyo style. It rewarded Sugano Mamichi, Akishino Yasundo, and Nakashina Kotsuo with promotions, expressing the pleasure of the Emperor with their accomplishment. Further, on the seventeenth day, Assistant Secretaries of the Council of State, the Ministry of Ceremonial, the Ministry of Central Affairs, the Ministry of People's Affairs, and clerks of the Ministry of Ceremonial all received promotions of one grade or two in recognition of their service to the Office for the Compilation of Shoku Nihongi. Here the name of the Office of the Compilation of Shoku Nihongi appears for the first time. It seems to have been set up as a temporary office for this project, and the assistant secretaries of each ministry served there, copying the documents, and so forth. THE COMPILERS

As we know from the two memorials, the compilers included four people, starting with Fujiwara Tsugutada, together with five assistant secretaries and clerks from the Great Council of State and other government offices, from the court of Emperor Kanmu; and four people, including Ishikawa Natari, from the court of Emperor Konin.

Shoku Nihongi

97

In the Shingishiki [New Procedures in Administration] compiled at the Heian court during the reign of Emperor Murakami, the regulations for compiling a National History started with the selection of personnel: 'The first Minister of State, one supervising Consultant, and one person from among the Great Secretaries and Confucian scholars who is capable at writing should be chosen for the work. Four or five expert people should be appointed from the officials at the various ministries/1 Since the practices for writing the Six National Histories were just becoming institutionalized, it would not be surprising if they did not apply when Shoku Nihongi was written. Yet the people appointed came close to the above categories. Fujiwara Tsugutada was Minister of the Right in 791, and since there was no other minister of state, he was the only one who filled the bill. Sugano Mamichi was Second Vice-Minister of Civil Affairs in 791. Since it was 805 when he became Consultant, after the compilation was finished, in a strict sense he did not meet the requirement of a supervising Consultant. However, he met the requirement precisely from the point of view of the work's contents and his position as a compiler. Akishino Yasundo was a Great Secretary from 787 to 791, and Nakashina Kotsuo was also a Great Secretary in 797. It was as if the general composition of this team, including a Great Minister, a Consultant, and Great Secretaries, had been planned and carried out from the outset. Fujiwara Tsugutada was the grandson of Muchimaro of the southern branch of the family and the second son of Minister of the Right Toyonari. In 763 he was made Junior Fifth Rank, Lower, and he became Consultant in 766, at the age of forty. In January 771, during the reign of Emperor Konin, he was appointed to Senior Fourth Rank, Upper, and then swiftly to Junior Third Rank in the eleventh month of that year. In terms of office, during the same reign he proceeded through General of the Outer Guards, Head of the Treasury Ministry, Head of the War Ministry, Commander of the Left Guards, Middle Counsellor, and Commanding General of the East in the third month of 780, at the time of the rebellion of Iji Azamaro in Mutsu; however, he never went to the scene of the uprising, contenting himself with sending his assistant, Otomo Masutatsu. In 781 he became Head of the Ministry of Central Affairs and Mayor of the Left Capital and rose to Senior Third Rank. At the court of Emperor Kanmu he received more and more special favours. Kudara Konikishi Meishin, his wife, was a lady-in-waiting in court, and since Meishin came from the same family as the Emperor's mother, the Emperor's patronage was especially great. In 783 Tsugutada became Great Counsellor, and in 785 he became, concurrently, Crown

98


Prince's Mentor to Imperial Prince Ate at the time of his investment as Crown Prince. In 790 he succeeded Fujiwara Korekimi as Minister of the Right while continuing as General of the Centre Guards and Crown Prince's Mentor. In 794 he became Senior Second Rank; he died on the sixteenth day, seventh month, 796, at the age of 70. We also know that he had an especially intimate relationship with Emperor Kanmu, as shown by the fact that the Emperor often went to visit Tsugutada's villa for pleasure. In the eighth month of 787, the Emperor stopped at Tsugutada's residence and awarded Junior Third Rank to his wife. In the tenth month of the same year the Emperor went on a hunting trip to Katano, where he used Tsugutada's villa as a temporary palace. Tsugutada led the Kudara Konikishi family in presenting a concert for the Emperor's pleasure, and the latter responded by awarding ranks to the Kudara Konikishi family and to Tsugutada's son Otoei. Accounts of the Emperor's trips to Katano appear a number of times, and on each occasion he seemed to have gone to Tsugutada's villa. And in 788 on the occasion of the coming-of-age of Crown Prince Ate, Tsugutada helped bestow the ceremonial cap. The Emperor's trust must have been important in making Tsugutada's career a success. Objectively speaking, apart from his relationship with the Emperor, Tsugutada had no accomplishments that deserve mention. At the end of his biography, Nihon Koki appraises him as follows: 'Tsugutada rose through civil and military positions, reaching Minister of the Right. At times he was in office, and at times he took positions at court. He kept himself modest and respectful. One does not hear about his governance. Even without particular genius, he managed to escape the censure of the people.' Saying that he lacked talent may be severe, but his humility and his respect for others may have been one reason why the Emperor trusted him. It may also have been an essential qualification for being in charge of compiling a National History. Moreover, as the son of Toyonari of the mild southern branch of the Fujiwara, he was in a position to handle the various families fairly. And even if he lacked intelligence, Sugano Mamichi did not. Mamichi respected Tsugutada for his position, and presented the latter twenty volumes of Shoku Nihongi under his name, as well as giving Tsugutada's name among the compilers of each chapter. Tsugutada was most fortunate to have Mamichi as a colleague. Sugano Mamichi was descended from a family that had immigrated from Paekche and was originally known as Tsu Muraji. In 783 he was appointed to Outer Junior Fifth Rank, Lower, and he held the posts of Second Lieutenant of the Right Palace Guards, then Lieu-

Shoku Nihongi

99

tenant of the Right Palace Guards and Colonel of the Right Palace Guards. However, we know that he was recognized as an outstanding scholar from his appointment as Scholar in the Crown Prince's Household in 785. This was the time when Tsugutada was appointed Crown Prince's Mentor, so his association with Tsugutada may have arisen from matters surrounding the education of the Crown Prince. Thereafter he became Assistant, and later Head of the Library. In the seventh month of 790 he presented a memorial requesting the name Sugano Ason, stating that his ancestors who immigrated to Japan were descended from the family of King Kuisu of Paekche and recounting their literary accomplishments. This request was granted, marking an important point in his advancement. This memorial was presented jointly with Kudara Konikishi Genshin, Kudara Konikishi Chushin, and others. Genshin and Chushin were in the company in 787 when the Emperor went hunting at Katano and stayed at Tsugutada's villa, and they were awarded court ranks. Perhaps it was through bonds such as these with the Kudara Konikishi family that Tsugutada and Mamichi became intimate. During the years between 791 and 797, when he was engaged in the compilation of Shoku Nihongi, Mamichi held the posts of Second Assistant, Assistant Minister of Civil Affairs, Assistant Minister of People's Affairs, Commander of the Left Guards, and Controller of the Left, but he remained Scholar to the Crown Prince until the Prince's accession to the throne. During this period he seems to have enjoyed the trust of the Emperor. In the first month of 797 he was awarded one cho (2.45 acres) of land in the Nagaoka capital, and in the tenth month of 799 he was given one hundred cho (245 acres) in Shinano Province. The latter award was a special favour from the Emperor, either for his accomplishment in compiling Shoku Nihongi or for his guidance of the Crown Prince. In the first month of 805 the Emperor fell ill, and early in the morning of the fourteenth day he suddenly summoned the Crown Prince and gave an edict; in addition, Minister of the Right Prince Miwa was commanded to appoint Sugano Mamichi and Akishino Yasundo as Consultants, and the High Priest Shogu was requested to release the hawks and dogs kept by the Emperor for hunting. Nihon Koki records that all of the attending ministers were in tears. It must have been a moment of deep emotion for Mamichi, to be present on the dramatic occasion when the Emperor entrusted matters to the Crown Prince, and be appointed Consultant. It was also especially significant that his colleague in the compilation of Shoku Nihongi, Akishino Yasundo, was present. As Consultant, Mamichi's sense of public service became

ioo


stronger. In the twelfth month of that year he entered into a famous debate at the palace with Fujiwara Otsugu on the subject of virtuous government. Otsugu held that the most burdensome things for subjects were military duty and construction projects and that if these two were terminated the empire would be at peace. Mamichi held a different view and refused to yield. The Emperor followed Otsugu's advice, however, and terminated the two obligations. When Emperor Heizei came to the throne, Mamichi became Itinerant Inspector of the Sanyo and Tokai routes. He retained such important positions as Minister of the Imperial Household and Minister of the Treasury, but when Emperor Saga took the throne he finally perceived that the times were bad for him; and since he was also over seventy, he resigned in 811. Mamichi died in 814. Akishino Yasundo, who is considered a good comrade of Sugano Mamichi, was eleven years younger than him and was at first known as Haji Sukune Yasundo. He was a descendant of Nomi Sukune, famed for the account in Nihon Shoki of his origination of sumo, Japanese wrestling. In 782 his request was granted to bear the name of Akishino Sukune. In 789, when he was Great Secretary, he was added to those who examined the generals with insignia to serve the Emperor, along with Fujiwara Tsugutada, Fujiwara Oguromaro, Ki Funamori, and Tsu Mamichi. Tsugutada and Mamichi were also compilers of the National History. Thereafter Yasundo became, successively, Second-Vice Controller of the Left, First Vice-Controller of the Left, Inspector of the Records of Outgoing Officials, Controller of the Right, and so on, and in 805 he became Consultant at the same time as Sugano Mamichi. In the reign of Emperor Heizei he became Inspector of the Hokuriku route, and in the reign of Emperor Saga he was appointed Controller of the Left. He resigned in 820 and died in 821. He did not leave any particularly well-known writing, but his appointment to the important posts of Secretary and Controller suggests that he excelled as a literary bureaucrat at the court of Emperor Kanmu. The other Great Secretary, Nakashina Kotsuo, was a member of the same family as Sugano Mamichi, formerly known as Tsu Muraji. In 791, together with seven brothers and sisters, he was given the name Nakashina Sukune, after their pla'ce of residence. In the first month of 797 he was made Outer Rank, Junior Fifth, Lower; by that time he had already become Great Secretary. In the second month, Shoku Nihongi was presented, and, accordingly, he was promoted to Inner Rank, Junior Fifth, Lower. Of these four compilers during the reign of Emperor Kanmu, two were descended from immigrants from Paekche, and one was mar-

Shoku Nihongi

101

ried into the Kudara Konikishi family and thus was intimate with people of Paekche descent. It is not likely that favouritism accounted for their selection, but people of Paekche descent were flourishing, and such an outcome was natural when a search was made for people with literary affinities. In Nihon Shoki as well, a considerable number of Paekche records were used, and we surmised that Paekche-descended people were involved; in the case of Shoku Nihongi the facts are clear. We must also note that those trusted by the Emperor, like Tsugutada and Mamichi, were chosen for the position of historian. Shoku Nihongi was not completely the product of public duties of the bureaucratic system. People with a personal connection with the Emperor were selected to fulfil His Majesty's purpose. The Emperor must have lavished attention upon it as though it were his own literary production. Next let us say a word about the compilers at the court of Emperor Konin, starting with Ishikawa Natari. He was involved with both the former and the latter parts of the production, but the outcome appeared to be unsatisfactory. Natari was descended from the Soga family and was the son of Ishikawa Toshitari, who was Major Counsellor at the court of Emperor Junnin. Natari advanced swiftly, passing through the posts of Controller of the Left and the Right, to become Consultant. When he died in 788 at the age of sixty-one, he held the positions of Middle Counsellor, Junior Third Rank, and Head of the War Ministry; Master of the Crown Prince's Household; Mayor of the Left Capital; and Governor of Yamato Province. He was clearheaded and decisive, with a good memory, but he was also narrow and quick-tempered and liked to criticize the failures of others. It was said that when an official was making a report, if anything displeased him, he would berate that person in the extreme. His was not a very suitable appointment for fairly revising the history. Another who compiled the latter part with Natari was Kamitsukeno Okawa. During the reign of Emperor Konin he was sent, as Recorder for the Envoy, to China, and he returned to Japan in 778 as an up-to-date intellectual. In 779 he was promoted from Sixth Rank, Upper, to Outer Rank, Junior Fifth, Lower, and he also seems to have been appointed Great Secretary around that time. In 781, because he was Great Secretary, he was given the concurrent post of Vice-Governor of Yamashiro. In 786 he became Junior Fifth Rank, Lower, and Head of the Accountants' Office. The time of his death is not known. He was assigned to the compilation of the National History because he was Great Secretary. Since he was appointed as Recorder for the

1O2


Envoy to China in 775, it is not likely that he had worked on the National History before then. Being assigned to the task about ten years after his return from China, he was at the court of Emperor Konin for only three years. It is little wonder that he was unable to contribute much to the compilation. Next, those who revised the former part: in addition to Natari, there were Omi Mifune and Taima Nagatsugu. Omi Mifune, greatgrandson of Prince Otomo,2 was originally a prince, and received the surname of Omi Mahito in 751. In 756 he was imprisoned in the Palace Guard Office for slandering the court. However, during the rebellion of Emi Oshikatsu he worked in Omi to suppress the bandits, and for his efforts he was rewarded with Senior Fifth Rank, Upper, and Merit, Third Grade. He served as High Judge in the Ministry of Punishments, President of the University, and Doctor of Literature, and was Head of the Ministry of Punishments and Governor of Inaba Province when he died in 785 at the age of sixty-four. By nature he was clever and a voracious reader of books, and he enjoyed writing with the brush. After 765 he was known as the leading man of letters, together with Isonokami Yakatsugu. He lacked nothing in literary talent but he was an angular person, and seems not to have been fair. In the sixth month of 767, when he was Itinerant Inspector of the Tosando route, he failed to render a suitable judgement against the Governor of Shimotsuke Province, who was under his jurisdiction and had acted illegally, and he was reprimanded by being sent to Kyushu as Deputy Governor. There must have been times when he had differences of opinion with Ishikawa Natari, who was himself known to be narrow-minded and quicktempered. The report of the loss of the record for the year 757 in Shoku Nihongi may have been an excuse for the inability of these two men to agree upon a conclusion for the history of that year. Taima Nagatsugu was Junior Fifth Rank, Lower, in 767; in 769 he was made Second Vice-Controller of the Left, and in 781 he became First Vice-Minister of Punishments. The year of his death is unknown. There was nothing special about his literary accomplishment. The selection of these people during the reign of Emperor Konin was not as suitable as was the selection of the succeeding court of Emperor Kanmu. Inevitably they were criticized by the later compilers for leaving both parts of Shoku Nihongi incomplete. In a word, the desire and concern to compile a National History was not as high as at the court of Emperor Kanmu.

Shoku Nihongi

103

CONTENTS

Having discussed the form and special features of the narrative of Shoku Nihongi in Chapter i, we can proceed directly to the contents and related features of the style of narration. Since it would be burdensome to discuss each volume, let us consider the reign of each Emperor. Volumes 1-3: Emperor Monmu

Written in small characters after the title of the first volume is, 'From the 8th month of 697 to the 12th month of 700,' which delineates its scope; the next line adds the names of the compilers, 'Sugano Mamichi and others received the imperial command to compile this/ This naming of the compilers at the heads of volumes did not appear in Nihon Shoki, but the practice was established in Shoku Nihongi and was followed throughout by the next four National Histories. The next line gives the Emperor's posthumous name first in Japanese style, 'Ame no Mamune Toyo Oji no Sumera Mikoto,' and then in Chinese style in small characters, 'Emperor Monmu, the 42nd Emperor.' These small characters were not in the original text. The Chinese style of naming the Emperors existed at the time of compiling Shoku Nihongi but was not in such general use as to appear in the National History. In the original text the Emperor's name was probably written in Japanese posthumous style. The Emperors for whom the Japanese style was not used were special cases: 'The Empress who reigned as both Shotoku and Koken in the Hoji era' was used for Empress Koken; 'The Deposed Emperor' for Emperor Junnin; and 'The Empress in the Takano Tomb' for Empress Shotoku. As there was no era name in use at the beginning of Emperor Monmu's reign, the writers used the sexagenary cycle - 'Hinotobird year' (697). From the eighth month of that year to the sixth month of 707 spanned nine years and ten months. This is covered in three volumes, so the average per volume is a little over three years and three months - one year more than the average for the whole work of two years and three months. From this alone one would anticipate brief entries, and in fact the entries are concise. There are many that simply give a summary: 'The aborigines of Mutsu presented tribute goods' (nineteenth day, tenth month, 697); 'The imperial carriage went to Uchi no Kori' (fifth day, second month, 698). On a person's death they simply gave the name of his father, and no biography. On the death of Empress Dowager Jito in 702 and the death of Emperor Monmu in 707, they simply recorded their

1O4


deaths and wrote no appraisal or summary of their accomplishments. The most striking exception is the entry on the death of the Chief Priest Dosho, on the tenth day, third month, 700. Here appears a detailed biography, including his trip to China, Xuanzhuan's affection for him, and his escape from difficulties on his trip back to Japan with a cooking pot given to him by Xuanzhuan. It gives valuable historical information, such as his building the Uji bridge in Yamashiro Province, the origin of the custom of cremation at his death, and the fact that the scriptures in the Zen monastery in the Right Capital of Nara were his. He came from the Fune Muraji, the same family as Sugano Mamichi; hence perhaps Sugano's inclusion of his biography, though a historical interest in the Uji bridge and the origins of cremation may have led him to include it. This biography, in the midst of boring and fragmented accounts, lends interest to history. The story for the first day, seventh month, 704, about the stay in China of the Envoy Awata Ason Mahito, is similar: When he first arrived in China he encountered a man who approached and asked, 'What country are you from?" Mahito replied, 'I am an envoy from Japan/ and inquired in turn, 'Of what country is this the border?" The man answered, 'This is the border of Yancheng district of the prefecture of Chu in Great Zhou.' Mahito asked further, 'Formerly it was known as Great Tang, and now it has become Great Zhou. Why did the name of the country change?' The man answered, 'In 683 the Emperor died. The Empress Dowager ascended the throne, took the name of Holy Ruler, and called the country Great Zhou.' The dialogue was almost at an end, when the Chinese man said, 'May I just say - the country of Yamato is in the eastern seas. It is said to be a country of worthy men. There is abundance of goods and the people are happy; and propriety is carefully observed. Now when I see your gentlemanly bearing and composure, I know it is true!' With that the conversation ended, and the man left.

This was probably based on Mahito's report when he returned to Japan. It is extremely effective as an objective account of pride in being a country of worthy gentlemen in the eastern seas, and we can sense the compilers' strong national consciousness. Even though they were descendants of immigrants from Korea, they had become full-fledged Japanese.

Shoku Nihongi

105

These three volumes contain abundant notes - many more than do other volumes. Since they amplify the text or give explanations, the notes seem to have been written by the compilers. In cases where they had to edit and reorganize a lengthy original source, they supplied notes in order to avoid distortion of meaning. However, some notes are considered to have been added by later people. Admittedly it requires careful attention to tell them apart. I think that notes such as these were in the original manuscript: 8th day, 8th month, 701. Scholars of law were sent out to the six circuits to lecture on the new laws. [A note is added]: The Western Sea Route was excluded. 22nd day, 2nd month, 706. The ship Saeki was awarded Junior Fifth Rank, Lower. [A note is added]: It had transported the Envoy to China, Acting Envoy Junior Third Rank Awata Ason Mahito.

However, I have the impression that notes such as the following were added by later people: 'i4th day, 2nd month, 701. Ceremony of worshipping Buddha. [A note is added]: This is the first occasion of the ceremony of worshipping Buddha.' Volumes 4-6: Empress Genmei

This portion contains important accounts of the circulation of coins in the Wado era (708-15), the moving of the capital to Nara, and the imperial command to compile the Fudoki. The narration is brief, and does not describe the circumstances of these matters. For example, it recounts that in 708 copper from Musashi Province was presented to the government, and for the next two years copper coins were minted and put into circulation; but it does not mention that the pieces were termed Wado commemorative coins. The intention to move the capital to Nara was publicized in an imperial edict of the fifteenth day, second month, 708, and officers in charge of construction were appointed on the thirteenth day of the ninth month of the same year. On the tenth day, third month, 710, there is an entry on the move to the new capital, so we know that it was done; but there is no account whatsoever of the progress and circumstances of the actual building of the capital. Limitations arose from the chronological method, but frequently it is simply unsatisfactory as a record of history. There are cases of total abbreviation, as in the account of the presentation of Kojiki on the twenty-eighth day, first month, 712. From the Preface to Kojiki

io6


we know that Empress Genmei commanded a selection of records, and an account of national history ought to include either the command to select the records (eighteenth day, ninth month, 711) or the presentation of the work. It may have been included in an earlier draft and cut out during editing or simply omitted from the beginning; in either case, Shoku Nihongi fails as a historical record. Probably because of necessary shortening of long documents, the compilers recorded only the gist of some matters. Following are examples where they abbreviated the account, referring to the kyaku for details: - Nineteenth day, second month, 713. Five provisions for weights and measures, tax of goods, corvee tax, and government storehouses for poor relief were instituted. The details are in the respective kyaku. - Sixteenth day, fourth month, 713. New kyaku, together with scales and weights and measures were distributed throughout the empire. - Nineteenth day, fifth month, 715. There was a decree of the Council of State giving new regulations concerning the issuing of millet from government storehouses for poor relief. The families contributing millet were divided into nine grades according to their wealth. The details are in a particular kyaku.

Volumes 7-9: Empress Gensho The reign of Empress Gensho ends in the middle of Volume 9, and the account proceeds with the reign of the next Emperor, Shomu. It was usual to conclude a volume with the end of an Emperor's reign, so a division like this may have come about when the compilers were cutting and organizing old manuscripts and found that the change of reign did not fall easily into place. The character of the writing is about the same as in the chapters on Emperor Monmu and Empress Genmei, with no biographies as a rule. During this period Minister of the Left Isonokami Maro died (third day, third month, 717), as did Minister of the Right Fujiwara Fuhito (third day, eighth month, 720), and the Retired Empress Genmei (seventh day, twelfth month, 721), but while matters around the time of their deaths are given in detail, there are no biographies. For Fujiwara Fuhito it simply says, 'The Minister was the second son of the Palace Minister and Special Cap Rank Kamatari, of the Omi court' (Court of Emperor Tenji).3 However, there is one exception, a detailed biography of Governor of Chikugo, Senior Fifth Rank, Lower, Michi Kimi Obitona. He was Governor of Chikugo Province and became, concurrently, Governor

Shoku Nihongi

107

of Higo, and he encouraged agriculture among the people, so that within one or two years they were won over by his moral influence. Everyone benefited, and those who spoke about the government all praised Obitona. When he died, the farmers worshipped him. The fame of Obitona continued, and in Shoku Nihon Koki there is an entry concerning the award of the name Masamichi Ason to his grandson Hiromochi (seventh day, first month, 835): 'During the Wado era the record of the administration of Governor of Higo, Senior Fifth Rank, Lower, Michi Kimi Obitona was praised, and his legacy has lasted a long time.' In Sandai Jitsuroku Obitona received posthumous promotion to Junior Fourth Rank, Lower (second day, eleventh month, 865), with the explanation, 'Obitona was a superb provincial governor and is hereby honored posthumously.' In Shoku Nihongi as well, his biography alone is included in order to show his achievements as an outstanding official. They recognize the value of putting a model bureaucrat into their history, as they stated in the memorial of presentation: 'All matters relevant to righteous discourse and superior designs, as well as principles that are to be inherited by our descendants, are included.' There is a similar entry for the twenty-eighth day, sixth month, 720. Officer of the Lacquerers Bureau, Hasetsukabe Michi Imiki Iwakatsu, and a worker, Hata Inumaro, were sentenced to exile for sjealing from the Bureau. Iwakatsu's three sons, twelve-year-old Ojimaro, nine-year-old Azumaro, and seven-year-old Otomaro, presented an appeal stating that the three of them would become government slaves to expiate their father's crime. There came an imperial edict, stating that filial piety is the first obligation of a worthy man. The request of Ojimaro and his brothers to become government slaves to redeem their father shows their love for their family. This, said the edict, is most touching. In accordance with their wish, they shall become government slaves and their father shall be pardoned; with that Iwakatsu's crime was annulled. A month later, on the twenty-first day of the seventh month, there is an entry stating that Ojimaro and Azumaro were released and became free men.4 With respect to the social status of the people involved, this did not need to be related in the National History, but it displayed the filial piety of Ojimaro and his brothers. Clearly the compilers valued incidents that illustrated moral points, as they stated in the Preface: 'Informal decrees relevant to enlightenment and learning culminating in didactic principles are recorded.' In this section also, matters that should have been included were left out. One such case is the compilation of the \e>ro law codes. This

io8


is dealt with only in an entry for the twenty-seventh day, second month, 722, which explains that five people, starting with Yazume Mushimaro, were awarded rice fields 'for their accomplishment in compiling the ritsuryo.' Since the land was a reward for compiling the \oro code, then, judging from the example of the Taiho code, we would expect a record of the time of the imperial command to compile the code or else the time of its presentation. But neither is given, and it must be considered a careless omission. Volumes 9-17: Emperor Shomu

This account begins in the middle of Volume 9 and ends in the middle of Volume 17; without any kind of division, it finishes with the accession of Empress Koken in the seventh month of 749. The contents include the flourishing era of Tenpyo (729-49) and are filled with important events; the style of narration gradually becomes more and more detailed. The request on the eleventh day of the eleventh month, 736, by Prince Katsuragi and Prince Sai to receive the name Tachibana Sukune is quoted in full. It is an impressive document in beautiful language, citing the precedent of Takeshiuchi Sukune, recounting their accomplishments during the reigns of Tenmu, Jito, and Genmei, and telling how Tachibana Michiyo received the Tachibana surname at the Feast of Accession on the twenty-first day, eleventh month, 708. The report to the throne on the fourteenth day, fourth month, 737, by the Special Envoy to Mutsu, Fujiwara Maro, gives us valuable details of the history of government in Mutsu. It tells how, after his arrival at the Taga fort on the nineteenth day of the second month, he deliberated with Ono Azumando and stationed their forces at the various forts of the region. Azumando crossed the Ou mountain range into Dewa and went into the bandit territory as far as Mount Hirahoko. It is most fortunate that they did not abbreviate this into a simple entry, 'Special Envoy Maro made his report/ On the nineteenth day, first month, 742, there was a singing and dancing party at which some people recited a poem. This provided an unusual example of the writing of a poem in which Japanese and Chinese pronunciations were mixed together. Atarashiki Toshi no hajime ni Kakushi koso

Just as today At the beginning of each New Year We will serve faithfully

Shoku Nihongi Tsukae matsurame Yorozuyo made ni

109

For ten thousand reigns.

Biographies, as a rule, did not take up aristocrats; it is noteworthy that priests are the ones who appear. There are fairly detailed biographies of Preceptor Doji, Genbo, Archbishop Gyogi, and others. Perhaps it was an age that honoured priests; it is striking that biographies in Shoku Nihongi began with the priest Dosho in Volume i. Some errors in the compilation arising from carelessness and abbreviation are popular topics for historians' research. Some matters that ought to have been recorded, but were dropped, related to people, such as the appointment of Otomo Tabito as Great Counsellor (appointment date first day, tenth month, 730) and of Ono Oyu as Assistant Governor of the Government Headquarters in Kyushu (he died as Assistant Governor on the eleventh day, sixth month, 737). There is also the famous edict to establish a Buddhist temple in each province, entered in Shoku Nihongi under the twenty-fourth day, third month, 741. According to Ruiju Sandai Kyaku, the date of this edict was the fourteenth day of the second month.5 Another imperial edict of the seventh day, eleventh month, 747, in Shoku Nihongi, refers to the edict in question as follows: 'According to the previous imperial edict of the 14th day, 2rd month, 741 it was fervently desired . . . ' And an order of the Council of State for the twenty-eighth day, fourth month, 783, cites a previous order of State for the twenty-eighth day, fifth month, 742, which says, 'According to the measures announced in the imperial edict of the 14th day, 2nd month, 741, a temple is to be built in every province, and must be supplied with twenty priests.'6 Thus the day of announcing the intention was the fourteenth day of the second month, according to both the order of the Council of State and the imperial edict that were close to it in time. The date of the twenty-fourth of the third month given in Shoku Nihongi is mistaken. _ A similar mistake appears in the date of Ono Azumando's report to the throne on the circumstances of the rebellion of Fujiwara Hirotsugu. Reports from Kyushu on the rebellion incessantly came to the centre. The Emperor had gone to Ise and was staying at the temporary palace of Kawaguchi in Ichishi district. Even if the fastest post stations were used, the message from Kyushu would have taken four or five days to arrive there. In spite of this there is an entry, 'The General Azumando and others report/ for the fifth day,

110


eleventh month, 740, which says that on the first day of that month, Hirotsugu was beheaded and on the third day a sergeant was sent, received Hirotsugu's subordinate Mita Ehito and twenty others, and questioned the circumstances of Hirotsugu's last days. Even supposing that the account of the events of the first day had arrived by the fifth, it is not likely that the events of the third day could have been known by that date. This is a problem arising from the method of compilation, in which the accounts of the first day and of the third day were received in separate dispatches on different dates; but when the overall account was compiled, they were both recorded in Azumando's report of the fifth day. At times they appear to have adopted such a method when the contents of the reports did not contradict each other. A similar case appears in a report by Azumando, twenty-fourth day, ninth month, which tells about events of the twenty-second. Apparently the compilers felt they could adopt such a method, but this does not constitute an accurate historical record. The compilers mixed together Japanese-style and Chinese-style posthumous names when recording the deaths of the sons and daughters of Emperor Tenmu, apparently because of insufficient organization. There are five cases during the reigns of Emperor Monmu and Empress Genmei in which the Chinese-style posthumous name, Emperor Tenmu, is used. When we come to the reign of Emperor Shomu, his Japanese-style posthumous name, Ame no Nunahara Oki no Mahito, is used. However, this usage is not consistent throughout the reign of Emperor Shomu; in two cases the account reverts to the Chinese-style name. Perhaps at the time of the first draft of Shoku Nihongi the compilers had not yet decided to use the Chinese style and wrote Emperor Ame no Nunahara Oki no Mahito. Probably this was changed to the Chinese style when Sugano Mamichi and others did the revision. In his own request in 790 for a change of name from Tsu Muraji to Sugano Ason, Mamichi showed a preference for the Chinese style, giving the Chinese names of the Empress Regent Jingu, Emperors Ojin, Nintoku, Bidatsu, and so forth. In the early part of Shoku Nihongi, in the accounts of Emperor Monmu and Empress Genmei, the compilers devotedly changed all the Japanese-style posthumous names of the Emperors into Chinese style, but when they got to Emperor Shomu, their concern for this grew weaker. Even in Shomu's reign they changed it in two instances, but their attitude was clearly inconsistent. It is an example of poor execution at the stage of revision.

Shoku Nihongi

111

Volumes 17-20: Empress Koken

The beginning of the reign of Empress Koken comes in the middle of Volume 17; the reign name is not given, nor is there any account of her lineage, period as Crown Princess, or character and conduct. The compilers disinterestedly follow the chronology, so we pass by the change of reign at first sight without noticing it. This is also seen in the change from Emperor Junnin to Empress Shotoku and is a feature of Shoku Nihongi alone among the Six National Histories. Before the notice of her succession on the second day, seventh month, there is an imperial edict of the twentieth day, intercalary fifth month, which refers to 'the Retired Emperor Shami Shoman' (Emperor Shomu). The imperial edict has been transmitted among the documents of the Hirata Temple and contradicts the date of the second day of the seventh month given for her accession in Shoku Nihongi. It probably means that the accession of Empress Koken took place before the intercalary fifth month. Difficulty in confirming that fact may have given rise to such a variance; probably the method of compilation failed. Such irregularities are conspicuous in other parts of this section. Volume 19 covers four years, from the first month of 753 to the twelfth month of 756, so the accounts are very sparse. Particularly for 755, the entries are very few. For the second, seventh, and ninth months there are no entries at all, while the fourth, fifth, eighth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth have only one entry each. In contrast, Volume 20 covers one year and seven months, from the first month of 757 to the seventh month of 758. To depict the rebellion of Tachibana Naramaro in the seventh month of 757, the compilers used as source material the records of the interrogation of those involved to produce an extremely detailed and notably long entry. Naturally the varying importance of the events was responsible for the unevenness of the entries, but the imbalance is extreme. The memorial presenting Shoku Nihongi claimed a loss of the account for 757 at the time of compilation at the court of Emperor Konin, and in an all-out effort the compilers unwisely recorded the materials about Tachibana Naramaro just as they were; hence the volume increased. Perhaps they abbreviated the materials pertaining to 753 and 754 in compensation. For thejirst day, first month, 754, the report of the Assistant Envoy to Tang Otomo Komaro is recorded: he described the ceremony of offering New Year's congratulations to the Emperor at the Chinese court. He was placed in the second seat of the west, below Tibet, whereas the envoy from Silla was placed in the first seat of the east,

112


above Saracen. Komaro protested, saying that, as Silla was a tributary country of Japan, it was unreasonable to place it ahead of Japan, and as a result the order was changed. This falls into the same category as Awata Mahito's earlier tale of being recognized as a citizen of a country of gentlemen; the compilers were fond of such accounts. In this section there are no biographies, as before. In the seventh month of 754 Empress Dowager Miyako died, and in the eighth month of 756 Retired Emperor Shomu died, but there is no biography or summary of accomplishments for either. This contrasts with the next section, on Emperor Junnin, with its detailed biography of Empress Dowager Komyo (sixth month, 760). For the seventeenth day, eleventh month, 756, it says, 'The Feast of Harvest was not held. This was due to mourning'; A footnote says, 'According to the Jingikan Ki [Records of the Department of Shinto], in this year the Feast of Harvest was held in an apartment of the Department.' The note tells the opposite of the main text and looks to have been inserted by later people, though it could also have been an original note of the compilers. Perhaps by the time of revision they had found other sources but respected the original draft and recorded both versions. Volumes 21-5: Emperor Junnin The pre-accession history of the Emperor, hitherto lacking in every case, is quite detailed. This is the first volume of the latter half of Shoku Nihongi, and the attitude of the compilers seems to have changed. The end of the reign comes in the middle of Volume 25, but the timing is not clearly recorded. There is nothing to go by except the edict of Empress Shotoku on the ninth day, tenth month, 764, which deposes Emperor Junnin and makes him Lord of Awaji Province/ This was the period when the rebel Emi Oshikatsu rose to his height, so the facts are novel and the events numerous. The method of narration is very detailed, with reports to the throne and imperial edicts recorded in full, without abbreviation. Biographies make their appearance: Empress Dowager Komyo (seventh day, sixth month, 760); Ishikawa Toshitari (thirteenth day, ninth month, 762); the priest Ganjin (sixth day, fifth month, 763); Fujiwara Otosada (seventeenth day, tenth month, 763); and Emi Oshikatsu (eighteenth day, ninth month, 764). The last is the most detailed, and the course of the rebellion is told in his biography rather than through chronological entries.

Shoku Nihongi

113

Volumes 25-30: Empress Shotoku

As noted, there is no clear demarcation between the beginning of this account and the end of the account of Emperor Junnin, and there is no pre-accession history. At the end, there is the death of the Emperor (fourth day, eighth month, 770), followed by the completion of forty-nine days of abstinence on the twenty-second day, ninth month, and the end of the period of mourning on the twenty third day. In between, the new Emperor is treated as Crown Prince, and what should be called his Imperial Edict is called an Order (rydji) instead (third day, ninth month, 770). If this were all, it would not be too irregular; however, the change of era name to Hoki, which accompanies the accession of the new Emperor Konin (first day, tenth month), is made to reach back into the reign of Empress Shotoku. It is difficult to accept the year Jingo Keiun 4 (770) as having been Hoki i (770) from the beginning. This happened because the compilers disregarded the significance of changing the era name together with a change of reign, and used it simply as a measure for counting the passage of years. However, this is not the only place where an irregular change of era names occurs: it became a custom, spreading from Shoku Nihongi throughout the Six National Histories. In a year when the era name was changed, compilers marked the beginning of the new year from January, no matter what month the change actually took place. In case of change of era name during a reign, because of auspicious signs or evil omens, such an irregularity was not a serious matter. However, it may not have been appropriate, when there was a change of reign and the new sovereign took a new era name as a symbol of his own reign, for the compilers to extend it back into the reign of the previous Emperor. I think the compilers did not intend the change of era name to apply to the period before the change. If the period that had already passed were subsequently designated by a new name, what significance would it have? They may have been victims of the style of the imperial edicts announcing a change of reign, which said, 'Such and so [old name] year is changed into so and so [new name] year.' If taken literally, this would mean that the change of era name was retroactive to the first month; but they should not have taken the edicts at face value. Sugawara Michizane understood this point very well, and in recording the era names in Ruiju Kokushi he used both the old and the new era names in recording dates before and after the day of the change, and did not uniformly apply the new era name. With respect to the case in question, for the reign of Empress

ii4


Shotoku he used the era name Jingo Keiun until the eighth month of the fourth year (770); then he began the new era, Hoki, for Emperor Konin from the tenth month. The irrational method of recording the year in Shoku Nihongi when there was a change of reign also appears for Empresses Genmei and Gensho and for Emperor Shomu, as pointed out in Chapter i, but it is most striking in the case of Empress Shotoku, because the period of time involved, at ten months, is so long. The nature of the account is not greatly different from preceding volumes. The biographies give the main points about their subjects very well; the most striking are those of Kudara Konikishi Keifuku (twenty-eighth day, sixth month, 766), Fujiwara Matate (i2th day, 3rd month, 766), Fujiwara Toyonari (twenty-seventh day, eleventh month, 764). The practice of appraising the accomplishments of the Emperor at the time of his death also begins with these volumes. Also noteworthy is the large number of imperial decrees in senmyo style.8 The number of senmyo decrees per reign in Shoku Nihongi is: Empress Shotoku 18 Emperor Konin 12 Empress Koken 10 Emperor Shomu 9 Emperor Junnin 6 Emperor Kanmu 3 Empress Genmei 2 Emperor Monmu 2 Empress Shotoku's decrees were far more numerous than those of the other rulers. She may have enjoyed using the senmyo style, but probably the compilers indulgently recorded them without excising any. On the twenty-eighth day, third month, 770, there was a popular picnic, at which two hundred thirty men and women of Paekche descent, belonging to the families of Fujii, Fune, Tsu, Fumu, Takefu, and Kura, sang: Otomera ni Otoko tachisoi Fuminarasu Nishi no miyako wa Yorozuyo no miya

The young men approach The young maidens; Together they tread down the earth. The western capital Will last ten thousand reigns.

This is a rare example of recording a song with Manyo syllabary. It

Shoku Nihongi

115

shows the deep connection the compilers had with immigrants from Paekche.9 Volumes 31-6: Emperor Konin

This section begins with a detailed pre-accession history; the longest such account in Shoku Nihongi. It goes so far as to record a song foretelling his future accession while he was still a prince. However, the end of his reign is not clearly demarcated; there is simply an imperial edict on the accession of the new Emperor Kanmu in the middle of Volume 36 (fourth month, 781). Since Emperor Konin died on the twenty-third day, twelfth month, 781, Volume 36 continues up until his death. It concludes with the announcement of his posthumous name, Amamune Takatsugu, in the first month of 782, his burial in the Hirooka Tomb, and a brief Assessment of his reign. Together with the assessment of Empress Shotoku, this shows that the compilers of the latter part of Shoku Nihongi considered assessment of the Emperors a part of authentic historical method. The narrative is quite detailed, including the report of the return to Japan of the Envoy to China in 778 and the uprising in Mutsu by Iji Azamaro in 780. The facts are concretely portrayed, with great verisimilitude. The biographies are also interesting and several supplement the chronological entries: Dokyo (seventh day, fourth month, 772), Kuninaka Kimimaro (third day, tenth month, 774), Kibi Makibi (second day, tenth month, 775), Fujiwara Yoshitsugu (eighteenth day, ninth month, 777), and Fujiwara Momokawa (ninth day, seventh month, 779). Volumes 36-40: Emperor Kanmu

This portion is a contemporaneous account of the reigning Emperor Kanmu, the only such case in the Six National Histories; accordingly he is called, 'The Present Emperor/ There is no pre-accession history, but the attitude is no different from that which prevails throughout the work. It is almost the same as previous sections: there is an account of the aborigines in Mutsu contained in the report of the Eastern General and imperial decrees (789); many requests by families for change of names; and detailed biographies. However, there is a special concern for matters connected with the reigning Emperor. Upon the death of his mother, Empress Dowager Takano, in 789, they recorded the names of those appointed to conduct the funeral ceremonies, the awarding of her posthumous name

n6


in 790, her interment in the Oe Tomb, and an Assessment. The death of Empress Otomuro in intercalary third month, 790, is handled the same way. It is significant that this chronicle was added to the National History while the Emperor still reigned. It means that the Emperor displayed strong self-confidence about his reign. It is well known that Emperor Kanmu dismantled the old system of the Nara court and developed the brilliant new governing system at the Heian capital, and perhaps he wanted to see this accomplishment affirmed in the National History. He might have wished to make sure that the moving of the capital to Nagaoka, the associated and unexpected death of Fujiwara Tanetsugu, and the deposition of the Crown Prince were all properly recorded. Moreover, he may have wanted the funerals of the Empress Dowager Takano and Empress Otomuro recorded and their womanly virtues justly praised. However, in the midst of such self-confidence, troubles often appear. The Emperor himself subsequently sought to excise the accounts of the affairs that concerned him most, the matter of Fujiwara Tanetsugu and Prince Sawara. This was because he feared the wrath of Prince Sawara's angry ghost. Prince Sawara, younger brother of the Emperor, was said to have murdered Tanetsugu, in league with the Otomo and Saeki families, in order to overturn the court. Prince Sawara was banished and locked up in Otokuni-dera Temple, where he went without food for more than ten days; subsequently he died en route to Awaji. This probably happened because the Emperor was enraged at the death of his beloved and trusted Tanetsugu and determined to punish Prince Sawara. However, it resulted in the death in fury of his younger brother, and the Emperor must have lost sleep. In addition, great misfortune followed at court. The Empress Dowager and the Empress died one after the other, and the new Crown Prince, Ate, was sickly, against which no remedy was effective. Divination revealed that the deaths and illness were all caused by a curse by the deceased Prince Sawara, and thereafter the Emperor spared no effort to pacify his spirit. In 800 the name Emperor Sudo was bestowed posthumously upon the prince, and his grave in Awaji was designated an imperial tomb. Another measure was to excise from Shoku Nihongi the account of Prince Sawara's deposition. In the present version of Shoku Nihongi there is only a simple entry for the twenty-third day, ninth month, 785, stating that Fujiwara Tanetsugu was shot with an arrow by bandits. On the twentyfourth day it is recorded that Otomo Tsugundo and Otomo Takera and a score of their gang were arrested, interrogated, and punished

Shoku Nihongi

117

according to law. There follows Tanetsugu's biography, but there is no mention at all of Prince Sawara. There is only an account for the eighth day of the tenth month, saying that messengers had been sent to the various imperial tombs to announce to the spirits of the Emperors that Prince Sawara had been deposed. The Shoku Nihongi text is brief because excision occurred. But fortunately the unexcised text was recorded in Nihon Kiryaku, so we roughly know the original version. This text states that the gang was arrested and Hoki Ikadamaro, Otomo Tsugundo, and others were examined; gives an imperial decree for the twenty-eighth day announcing their crime; and narrates affairs up to the death of the prince. Only with this record do we learn of the end of Prince Sawara. The present version of Shoku Nihongi is most imperfect as a historical record. How are the details of this excision known? In later years, during the reign of Emperor Saga, Fujiwara Nakanari and his younger sister Kusuko were expelled from the palace for a crime,10 and this was announced in an imperial edict at the tomb of Emperor Kanmu. Nakanari and Kusuko were children of Tanetsugu, and during the reign of Emperor Heizei, when they flourished at the court, they became dissatisfied because the story of their father's murder was not recorded in Shoku Nihongi, and they had the excised part restored to the text to justify the position of Tanetsugu. Emperor Heizei, who was critical of the government of Emperor Kanmu, must have been in accord. However, Emperor Saga then came to the throne, and Nakanari and Kusuko lost their standing. Emperor Saga also desired loyally to continue the enterprises of Emperor Kanmu; respecting Kanmu's policy of excision of parts of the history, he once again deleted them. The present text of Shoku Nihongi perpetuates the deletion. The writers of Nihon Kiryaku had the original undeleted version, and they must have summarized their account from that. For the court to alter the text of a National History because of contemporary politics must be considered an actof violence. Since it was his own history that he had had compiled, Emperor Kanmu must have felt no resistance to amending it, but to defile the dignity of national history was an outrageous deed. In ancient China the historians protected the truth of history at the cost of their lives; what became of their example? History was recorded so lightly in Japan because the Emperor was involved with the historical account of his own governance. Historical writing ought to be carried out after the lapse of a period of time, because the contemporary era is always a time of uproar, and it is difficult to find the truth. This admonition must be

n8


borne in mind at the present day, and the truth of it was shown by Shoku Nihongi a thousand years ago. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS

The first of the materials appended to Shoku Nihongi is Kanso Jirui [Classified Guide for Officials]. This has not survived, but fortunately the Table of Contents and Preface are found in Honcho Hoka Monjo Mokuroku [Catalogue of Documents of Legal Families of Japan],11 and, as the dispersed text has been transmitted in some ancient works, we can conjecture about what sort of work it was. In the dispersed Preface, this work is described as the 'Miscellaneous Matters' of Shoku Nihongi. It was compiled on the same day of the same month, six years after the completion of Shoku Nihongi, and the compilers were the last group who worked on Shoku Nihongi. To summarize the Preface, it says that the facts from the first year of the reign of Emperor Monmu up to 791, which are appropriate and ought to be in a book of history, are thoroughly discussed and put into the contents of the chronicle and edited as Shoku Nihongi. Such matters as New Year's ceremonies, accession ceremonies, envoys from neighbouring countries, and the sending out of officials from the court, being recorded in separate accounts and complicated besides, were not recorded a second time in this work. However, there were also daily minor matters and customary practices for which either the language was archaic and difficult to understand or the rationale was vague. Of these, practices of long standing, and worthy of preserving in government offices, were culled without change from earlier drafts of Shoku Nihongi, collated, and compiled in a form which was easy to examine. There were thirty volumes; and with the title Kanso Jirui, Classified Guide for Government Officials, they were kept in government offices for use in administration. The date is the thirteenth day, second month, 803, and in addition to the compilers Sugano Mamichi, Akishino Yasundo, and Nakashina Kotsuo, there are signatures of such men as Clerk in the Ministry of Ceremonial Kamo Agatanushi Tatsunaga, who had previously served in the Shoku Nihongi compilation office and had received a court rank as reward. According to the Preface, the compilers collected and classified items rejected as insufficiently important for Shoku Nihongi. In other words, it was a secondary compilation of Shoku Nihongi and a supplementary task. In collecting historical materials that had been rejected, its significance lay in the preservation of materials. Further, it reorganized the materials arranged by chronology in Shoku

Shoku Nihongi

119

Nihongi in order to facilitate review under classified headings. From the Table of Contents we can see that it was divided into small parts, extending over each area of government: Part i: The Gods, 68 items Part 2: Vestal Virgins, Book i, 99 items12 Part 3: Vestal Virgins, Book 2, 99 items Part 4: Buddhist temples, 116 items Part 5: Buddhist purification rites, 83 items13 Part 6: Worship of Shakyamuni, 8 items; national abstinences, 23 items; priests, 24 items; high priests, 9 items It goes up to Part 29: Offices posthumously awarded to persons of merit, 36 items; gifts, 18 items; remonstrances, 3 items; and Part 30: Miscellaneous, 82 items. This method of classifying materials had significant value as a precedent for Ruiju Kokushi and Ruiju Sandai Kyaku. The dispersed text appears in several works, which are collected by Wada Hidematsu in Kokusho Itsubun [Dispersed Texts of Japanese Works].14 Comparing these dispersed texts with the text of Shoku Nihongi, they are almost identical; for example, the entry for the first day, first month, 702, which records the first donning of ceremonial clothing by everyone from the Princes down to the Great Counsellors,15 and the entry for 715, which records the same, beginning with the Crown Prince (both of these are found in Saikyuki).16 This is probably from the lost text of Part 21: Clothing. The text of a foot-stomping song on the sixteenth day, first month, 730, is also identical with the text of Shoku Nihongi.17 Thus the classified entries in Kanso Jirui were not always matters omitted from Shoku Nihongi; what was significant was the method of classification. The classified items were dated by recording the day, not the sexagenary cycle. On this point they differ from Shoku Nihongi, which shows that the materials were in the form of a journal. The ceremonies for sending emissaries to Ise on the eleventh day, ninth month, 72i,18 are also recorded in minute detail, in contrast to the simple account in Shoku Nihongi. Also, in recording the establishment of repentance liturgy at the court in the twelfth month of 774, Kanso Jirui adds the explanation, 'This was the origin of repentance liturgy,'19 whereas it is not found at all in Shoku Nihongi. This recording of the origin of practices provides what is lacking in Shoku Nihongi. Following Kanso Jirui in Honcho Hoka Monjo Mokuroku is the name of a work entitled Gekan Jirui [Classified Guide for Provincial Officials], eleven volumes. Since it is described as 'beginning in 701 and

12O


going up to 803,' the time-span is not exactly the same as Shoku Nihongi. However, 803 is the year in which Kanso Jirui was compiled, so it may have a connection with that work. There is no preface, and the circumstances of compilation are unknown; a Table of Contents contains such items as, 'Chapter i: Offices, provinces and districts, gods of heaven and earth; Chapter 2: Temples, priests, and nuns, tax registers, labour, guards.' It may have been a classified guide to essential matters for the use of provincial officials, in contrast to Kanso Jirui, which was a guide to affairs for junior officials in the central government. It is certain that it was appended to Shoku Nihongi. Gekan Jirui is not extant, nor do we find dispersed parts elsewhere. RESEARCH

Unlike Nihon Shoki, there are no records of lectures at the court on Shoku Nihongi and few examples of scholars having done deep research. Tsuken Nyudo Zosho Mokuroku [Catalogue of the Library of Lay Priest Michinori] records that in the noth box there were four binders, each containing ten volumes of Shoku Nihongi, so we know that it was kept in the libraries of book collectors such as Michinori.20 Also, Emperor Hanazano (r. 1308-18) noted in his diary that he had looked over Shoku Nihongi. However, the beginning of serious study came with the rise of National Studies in the Edo period. The only commentary that covers the whole work is Murao Genyu's Shoku Nihongi Kosho [Research on Shoku Nihongi]; Kawamura Masune's Shokki Shikkai remains in manuscript form. Motoori Norinaga accomplished the greatest work among the modern scholars of National Studies, and his studies of Shoku Nihongi were also pioneering works. However, he was not interested in Shoku Nihongi in its entirety but prized the ancient words and meanings preserved in the imperial proclamations in the text; his contribution was the six-volume commentary on the proclamations called Rekicho Shoshi Kai [Explanation of the Words of Imperial Decrees at the Successive Courts]. He published this work in his last years after the completion of Kojiki Den, and it still has great value as the meticulous research of a mature scholar. In Hikobae, by his disciple Ban Nobutomo, there are related essays of bibliographical research on Shoku Nihongi, such as Volume 4: 'Shoku Nihongi no naka naru Furuki Sakuran no Fumi' [Disordered Ancient Texts in Shoku Nihongi]; Volume 6: 'Sen Shoku Nihongi Shidai K6' [On the Stages in the Compilation of Shoku Nihongi]; and Volume 12: 'Shoku Nihongi no naka naru Nendaireki to iu Mono no Koto' [On

Shoku Nihongi

121

Nendaireki in Shoku Nihongi].21 Since Ban Nobutomo made extensive use of Shoku Nihongi in his studies of Japanese history, he recognized the necessity of such basic research. A complete commentary, Shoku Nihongi Kosho, was published in 1849 by Murao Genyu, a scholar of the Hamamatsu domain, Totomi Province. The book that now exists was his manuscript, put into order by his son Motonori and published in twelve volumes by the Tsurumai domain in 1870. Genyu laboured to produce an authentic text, and for that purpose he collected and revised six versions. However, in this work the original text was not completely recorded. His method was to enter the words that were problems and to write notes beneath them correcting the differences. Since he did not provide a complete text, the work, regrettably, is not of much use without the aid of a full set of volumes. In addition to correcting discrepancies, the notes cite various books to provide exegeses of individuals' names, place names, and historical terms, and the explanations are generally satisfactory. Though present-day scholars may note quite a few inadequate points, a great deal of effort was required to achieve this much in the troubled times at the end of the Bakufu era. Next, Shokki Shikkai follows after Kawamura Hidene's Shoki Shikkai and is one of the exegeses of the Five National Histories authored by his son Kawamura Masune. The exegesis of the Five National Histories consists of eighty manuscript volumes altogether, and the original manuscript in Masune's hand is preserved in the Hosa Library in Nagoya.22 Shokki Shikkai is in twenty manuscript volumes, and there is a note saying that it was written between the twentythird day, sixth month, 1806, and the sixth day, fifth month, 1811. The format is the same as that of Shoki Shikkai, providing the necessary explanation in the form of notes regarding the main words in the text. As might be expected, many of the explanations consist of recording sources in the Chinese classics; but it also contains historical research. An example of Masune's research is the case of the Uji bridge in the biography of Dosho. Masune cites Nihon Ryoiki and the inscription on the bridge to the effect that it was Doto who built it and explains that 'built' in this case means 'repaired.' In another example, he added a note to the entry, '4th day, nth month, 705. Junior Fifth Rank, Lower, Taima Mahito Tate was made head of the Ise Virgins Office/ saying that this had already been recorded for the first month of 702. However, it often happened that an entry concerning appointment to office was cited again after three or four years; this involved a notice of first appointment and then a second

122


notice of reappointment after the person resigned from office for three years on the death of a parent. Masune judged this not to be a genuine case of repetition of an entry. Although it contains notable explanations such as those mentioned above, the book cannot be called complete. As it was handed down in manuscript form in the Kawamura family, it was not known to the outside world. Murao Genyu was unaware of it when he wrote Shoku Nihongi Kosho. New methods of historical research were adopted in the Meiji period, and many scholars noted Shoku Nihongi as a historical source for the Nara period. A number of studies were produced, such as Hagino Yoshiyuki's questioning of 741 as the time of the imperial decree ordering establishment of a Buddhist temple in each province and Kita Sadakichi's theory about the date of founding for the provinces of Iwaki and Iwashiro, but no comprehensive work of commentary appeared. In the post-war period, at the same time as disbelief in Nihon Shoki mounted, the credibility of Shoku Nihongi increased, and it came into general use in the history departments of universities as a text for practising reading and interpretation of documents on ancient history. In Osaka there arose among progressive scholars a Shoku Nihongi Research Society, which, starting in January 1954, published 'Research on Shoku Nihongi/ a journal in which scholars of ancient history throughout the country could present their research. This continues to be published by the Ancient History Chapter of the Osaka Historical Society, and it occupies a special place as a journal of research on the whole of ancient history, with Shoku Nihongi at the centre.

C H A P T E R FOUR

Nihon Koki

COMPILATION

Details of the compilation of Nihon Koki are known from the Preface, which is found in Ruiju Kokushi. It began in 819 when Emperor Saga commanded four men to compile it: Great Counsellor Fujiwara Fuyutsugu, Middle Counsellor Fujiwara Otsugu, Consultant Fujiwara Sadatsugu, and Consultant Yoshimine Yasuyo. The year 819 was twenty-two years after the presentation of Shoku Nihongi in 797. The reigns of Emperor Kanmu and Emperor Heizei had been completed, and eleven years had already passed since the inauguration of Emperor Saga's reign. Strangely enough, the year 791, the beginning of Shoku Nihongi, was also the eleventh year after the accession of Emperor Kanmu. Perhaps Emperor Saga wanted to follow the example of his father, Emperor Kanmu. Around this time Emperor Saga had commanded various works of compilation. Since Konin Kyaku Shiki [Regulations and Procedures of the Konin Era] was finished in 820, 819 must have been the last stage of a compilation process. Also, in the first month of 821, Dairi Shiki [Palace Procedures] was finished. The collection of Chinese poetry Ryounshu, compiled under imperial order, was finished in 814, and the succeeding Chinese poetry collection, Bunka Shureishu, was presented to the throne in 818. It was natural for Emperor Saga to attempt as well the compilation of a National History. How were the compilers chosen? The Great Counsellor, Middle Counsellor, and two Consultants were high-ranking officials, all the more so because there was no Great Minister in 819; the top office was Great Counsellor, and Fuyutsugu was the only one who held the post. Thus Fuyutsugu's position corresponded to that of Great Minister, as described in Shingishiki. He was then forty-five years

124


old, and was, concurrently, General of the Right Guard and Inspector of Mutsu and Dewa provinces. In 818, Fujiwara Sonondo had died while Minister of the Right, and for some time there was no great Minister; Fuyutsugu was finally appointed Minister of the Right in 821. Since he was also the chief compiler of Konin Kyaku Shiki and Dairi Shiki, his duties as chief compiler of the National History may have been merely nominal. But he laid the foundations for the later prosperity of the northern branch of the Fujiwara as Regents for the Emperors, and his position as chief compiler of the National History began their monopoly of this position. Next is Middle Counsellor Fujiwara Otsugu. At this time there were two Middle Counsellors, Otsugu and Funya Watamaro. Watamaro was a military administrator throughout, so the only official next to the Great Minister was Otsugu. He was the eldest son of Momokawa of the Shiki branch of the Fujiwara and had his comingof-age cap bestowed in audience with Emperor Kanmu in 788. Kanmu owed much to the power of Momokawa in succeeding to the throne, so the special favour he showed to Otsugu was a repayment for his father's merits. Otsugu was appointed Consultant in 802 at the age of twenty-nine. In 819 he was forty-six, at which time he was appointed Middle Counsellor and Head of the Ministry of Popular Affairs. Since Shingishiki stipulated an executive Consultant and a Great Minister, Otsugu's position as Middle Counsellor was anomalous, but it was probably because of his character and judgement, as discerned by Emperor Saga, that he was added to the compilation team. The choice brought about even better results than anticipated. Three of the four compilers died early, and only Otsugu remained. He supervised the work to the end. Fujiwara Sadatsugu and Yoshimine Yasuyo were present as Consultants. Sadatsugu was a grandson of Muchimaro of the southern branch of the Fujiwara, the son of Kosemaro and a cousin of Tsugutada, the compiler ofShoku Nihongi. In 819, at the age of sixty-one, he was appointed Consultant. He does not seem to have been deeply concerned with scholarship, and his involvement with the history compilation was nominal. Yoshimine Yasuyo was a son of Emperor Kanmu and was given the name Yoshimine Ason in 802. He had outstanding talent in both letters and military skills and enjoyed the confidence of Emperor Saga; he participated in the compilation of both Keikokushu and Dairi Shiki. Thirteen of his Chinese poems are contained in collections such as Ryounshu, Bunka Shureishu, and Keikokushu. He must have made a substantial contribution to compiling the National History. To what degree were these four men able to accomplish their task?

Nihon Koki

125

Fuyutsugu died in 826, Sadatsugu in 824, and Yasuyo in 830. As the Preface says, 'Three ministers passed away in succession with the work unfinished, leaving only Otsugu.' More importantly, Emperor Saga, who had commanded the work, abdicated the throne to Emperor Junna. It is not clear how far the history was intended to go in Emperor Saga's original plan, but in Junna's reign the compilers apparently intended to narrate the reigns of Emperors Kanmu, Heizei, and Saga. Thus during Emperor Junna's reign they had to supplement the team of compilers and enter into the second stage of work. According to the Preface, the following were commanded by Emperor Junna to join Otsugu in compiling the National History: Provisional Great Counsellor Kiyowara Natsuno, Middle Counsellor Prince Naoyo, Consultant Fujiwara Yoshino, Consultant Ono Minemori, Great Secretary Sakanoue Imatsugu, and Great Secretary Shimada Kiyota. The date of the command is not clear, but the recorded ranks and offices should clarify the range of possible dates. First, Kiyowara Natsuno is recorded as General of the Left Guard, Third Rank, and, concurrently, Great Counsellor and Head of the Ministry of Popular Affairs. He held these ranks and offices from the nineteenth day, third month, 828 to the eleventh day, ninth month, 830. Prince Naoyo is recorded as Middle Counsellor, Junior Third Rank, and, concurrently, Head of the Ministry of Central Affairs. He was appointed Middle Counsellor and Junior Third Rank in the sixth month of 830, and, concurrently, Head of the Ministry of Central Affairs on the fourth day, eighth month, 830. Fujiwara Yoshino is recorded as Consultant, Senior Fourth Rank, Lower, General of the Right Guard, and, concurrently, Master of the Crown Prince's Household. He was appointed to Senior Fourth Rank, Lower, on the fourth day, eighth month, 830, remaining General of the Right Guard and Master of the Crown Prince's Household, as before. These three men held the listed offices at the same time for just over a month, between the fourth day, eighth month, 830 and the eleventh day of the ninth month. This period was about one month after the death, on the sixth day, seventh month, 830, of Yoshimine Yasuyo, who was, together with Otsugu, the last of the compilers appointed by Emperor Saga. Emperor Junna had probably cherished the idea of compiling a National History for some time, and, seeing the death of Yoshimine Yasuyo, he appointed additional compilers to carry on the work around the eighth month of 830. The above conjecture is valid for five of the six men appointed by Emperor Junna; the only exception is Ono Minemori. He is recorded in the Preface as Consultant, Junior Fourth Rank, Upper, and Head

126


of the Ministry of Punishments. He held these offices and ranks from the ninth day, intercalary third month, 828, but he died on the nineteenth day, fourth month, 830. Either Minemori alone was appointed earlier or there are errors in recording the offices and ranks of the others. For the time being I hold the first view, that Minemori alone was specially appointed for his literary talent. Let us now turn to the details of the compilers. In 830 Otsugu was already Great Minister of the Right and, concurrently, Crown Prince's Mentor. After the death of Fuyutsugu, he was the highest official in both name and reality, and a suitable person to head the compilation of the National History. Kiyowara Natsuno was a great-grandson of Prince Toneri and was given the surname of Kiyowara Mahito in 803. He was appointed Consultant in 823, Provisional Great Minister in 828, and Minister of the Right in 832; he died in the tenth month of 837, at the age of fiftysix. In another of Emperor Junna's compilation projects, the selection of Ryo no Gige, he rose to the position of chief, and the work was accomplished in the second month of 833. Thus in character and judgement he was a suitable person for the compilation of the National History. However, he does not seem to have been deeply involved with the actual work of the compilation. Middle Counsellor Prince Naoyo was a grandson of Prince Nagata and son of Prince Kiyowara. He became Consultant in 821, held the positions of Controller of the Left and Mayor of the Left Capital, and became Middle Counsellor and, concurrently, Head of the Ministry of Central Affairs in 830. He died in the first month of 834, at the age of fifty-nine. He was not especially known for literary achievement, so the degree of his participation is not clear. Possibly he was chosen because he was a Middle Counsellor. Consultant Fujiwara Yoshino was a grandson of Kurajimaro and a son of Tsunatsugu of the Shiki branch of Fujiwara House. Having enjoyed studying in his youth, he was not ashamed to seek counsel from inferiors, and he taught his disciples gently. Because he always modelled his behavior after the Chinese classics, he did not need to consult them. He never censured people for their mistakes; and he served his parents with filial piety: in all, the classic gentleman. Receiving the confidence of Emperor Junna, he became Consultant in 828, and in 830 he held the posts of Master of the Crown Prince's Household and, concurrently, General of the Right Guard, being promoted to Middle Counsellor in 834. After the death of Retired Emperor Junna in 840, he ceased to attend at court and three times presented memorials to the Emperor seeking to resign his positions, but they were not accepted. In 842 he was implicated in the rebellion

Nihon Koki

127

of Tomo Kowamine and demoted to Governor-General of the Government Headquarters in Kyushu; he died in 846 at the age of sixtyone. Yoshino was a benevolent man with a love of learning, and since he enjoyed a relationship of mutual trust with Emperor Junna, it is likely that the Emperor personally added him to the compilation team. Together with Otsugu he was entrusted with the compilation to the end and contributed at many points to the character of Nihon Koki. Consultant Ono Minemori was a descendant of Ono Imoko and the son of Nagami. He started his affiliation as Provisional Lesser Secretary and held the positions of Second Vice-Minister in the Ministry of Ceremonials and Head of the Treasury Bureau, becoming Consultant in 822, and, concurrently, Assistant Governor-General of the Government Headquarters in Kyushu. In 828 he also held the position of Head of the Punishments Ministry. He had a high reputation as a man of letters and selected parts of the first imperial anthology, Ryounshu, which contains thirteen of his own Chinese poems; eight others appear in Bunka Shureishu, and nine in Keikokushu. He also participated in the compilation of Dairi Shiki, and thus was active on many fronts. He died on the nineteenth day, fourth month, 830, before Emperor Junna officially selected men to compile a National History in what we think was the eighth month of 830. It is possible that he alone was appointed earlier. Great Secretary Sakanoue Imatsugu is described in the Preface as, concurrently, a professor of history and literature, so he was a specialist in historical compilation. Two of his Chinese poems are found in Ryounshu, and one is found in Bunka Shureishu. As a Great Secretary he was probably involved in the actual writing, but he might have died early, and his name is not entered among those selected to compile the history in the reign of Emperor Ninmyo. Great Secretary Shimada Kiyota entered the university, studied ethics and history, and passed the examinations in literature. He became Lesser Secretary in 824 but was promoted to Great Secretary in 827. Since he is said to have died in 855 at the age of seventyseven, he was fifty-two in 830. However, because his name was not included among those selected during Ninmyo's reign, he is not listed among those who completed the work. After the mid-83o's he was transferred to Second Vice-Minister of the Imperial Household Ministry and second Vice-Minister in the Ministry of Civil Affairs; in 839 he moved out to become Governor of Iga Province. Thus separated from his work as Great Secretary, he may also have been distanced from the work of compiling the history. The compilers composed a splendid group, consisting of a Minis-

128


ter of the Right, a Provisional Great Counsellor, a Middle Counsellor, and two Consultants and Great Secretaries. Two Great Secretaries were added after Emperor Saga's time, evidence of the desire to get on with the actual work. This desire is seen in the entry for the twentieth day, first month, 799, on the death of Wake Hiromushi. It says, 'The Emperor, conscious of Wake's diligent work, posthumously raised his rank to Senior Third.' According to the entry on the biography of Wake Kiyomaro (twenty-first day, second month, 799), his rank was posthumously raised to Senior Third in 825. This means that the 'Emperor' refers to Junna, and the portion of the record containing Hiromushi's biography was written during his reign. How did the compilation progress during the reign of Emperor Junna? The Preface says, 'Due to the abdication of Emperor Junna, the compilers did not have enough time.' It seems that they had not completed enough of the history because of the abdication. They resumed compilation in the eighth month of 830, but since Emperor Junna abdicated in the second month of 833, they only had two-and a-half years to work and could not complete the book during his reign. Thus in the reign of Emperor Ninmyo, it was necessary to enter the third stage of compilation. According to the Preface, a revised command was given to Minister of the Left Fujiwara Otsugu, Minister of the Right Minamoto Tokiwa, Middle Counsellor Fujiwara Yoshino, Middle Counsellor Fujiwara Yoshifusa, and Consultant Asano Shikatori, with Former Governor of Izumi Furu Takaniwa and Great Secretary Yamada Furutsugu carrying out the actual writing. The date of this imperial command is not known. The ranks and offices given for the compilers were all those of the time of completion in the twelfth month of 840, so we cannot use their ranks and offices to conjecture the date, as we did in the case of Emperor Junna. As noted, Minister of the Left Fujiwara Otsugu was a compiler straight through from the reign of Emperor Kanmu. In 832 he switched from Minister of the Right to Minister of the Left, thus retaining his position as the leading minister of state. He continued thus until his death in 843. Minister of the Right, Minamoto Tokiwa, joined the compilers for the first time. He was a son of Emperor Saga, who received the family name Minamoto in 814. He was awarded Junior Third Rank in 831 and was appointed Middle Counsellor in 832. In 838 he became Great Counsellor and was promoted to Minister of the Right and, concurrently, Crown Prince's Mentor in 840. He died in 854 at the age of forty-three. He was twenty-nine in 840 when he was

Nihon Koki

129

appointed to the compilation of Nihon Koki. At a time when the controlling power of the Fujiwara family was very great among the compilers, his appointment was deeply significant. This may have been one measure of resistance against the Fujiwara by Emperor Ninmyo, who was also a son of Emperor Saga. Middle Counsellor Fujiwara Yoshino continued on from the time of Emperor Junna, while Yoshifusa was freshly appointed to join the Middle Counsellors. He moved from Provisional Middle Counsellor to Middle Counsellor on the eighth day, eighth month, 840. The Preface gives him as Middle Counsellor, but that was his rank at completion of the work in the twelfth month of 840. At the time of the command appointing him, he was probably Provisional Middle Counsellor (as of the fourth month of 835) and Consultant (as of the seventh month of 834). He was a son of Fuyutsugu and succeeded him as head of the northern branch. He gained the confidence of Emperor Ninmyo and passed over seven other men when he was promoted from Consultant to Provisional Middle Counsellor. His rank and popularity made it natural for Ninmyo to add him as a member of the compilers; there was probably no expectation that he work on the actual compilation. Consultant Asano Shikatori studied as a youth at the university and was exceedingly learned in the Shi Ji and the Han Shu. In 802 he accompanied the diplomatic mission to China as an associate recorder, and he held several offices upon his return to Japan, becoming Consultant in 833. He died in 843 at the age of seventy. He was sixty-seven at the time of presentation of Nihon Koki, and, because of his learning and experience, he may have made great contributions to the work. His character, 'Disciplined, with a full understanding of matters to be dealt with, and a competent official/ may have helped shape the superior quality of Nihon Koki. He also participated in the compilation of Dairi Shiki; six of his Chinese poems are found in Bunka Shureishu. Former Governor of Izumi Province Furu Takaniwa appears in the National History in 805 as a student of Chinese poetry and biography at the university and Junior Eighth Rank, Upper, so he was probably a graduate in those fields. No details are known about him. Great Secretary Yamada Furutsugu became Third Private Secretary in 828, Lesser Secretary in 829, and Great Secretary in 834. In 846 he was appointed Assistant Governor of Awa Province, where his administrative achievements were said to be highly notable. He died while Provisional Assistant Governor of Sagami Province in 853. He was honest and respectful, reserved, and showed extreme filial piety towards his parents. He may have participated in the compila-

130


tion of the history because of his position as Great Secretary, but his integrity of character may also have been recognized by the Emperor. The people chosen during Emperor Ninmyo's reign were men of excellent character. During Emperor Junna's reign, the scope of the history was broadened to cover the reign of Emperor Saga, and in Emperor Ninmyo's reign it was extended again to cover the reign of Emperor Junna. Thus the scope of the history was expanded to cover the reigns of Emperors Kanmu, Heizei, Saga, and Junna, a period of forty-one years and two months from the first month of 792 to the second month of 833. As for the method of narration, the Preface says, 'We have taken the essentials from complicated documents, and have not put minor and detailed matters into this record/ and, also, 'Matters that are carried out according to custom are recorded in other works, and are not included in the present work.' From the Preface it appears that the compilers chose the name Nihon Koki, intending it as a National History sequential to Shoku Nihongi. The date of the Preface is the ninth day, twelfth month, 840. In Shoku Nihon Koki there is an entry that Nihon Koki was presented on the nineteenth day, twelfth month, 841. The compilers did indeed complete Nihon Koki in 840, and I prefer to follow the Preface, rejecting the entry in Shoku Nihon Koki. The ranks and offices of the compilers are all correct for the twelfth month of 840 and do not tally for the twelfth month of 841, so the date given in the Preface cannot be considered mistaken. Also, the date of the ninth day of the twelfth month could easily have been taken erroneously as the nineteenth day of the twelfth month in Shoku Nihon Koki. In Shoku Nihon Koki there are many cases of paragraphs or pages out of order, so its dates are often open to doubt. CONTENTS

Describing the contents of Nihon Koki is difficult because the text does not exist in its entirety. In the other Five National Histories there are some abbreviations of entries, but at least the entire text exists; while in this case only ten volumes out of forty remain. They are scattered over four volumes on Emperor Kanmu, two on Emperor Heizei, and four on Emperor Saga, while not a single volume remains on Emperor Junna. These volumes and their dates are: Emperor Kanmu Volume 5: seventh month, 796, to third month, 797

Nihon Koki

131

Volume 8: first month, 799, to twelfth month, 799 Volume 12: first month, 804, to sixth month, 805 Volume 13: seventh month, 805, to fifth month, 806 Emperor Heizei Volume 14: fifth month, 806, to ninth month, 806 Volume 17: fourth month, 808, to fourth month, 809 Emperor Saga Volume 20: ninth month, 810, to twelfth month, 810 Volume 21: first month, 811, to intercalary twelfth month, 811 Volume 22: first month, 812, to second month, 813 Volume 24: seventh month, 814, to twelfth month, 815 In addition, numerous fragmentary entries, day by day, are included in Ruiju Kokushi. Ruiju Kokushi was compiled under subject-headings, using the material in the original text of the Six National Histories. Thus from the items contained in Ruiju Kokushi we can learn what parts correspond to the years and months in Nihon Koki. These forty volumes cover forty-one years and two months of history, so that each volume covers about one year, which is much denser than Shoku Nihongi. Let us summarize the essential points, taking the surviving volumes in order. Volumes 5, 8,12,13: Emperor Kanmu

In entries for 794 and 797, the chronicle of Emperor Kanmu describes the presentation of Shoku Nihongi to the throne; thus we know the circumstances of its composition, despite the absence of a Preface to Shoku Nihongi. Also notable is the detailed biography of Wake Kiyomaro at the date of his death, on the twenty-first day, second month, 799.1 The rule in Nihon Koki was to write biographies for people of the fourth rank and up, and generally these biographies were quite simple, but Kiyomaro's is exceedingly detailed. Parts of the account of the oracle of the deity Hachiman at Usa are considered to have been taken from Shoku Nihongi, but it also provides much new information. An example of what appears in this biography is the story of when Kiyomaro went west and Dokyo's teacher Michi Mahito Toyonaga admonished Kiyomaro, saying that if Dokyo rose to become Emperor, Toyonaga, out of dignity, would refuse to become a subject of Dokyo. Another example is the story of Kiyomaro, saying that if the deity at Usa did not present a miracle, then he, Kiyomaro, could not believe in the oracle, whereupon the deity, Hachiman, revealed himself in a form nine metres tall. There is

132


also a tale of Fujiwara Momokawa, who so admired Kiyomaro's loyalty that he took the proceeds from twenty households in Bingo Province and sent them to Kiyomaro in exile. The writers of this biography were eager to transmit the fierce loyalty of Kiyomaro, and they laboured to collect stories that were not widely known. In addition they recorded the deeds of his ancestors, starting with their suppression of the rebellion by Prince Oshikuma in Empress Regent Jingu's reign and giving the names of the subsequent four generations. Then comes Kiyomaro's editing of Minbusho Rei [Practices in the Ministry of Popular Affairs] and Yamatoshi Fu [Genealogies of Yamato Families]. Thus his biography and family history are exhaustively covered. However, it does not omit the facts of his failure as Governor of Settsu, when he tried to construct a canal to connect the Kawachi River directly to the western sea to prevent flood damage. Despite enormous expense, he did not succeed. This recording of shortcomings as well as strong points is a distinct feature of the biographies in Nihon Koki, so in this respect the biography of Kiyomaro is not exceptional. This biography became an independent work under the title Wake Kiyomaro Den [Biography of Wake Kiyomaro] and is included in Gunsho Ruiju.2 This is probably the work also referred to in Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku as 'Wake Kiyomaro, one volume.'3 The biography of Kiyomaro in Nihon Koki was sufficiently detailed to circulate as an independent work. There is an entry for the tenth day, second month, 805, in which sacred treasures of the Isonokami Shrine were moved to Yamashiro but finally had to be returned to the original place because of the anger of the deity; this account is very lively, recounted in the form of discussion among the people involved. For the eighth day, sixth month, 805, there is an account of the report of Fujiwara Kadonomaro, Envoy to China; this details in diary form the conditions of the envoys and directly reveals conditions in Tang China. Volume 13 records the Emperor's death on the seventeenth day, third month, 806. The Crown Prince did not ascend the throne immediately, so during that time the courtiers presented a 'respectful statement' in the form of a statement to the Crown Prince. On the eighteenth day, fourth month, they started using the terminology applicable to the Emperor: 'imperial rescript' (sho) and 'report to the throne' (so). However, the formal enthronement ceremony was held on the sixteenth day, fifth month, 806, and accounts up to that point, were included in Volume 13. As the era name of Daido had been determined at the time of the enthronment of the new Emperor, it was unreasonable to call the

Nihon Koki

133

twenty-fifth year of Enryaku, into which Emperor Kanmu's reign had extended, by the name Daido. Nevertheless the court started the new era of Daido retroactively to January. In this they may have followed ancient historical method. The compilers of Nihon Koki were concerned about this, and at the beginning of Volume 14 (on Emperor Heizei) they discussed its impropriety: Changing the era name to Daido was improper. The ruler ascends the throne, and changes the era name after passage of the year, so that the subjects would not have to endure the sense that they were serving two sovereigns in one year. Changing the era name without waiting for the year to pass, means that the last year of the former Emperor's reign was cut into two, and the latter portion became part of the auspicious era of the present Emperor. Failing to respect the latter portion of his last year, by not observing the custom of refraining from changing the era name, is not the heart of a filial son. It must be described as an error, in view of the ancient authorities.

This is a straightforward judgement about politics and an example of Assessment that is rare in the National Histories. It is a typical example of the particularly critical spirit of Nihon Koki, but, strictly speaking, the compilers themselves ought to have extended Kanmu's reign into Enryaku 25 (806). By recording the reign of Emperor Kanmu in the first year of Daido, their method of writing recognized that two sovereigns had reigned in one year. The compilers of Nihon Koki deserve equal criticism. Following the entry on Emperor Kanmu's funeral (seventh day, fourth month, 806), there is a brief history of his life, with a simple Assessment: 'The Emperor's personal name was Yamabe; he was the eldest son of Emperor Amamune Takatsugu [Konin].' A note explains, 'Because there is no pre-accession history in the previous National history, the record is given here.' Shoku Nihongi lacked preaccession genealogies and brief histories. The compilers of Nihon Koki were not satisfied with this, and discussed the Emperor as follows: The Emperor's character was extremely filial, and when Emperor Konin died, he was unequalled in mourning. Although he was old enough, he totally refused to don the clothing of maturity. His virtue towered high, and his style was composed. He did not enjoy fine arts, but his power illuminated afar. After he ascended to the imperial throne, his heart was diligent in government. Within, he gave priority

134


to construction and productivity, and without, he dispelled the barbarians. Although the expenses of his years were high, later generations shall depend on his deeds.

The Emperor's virtue and achievements are succinctly recognized, but the last sentence penetrates to the weak spot of his government. In the twelfth month of 805 there had been a debate over virtuous government at the court, and this Assessment supported Fujiwara Otsugu's contention: 'At the present time, what is causing problems for the empire is military service and construction projects. If these two are stopped, the people will gain relief.' The thought and opinions of Otsugu are strongly represented in the work, and in this Assessment of Emperor Kanmu they are most forcefully expressed.4 Volumes 14 and 17: Emperor Heizei

The chronicle of Emperor Heizei starts with Volume 14, beginning with a simple pre-accession account. It was customary to begin the account of the accession with the imperial address upon the occasion, but this is not the case here. For the twenty-fourth day, fifth month, 806, there is the following entry: 'Itinerant Inspectors were established in the six circuits for the first time.' Nothing is recorded regarding the names of Itinerant Inspectors, their duties, or their purpose. They were expected to execute the new policies of Emperor Heizei and, since those who occupied the positions held the high position of Consultants, a National History should include this in detail. Only later, in a decree written by the Emperor himself on the tenth day of the sixth month, is the purpose of the Itinerant Inspectors stated. Only two volumes remain of the chronicle of Heizei, so there is very little material with which to work. It stops at the end of Volume 17 with his abdication on the third day, fourth month, 809. However, he was later involved, as Retired Emperor, with a scheme for the restoration of the capital at Nara, which is briefly surveyed. The Assessment of the Emperor comes after his funeral in the seventh month of 824, as recorded in the volume on Emperor Junna. Since the text of Nihon Koki is missing at this point, I cite from the section on Retired Emperors in the Emperors category in Ruiju Kokushi. The Emperor's mind was deep and alert, and his wisdom and resourcefulness were both thorough and concealed. He made himself familiar with all matters, overcoming his own limitations and invigorating himself. He cut back on burdensome expenses and terminated novelties.

Nihon Koki

135

The laws were strictly administered, and the officials conducted themselves solemnly. The wise rulers of the past did not surpass him. However, he had a suspicious nature. In his position of command he was not lenient. In coming to ascend the throne, he killed his younger brother the Prince, his children, and his mother and arrested many others. People regarded these as punishments in error. Thereafter his heart inclined toward inner trusted subjects, and he entrusted the government to a woman. The saying goes that the censure against letting a woman take power is because it ruins the house. How lamentable.

This is a conscientious Assessment, praising the praiseworthy and criticizing what ought to be criticized. Volumes 20-2 and 24: Emperor Saga

The first two volumes of the chronicle of Emperor Saga are missing; the surviving text starts at Volume 20. This begins with the ninth month of 810 and narrates Retired Emperor Heizei's attempt to restore the capital to Nara.5 Because of quick thinking on the part of Emperor Saga's side, Fujiwara Nakanari was captured at the headquarters of the Right Guard, and his sister Kusuko (d. 810) was expelled from the palace. An imperial decree was then issued, exiling Nakanari as Provisional Governor of Sado. The dramatic events continued with Retired Emperor Heizei's attempt to take the Kawaguchi route to the eastern provinces, but he was stopped by Sakanoue Tamuramaro. Nakanari was shot to death in prison, while the Retired Emperor returned to the capital to shave his head and become a lay priest. Fujiwara Kusuko committed suicide by taking poison. Volumes 21 and 22 narrate the events from the ninth month, 810, to the second month, 813. The governing of the Emishi by Funya Watamaro is handled as a continuing tale. In the ninth month, 810, he was appointed Itinerant Inspector of Mutsu and Dewa, and in the fourth month, 811, he was made Barbarian-Subduing General. Upon receiving the command, 'The safety of the country is your responsibility. The General must strive for this,' he headed for Emishi territory. The National History is peppered with his reports, along with imperial commands. In the twelfth month of 811 there is an imperial decree promoting Watamaro to Junior Third Rank for his merit in pacifying the Emishi in Hei village, whom Sakanoue Tamuramaro had been unable to put down in the preceding reign, and thus overturning their base camp. Promotion was also given to the Lieutenant-Gener-

136


als. This is good historical material, portraying the activities of the Emishi during the Konin period. Besides this, all that remains of the chronicle of Emperor Saga is one volume on 814-15. The volumes on Emperor Junna are entirely lost, so we cannot discuss them in detail. As Emperors Saga and Junna both abdicated and died during the reign of Emperor Ninmyo, no Assessment of their reigns is to be seen in Nihon Koki. We cannot give a full explanation of the contents of Nihon Koki because of gaps in the text, but we can provide some additional explanation where it is supplemented by Ruiju Kokushi. One area where this applies is biographies. Volume 66 of Ruiju Kokushi, with the heading Funerals in the section People, contains a collection of biographies of people of the fourth rank from the Konin era (810) to the Kasho era (850). The first half of these fall into the period covered by Nihon Koki, so they can supply what is missing from that work. Throughout these biographies, the special characteristic of Nihon Koki is evident: although the text is generally concise, the facts are remorselessly included and criticisms are scathing. The strong points as well as the weak points of the person are always raised: Consultant, Controller of the Left, General of the Guards and concurrently Head of the Department of Shinto, Senior Fourth Rank, Upper, Onakatomi Ason Morouo. By nature, Morouo enjoyed music and poetry, but he had no other talents. Although he was merciful, he rode upon pleasures and forgot about melancholy. Craving wealth, he became prosperous and sought to manage his property. This was regarded as lowly, (twenty-first day, second month, 797). Middle Counsellor, Junior Third Rank, Yamato Ason Yakamaro. His character had a rugged honesty, but he had no scholarly ability. Because he was a maternal relative of the Emperor he was promoted over others; the entry of barbarians to office started with him. It may be said that his rank was too high for his natural ability. Despite his exalted status, whenever he met an old friend he would not despise the friend's lowliness, but would extend his hand and talk to him. Those who observed this were moved (twenty-seventh day, fourth month, 804). Great Counsellor, Senior Third Rank, and concurrently General of the Right Guard, Head of the Ministry of War, Sakanoue Greater Sukune Tamuramaro. Tamuramaro had a red countenance and a yellow beard. He surpassed

Nihon Koki

137

all others in courage, and had much ability as a general. The Emperor considered him brave, appointing him Great Barbarian-Subduing General in 804. For his merit he was promoted to Junior Third Rank. However, in the course of his comings and goings to the field of battle, his followers became many, and it became difficult to supply horses, while troubles and expenses piled up. In 810 he was appointed Great Counsellor, while remaining as General of the Right Guard. Repeatedly he led the frontier soldiers, gaining merit each time he went to the field. He dealt tolerantly with his men; and thus gained from them desperate efforts (twenty-third day, fifth month, 811).

This special quality of the biographies in Nihon Koki is related to the character and judgement of the compilers. The biographies in the National Histories generally used for source material existing biographies, such as Koshin Kaden [Biographies of Meritorious Subjects], compiled by the Ministry of Ceremonial. The compilers added material from their own standpoint and seem to have made their own evaluations of deeds. Among the compilers were many true gentlemen, humane, filial, and conscientious, such as Fujiwara Yoshino, Asano Shikatori, and Yamada Furutsugu. Pre-eminent among them was the chief compiler, Fujiwara Otsugu, a man of firm character and lofty judgement. His biography in Shoku Nihon Koki says, 'He was brightly versed in the art of government, and he ruled with respect toward the imperial house. He always spoke out with knowledge of the national welfare' (twentythird day, seventh month, 843). He also worked to stabilize the lives of the people: in his memorial to abolish some functions of the provincial officials in 808 when he became Itinerant Inspector6; or when, as the result of his experience as Itinerant Inspector of Mutsu and Dewa, he was anxious about the excessive burden placed on poststations; and when, in 822, he suggested that government allocated rice fields be located close to post stations7. We have already mentioned how his Essay on Virtuous Government risked the displeasure of Emperor Kanmu. He was a pillar of the state who was sincerely conscious of the country's welfare. The presence of such a person at the head of the National History made possible a frank assessment of people. Another special feature of Nihon Koki is the large number of Japanese poems that it records. Since we must discover them from such works as Ruiju Kokushi and Nihon Kiryaku, we do not have all that were included, but there are twelve, composed mainly by Emperors Kanmu, Heizei, and Saga. For example,

138


4th day, ist month, 801. A banquet was held. On this day, snow had fallen. Emperor Kanmu composed a Japanese poem, Ume no hana Koitsutsu oreba Furu yuki o Hanakamo chiru to Omoitsurukamo.

The plum blossoms When in love, I have mistaken The fallen snow For scattered plum blossoms.8

22nd day, 4th month, 813. Emperor Saga went to the southern pond of his younger brother's house, where he commanded the literary people to compose Chinese poems. Minister of the Right, Junior Second Rank Fujiwara Ason Sonondo composed a Japanese poem: Kyo no hi no Ike no hotori ni Hototogisu Taira wa chiyo to Naku wa kikitsuya.

The cuckoo That was beside the pond During the day today Wasn't it crying 'May peace last a thousand reigns?'

The Emperor in return composed a Japanese poem, Hototogisu Naku koe kikeba Utanushi to Tomo ni chiyo ni to Ware mo kikitari.

When I heard the voice Of the cuckoo Together with you, I also thought it said, 'May it last a thousand reigns.'

The Minister Sonondo performed a dance, and the Music Bureau played.

There was no necessity to record the poems in these entries; the other National Histories recorded almost no poems in such circumstances. The compilers of Nihon Koki had a deep concern for Japanese poetry and, further, a passion to preserve and exalt Japanese culture in the midst of the more widespread and onrushing Chinese culture. Otsugu may have been the most important compiler in this respect. He was very adept at offering congratulations to the Emperor and reading imperial commands, and he passed this learning on to Imperial Prince Nakano. It is recorded that at the time there was no one else with the knowledge of these things, so Fujiwara Mototsune and Oe Otondo received an imperial rescript to study it with the Prince.9 Thus we know of Otsugu's mastery of the ancient ways of Japan. In addition, he pleased Emperor Kanmu with

Nihon Koki

139

we may conjecture that Otsugu loved Japanese culture, and his tastes are evident in the Japanese poems recorded in Nihon Koki. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS

Tencho Kyaku Sho [Selections from Regulations of the Tencho Era, 824-34] is appended to this work, and it is comparable to the Kanso Jirui appended to Shoku Nihongi. The name of the work appears in Honcho Hoka Monjo Mokuroku and Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku,w but the text has not been transmitted. In Honcho Hoka Monjo Mokuroku the Table of Contents and Preface of this work are recorded.11 The Preface says, 'Tencho Kyaku Sho consists of excerpts taken after the compiling of Nihon Koki.' Under the categories, Small Matters of Special Events, National Ceremonies at Court, and Arrival of Foreign Representatives in Japan, are matters pertaining to offices that were not necessarily recorded in any book. By making ordinary things into targets for recording, the compilers did not change the original intent of Nihon Koki but, rather, assembled various phenomena into categories for convenient reference. The intention was exactly the same as in Kanso Jirui, which was appended to Shoku Nihongi: using materials collected at the time of compiling Nihon Koki, they organized under categories those which they did not wish to discard. The method of classifying was also the same as that found in Kanso Jirui. Volume i is The Gods, part i; Volume 2 is The Gods, part 2; Volume 3 is Buddhist Temples; and so on, to Volume 30, Miscellaneous, part 2. The number of volumes is also the same: thirty. However, it differs from Kanso Jirui, which did not give the original text of imperial edicts and government orders, but, generally, changed them into narrative text. Tencho Kyaku Sho gives these in their original text. This is directly reflected in their respective names, Classified Materials as an Aid to Officials (Kanso Jirui) and Selections from Regulations of the Tencho Era (Tencho Kyaku Sho) and can be observed in the dispersed texts. The dispersed text of Tencho Kyaku Sho consisted of government orders, which are collected in Wada Hidematsu's Kokusho Itsubun. One of the dispersed texts found in Seiji Yoryaku is a government order dated ninth day, ninth month, 812, which instructs the Imperial Household Ministry to treat the occasion of the ninth day, ninth month the same as that of the third day, third month. Another order of the sixteenth day, ninth month, 812, instructs the five inner provinces, Shima, and Omi Provinces to present gifts to the Emperor on the ninth day of the ninth month the same as on the third day of the

140


third month.12 These two items do not appear under these dates in Nihon Koki; thus if Tencho Kyaku Sho had survived in its entirety, together with Nihon Koki, it would have recounted many matters of importance that have regrettably been lost. It seems that the value of Tencho Kyaku Sho was recognized at an early stage. In 912, when the Inspectors of the Records of Outgoing Officials were editing Engi Kotai Shiki [Procedures for Rotation of Officers in the Engi Era], some doubts arose about the text of the government orders that documented it. To resolve these doubts, they requested the loan of this work. The loan was granted on the twenty-third day of the eighth month, and the book was returned in the ninth month of 914, two years later. In 919 the Office for Selecting Procedures also requested a loan. These incidents are known from Ruiju Fusen Sho [Classified Collection of Selections from Government Documents], and there were probably other similar occasions.13 As described previously, only ten volumes of Nihon Koki have survived, but even these were not known until the late Edo period. By the Kanbun era (1661-73), °nly Nihon Koki of the National Histories had not been published in a printed edition. Thus Kamo Agatanushi Sukeyuki set out to restore the text of the work by referring to Ruiju Kokushi, Nihon Kiryaku, and others. It was completed in 1692, with the title Nihon Isshi [The Dispersed History of Japan], and published in 1724. There are some debatable points concerning the methods of compilation, and the old works that were quoted from were insufficient, with the result that its current scholarly significance is slight. However, it was a major effort for its time. The work of compiling the dispersed text was carried out in later times. Nihon Koki, Volume 2, in the Six National Histories published by Asahi Shinbun Sha, contains the dispersed text retrieved by the editor, Saeki Ariyoshi. This is the product of the scholarship of a new era and is superior in many ways to Kamo Sukeyuki's Nihon Isshi.

CHAPTER FIVE

Shoku Nihon Koki

COMPILATION

The circumstances of compilation of this work are given in the Preface. Since no history of the reign of his predecessor, Emperor Ninmyo, had appeared, Emperor Montoku commanded five men to compile it: Fujiwara Yoshifusa, Fujiwara Yoshimi, Tomo Yoshio, Haruzumi Yoshitada, and Agata Inukai Sadamori. However, there was no time when these four men simultaneously held the ranks and offices ascribed to them in the Preface, so it is difficult to determine the date of the beginning. Thus we must look for other materials concerning the date of the command. Fortunately, there is an entry in Montoku Jitsuroku for the seventeenth day, second month, 855, which says that Minister of the Right, Senior Second Rank, and, concurrently, General of the Left Guard Fujiwara Yoshifusa; Consultant, Junior Third Rank, and, concurrently, Master of the Empress' Household and Governor of Sanuki Tomo Yoshio; Junior Fourth Rank, Lower, and Assistant Minister of Punishments Haruzumi Yoshitada; and Senior Sixth Rank, Upper, and Lesser Secretary Yasuno Toyomichi were commanded to compile a National History. In 855 Emperor Montoku was in his sixth year on the throne, perhaps an appropriate time to start compiling a history of the preceding reign. No problems arise from considering this as the time of the imperial command to compile Shoku Nihon Koki. However, Yoshimi and Sadamori, who were mentioned in the Preface, have disappeared from the command, and Yasuno Toyomichi has been added. Perhaps at the outset the four men listed in Montoku Jitsuroku were indeed there, with Yoshimi added later, and Agata Inukai Sadamori added in place of Yasuno Toyomichi. This could

142


have been because Toyomichi was appointed Assistant Governor of Shimosa on the fourteenth day, first month, 857, and thus became separated from his duties as Lesser Secretary in the capital. In any case, among these four men the offices of Minister of the Right, Consultant, and Lesser Secretary were represented. Although Yoshitada was only Assistant Minister of Punishments, he was a superior writer among the Confucian scholars. Thus they met the qualifications for compilers laid out in Shingishiki. The later addition of Yoshimi may have come about because Yoshifusa became Chancellor, was separated from the actual work, and, out of concern, yielded his duties to the former. The compilers started out in this manner, but very shortly Emperor Montoku died. The next Emperor, Seiwa, commanded continuation of the compilation, but since he had ascended the throne at the age of nine, this was not his own idea. Probably Yoshifusa started the enterprise again on the Emperor's behalf. No new compilers were added, probably because the Emperor was not actively involved. Circumstances intervened to remove three of the five compilers. Tomo Yoshio, who was sentenced to death on the twenty-second day, ninth month, 866, because of the Oten Gate incident, had his punishment reduced by one degree and was exiled to Izu Province.1 Agata Inukai Sadamori left the capital to become Governor of Suruga Province on the tenth day, second month, 863, and Yoshimi died on the tenth day, tenth month, 867. The remaining two, Yoshifusa and Yoshitada, presented Shoku Nihon Koki on the fourteenth day, eighth month, 869. The fact that the task was entrusted to 'two Fujiwara brothers who were Great Ministers displays the undisguised monopolistic intention of the Fujiwara family. Other aristocrats were available. In the second month of 857, when Yoshifusa became Chancellor, Minamoto Makoto moved from Great Counsellor to Minister of the Left, and in the same year Abe Yasuhito was Great Counsellor, while Minamoto Hiromu, Minamoto Sadamu, and Tachibana Minetsugu were Middle Counsellors. Minamoto Makoto was the first son of Emperor Saga and was described as a man of culture who 'enjoyed reading classical works, and was versed in cursive-style and square-style calligraphy.'2 Abe Yasuhito was described as a talented official who 'was well trained in the political structure, clearly comprehended court documents, and took all proper measures on every occasion of a report to the throne.'3 Minamoto Hiromu was the second son of Emperor Saga, and Sadamu was the sixth son, while Tachibana Minetsugu was the

Shoku Nihon Koki

143

eldest son of Minister of the Right Ujikimi. None of them was lacking in good lineage or personal qualifications, 'but they were not entrusted with compilation of the history. Tomo Yoshio was added as a member of another noble family, but he was a famous schemer who was well connected with the Fujiwara. He served Emperor Fujiwara Junshi as Master of the Empress' Household and then as Master of the Household of the Empress Dowager, and he never displeased her. As Haruzumi Yoshitada and the others did the actual writing, they were not involved with this problem. In comparison to the recent Nihon Koki, the compilers were confined to the northern branch of the Fujiwara family and its allies. This reflected the power of the Fujiwara at the time and revealed the personal intention of Yoshifusa. The monopolistic position of the northern Fujiwara was fully established in this history. The final compilers of Shoku Nihon Koki were Fujiwara Yoshifusa and Haruzumi Yoshitada, because the others happened to drop off. The history clearly manifests the character of these two men. Yoshifusa occupied an important position, following his father, Fuyutsugu, in the prosperity of the Regent branch of the Fujiwara; he embodied its extraordinary desire for power and fame. The first step on his way to success was to marry Emperor Saga's daughter, Princess Kiyo, thereby receiving immense trust from Emperor Ninmyo and Emperor Montoku. His daughter and Emperor Montoku gave birth to Prince Korehito, and before he was one year old, Korehito was made Crown Prince ahead of his three elder brothers. Yoshifusa himself was appointed Chancellor for Emperor Montoku, a position unprecedented for a subject, and, when Prince Korehito ascended the throne as Emperor Seiwa, Yoshifusa became Regent. His rank and office were indeed high, and his situation prompted his poem, 'When I but see the blossoms, my heart's sorrows disappear.'4 Yoshifusa's prosperity was achieved by self-assertion and by strict exclusion of other families. A series of events must have raised the eyebrows of knowledgeable people - the Jowa Affair, in which Crown Prince Tsunesada was deposed;5 the ostracism of the Tachibana and Ki families; and the scheme to make Korehito Crown Prince. Yoshifusa's character naturally affected the National History, of which he had editorial supervision. His was a posture of raw, excessive self-display. The name of Yoshifusa frequently appears in unnecessary places, as is shown in the discussion of the contents. Haruzumi Yoshitada was a pure scholar. He came from the Inabe District in Ise Province and loved scholarship from childhood. His grandfather devoted his property to the education of Yoshitada, begrudging nothing. Yoshitada responded to his grandfather's

144


expectations and became very accomplished. He was widely read, with extensive knowledge and an excellent memory, and no other scholar approached his stature. He passed the examinations as a Special Student of Literature, graduated, became Private Secretary, advanced to Doctor of Letters, and rose to Consultant in 860. Perhaps because he was so devoted to working on Shoku Nihon Koki, he died in the second month of 870, less than half a year after the presentation of the book. He was then seventy-four. Discreet and respectful, he was not boastful in a time when other scholars established their respective territories and criticized each other; he remained simple and maintained his composure. Thus no one spoke ill of him. In old age his mental capacity did not decline in the least, and his composition became ever more beautiful. A scholar such as he must have considered involvement with the National History project a great honour, and no doubt he put all his effort into drafting the work. Receiving the patronage of Yoshifusa, he probably had no hesitation in complying with Yoshifusa's intentions as he wrote; the compilation went smoothly because of the mutual understanding between them. CONTENTS

This is a history only of the reign of Emperor Ninmyo. The previous National Histories had covered the reigns of several Emperors or several tens of Emperors. The tendency towards becoming a Chinese-style Veritable Record was shown in the Preface, which explained the policies for compilation. It says, 'Everyday matters such as rice and salt are either abbreviated or rejected. When it comes to the activities of the Emperor, regardless of their importance, they are included without exception/ In abbreviating everyday matters of rice and salt, it does not differ from the other histories since Shoku Nihongi, but this was the first to include the activities of the Emperor, whether important or trivial, and thus it is the Veritable Record of a single reign. In addition, it has many more accounts of court ceremonies and praise for the excellence of civil government. In twenty volumes, the work covers seventeen years and two months, from the accession of the Emperor on the twenty-eighth day, third month, 833, to his funeral on the twenty-fifth day, third month, 850. Each volume covers about ten months, and the entries are more detailed than those in any previous National History. There is a pre-accession history at the beginning and an Assessment at the end. With some exceptions (Volumes i, 2,11,12, and 20) the volumes

Shoku Nihon Koki

145

are standardized, each covering one year, beginning with January and ending with December. The most unusual is Volume 18, which states that it 'begins with the ist month of Jowa (848) and ends with the i2th month of Kasho i (848).' The other National Histories would have used the first month of Kasho i in such a case, but the change of era to Kasho was made on the thirteenth day of the sixth month of Jowa 15. In the case of the Jowa era, as the compilers used the new era name from the beginning of the first year (because the era was changed on the third day of the first year), it was meaningless to list the old era name, the eleventh year of Tencho.6 In the work, notes are used freely to supplement insufficiencies in the text or to indicate the results of research. It is an extremely detailed compilation, displaying consideration for the reader. For example, the entry for the twenty-sixth day, fourth month, 834, says, 'An imperial decree awarded fifty cho of abandoned rice fields and undeveloped rice fields in Mino Province to ki [the character that replaces the actual name of a person too exalted to name]/ Under ki there is a note saying 'Tamura' [Emperor Montoku]. Later there follows in the entry for the eighth day of the eighth month, 'fifty cho of developed rice fields in Settsu Province were awarded to ki.' Under ki is a note saying, 'See the explanation of ki, above.' This concern for detail has little parallel in the other five National Histories. Such concern for detail is seen everywhere. The entry for the twenty-fourth day,, second month, 836, says, 'Senior Sixth Rank, Upper, Kudara Konikishi Keien, and Kudara Konikishi Gennin both received the rank of Junior Fifth, Lower.' The note says, 'Gennin was a female.' Without the note, and going by the name of Gennin alone, she might have been mistaken for a man. The entry for the fourth day, first month, 841, says, 'Fifty-eight priests gathered at the Seiryoden Palace, [Serene and Cool Hall] where they recited the Yakushikyo [Sutra of Healing] by day and performed the Penitence Liturgy of the Boundaries of the Monastic Precincts by night.' The note says, 'Thirty-nine of them were begging priests; the rest were high priests.' This note permits reckoning the number of high priests at that time at more than nineteen. An interesting entry of this kind is that for the eighth day, twelfth month, 837, which gives the legend of keeping Prince Shotoku's hair at the Shitennoji Temple. The text says, 'There was an imperial command to make one wooden jar turned on the lathe, and one copper jar with sculptured rim, and present them to the Tennoji for storing the hair of Prince Shotoku.' The note says, 'The origin of this incident is not clear, but according to oral tradition, there were four

146


locks of Prince Shotoku's hair stored straight under the pagoda of Shitennoji. Last year in the winter, a thunderclap struck the pagoda, and an officer was sent to inspect it. He secretly stole the hair and gave it to his wife, with the result that a curse subsequently came upon them. Accordingly a new investigation was made, and the hair was restored/ Adding 'The reason is not yet clear' when they did not know the reasons for an entry is a characteristic feature of this work. The authors had a scholarly attitude of faithfully reporting matters that they did not fully understand: 2Oth day, 8th month, 834. Officials were sent to the seven great temples of Nara; starting on that night, they were made to read in turn the Daihannyagyo [Great Wisdom Sutra] for seventeen nights. [Note in small print:] There are no details on the reasons. 28th day, 6th month, 835. The Ministry of Central Affairs was ordered to present seven pieces of Buddha's ashes to the palace. [Note in small print:] It is not known where they came from. 15th day, and month, 848. One hundred priests were gathered at the Ceremonial Hall, and the Serene and Cool Hall for reading in turn the Great Wisdom Sutra. [Note in small print:] The reason for this is not yet clear. 29th day, 12th month, 848. Officials were sent to present offerings to Kashii Shrine. [Note in small print:] The reason for this is not clear. Sometimes the compilers supplied historical materials in the notes: 27th day, ist month, 837. The deities of five districts in Iwami Province, comprising fifteen shrines, were enrolled as government shrines for the first time. This was done because they responded well to the prayers of the officials and the people for relief from drought and disease. [Note in small print:] The names of the deities are given in full in the records of the Department of Shinto. 6th day, 6th month, 840. One hundred thrones were set up in the palace to read the Nin'okyo [Benevolent King Sutra]. The purpose was to ward off evil omens within and without the palace. The reading finished in early evening, and alms were given in varying amounts. [Note in small print:] The Geki Nikki [Diary of the Great Secretary of the Council of State] says alms were not given to all the priests, but only to those who were said to be without acquisitiveness.

Shoku Nihon Koki

147

22nd day, 3rd month, 850. Officials for the imperial funeral were appointed. [Note in small print:] The details of this are found in the long draft.

The last example indicates that there was a long draft connected with the work. In China, when Zizhi Tongjian [Comprehensive Mirror for the Aid of Government] was compiled in the Song dynasty, the compilers first made a general outline and then a long draft, in which all sorts of historical materials were cited in chronological order.7 The Japanese historians might have been referring to a similar long draft. It is possible that they gathered the historical materials, made a long draft in which they cited matters great and small, and then organized this into the text of the National History. In this case the names of the people appointed as officials for the imperial funeral were probably contained in the long draft but were deleted from the text of the National History. The same character is seen in the text. In addition to introducing historical materials and the results of research from time to time, the entire text is thoughtfully written. For such matters as ceremonies the scenes are described in detail, giving the reader the feeling that he is actually at the scene: iQth day, 2nd month, 834. Junior Fifth Rank, Upper, Tajihi Mahito Kiyosada was appointed Governor of Ise. He was called to the palace, and the Emperor's coat was given to him. Consultant, Senior Fourth Rank, Lower, and Vice-Chief of the Police Bureau Mihara Ason Harukami was ordered to convey an imperial edict. Kiyosada left, in a respectful dancing motion of joy.

Such a thorough account of a simple case of an appointment as Governor of Ise is exceptional. An exhaustive account of a dance by a remarkable old man, Owari Muraji Hamanushi, portrays the peaceful time of the Jowa era. 8th day, ist month, 845. For the first time the reading of the Golden Light Excellent King Sutra was held in the Great Hall of Audience. On this day, Outer Junior Fifth Rank, Lower, Owari Muraji Hamanushi performed a Japanese-style dance for long life on the corridor to the South Garden. A thousand people were watching. At first they said that he was so old he could not do it, but he let go of his sleeves and proceeded with the music, just like a youth. Everyone said, 'I have never seen anyone like him.' Hamanushi had formerly been a court musician; he was then 113 years old. He himself had requested to be

148


allowed to perform this dance for long life. In his request for the performance, he included a Japanese poem, which went, Nanatsugi no Miyo ni mawaeru Momochimari To no okina no Mai tatematsuru

An old man, More than a hundred, Who has seen seven reigns, Dedicates a dance To His Majesty.

On the loth day the Emperor summoned Owari Muraji Hamanushi in front of the Serene and Cool Hall and had him perform a dance for long life. When he finished, Hamanushi promptly recited a poem: Okina tote Wabi ya wa oramu Kusa mo ki mo Sakayuru toki ni Idete maitemu

Although I am old How could I be sad? When the flowers and trees Bloom at their height I will go out and dance.

The incident of the Emperor paying his New Year's visit to the Great Empress Dowager on the fourth day, first month, 850, is included in order to praise the etiquette and culture of this reign, but it also has a slight fragrance of Confucian decoration, which discloses another aspect of the character of this book. The Emperor went to pay his New Year's call on the Great Empress Dowager at the Reizen-in. Along with the Prince and others, the drinking party was in full swing, and endowments were being given out according to status. After a while the Emperor went out of the building, and at the foot of the southern stairs, extending his ceremonial wand, he kneeled on the ground. Summoning Minister of the Left Minamoto Tokiwa Ason and Minister of the Right Fujiwara Yoshifusa Ason, the Emperor said, 'I received the command of the Great Empress Dowager, saying 'I remain deep within the palace, so I have not yet seen the ceremony of the Emperor riding in his palanquin. Today, please get into a palanquin for me to view.' Although I have already declined two or three times, her command has not changed. My lords, what is your view?' The great ministers said, 'Ceremony consists of nothing more than respect. You should do as she commands.' The Emperor thereupon went back into the palace and bowed to the north in front of the bamboo screen, behind which the Great Empress Dowager sat. Then the imperial palanquin was brought to the palace. He descended from the palace and departed in the palanquin. Those who observed this wept, saying, 'The Emperor bowed to the ground, facing

Shoku Nihon Koki

149

north toward the Great Empress Dowager. It is true that the way of filial piety originates from the Emperor and reaches to common men.'

Such an entry sketches the ideals of Confucians, in which the Emperor sets a model through the personal practice of filial piety and thereby promotes similar piety in the empire; this is beyond the realm of objective entries suitable for the National History. However, similar acts by the Crown Prince and the imperial princes are noteworthy: i8th day, 3rd month, 833. The Emperor was in the Ceremonial Hall, where the Crown Prince came for the first time to pay a call. He came up with respectful dancing steps. A maiden from the Crown Prince's Household presented an offering of food. The Emperor bestowed his garment upon the Crown Prince, before he had even touched the food. The Crown Prince received it and gracefully withdrew. This was because on the same day he had to go to audiences with both Retired Emperors. At the time he was only nine years old, but his deportment and propriety were those of a mature person. loth day, 7th month, 833. First Imperial Prince Tamura paid a call on the Emperor. He was then seven years old. However, his bearing was correct and clear, like an adult. Those who observed this wondered at it. 7th day, 8th month, 834. Imperial Prince Muneyasu paid a call on the Emperor for the first time. He was then seven years old.

These entries on the visits of the imperial princes to the Emperor are not found in other National Histories. Special entries like this, showing that the princes conformed to etiquette despite being very young, could have arisen only from the preferences of the compilers. Here the compilers show themselves to have been fervent believers in the Confucian way, men of culture devoted to ceremony and letters. The pure Confucianist Haruzumi Yoshitada compiled this book, devoting to it all the energy of his later years. A pure scholar such as he would make a positive statement about the excellent propriety of the Jowa era and would try to manifest in historical writing the ideal country of propriety that he held in his mind. Entries concerning ceremonies and formalities are abundant. In addition to those mentioned, they include the Feast of Accession (eleventh month, 833) and the funeral ceremonies for Emperor Saga and Emperor Junna (fifth month, 840, and seventh month, 842). Such

150


events are also referred to at many places in the individual biographies. As noted previously, the biographies in Nihon Koki are concise and contain sharp criticisms, while in Shoku Nihon Koki the concrete details are recorded and the scene is presented vividly. This, too, may have resulted from Yoshitada's beautiful style of writing. 8th day, 3rd month, 838. Scattered Rank, Junior Fourth Rank, Lower, Ikeda Ason Haruno died. In the winter of 833, the Feast of Accession was to take place. The Emperor wanted to perform in the purification rites, so he went to the Kamo River. As head of the Bureau for Cleaning Imperial Apartments and Palace Grounds, Haruno joined the imperial party. Inspecting the garments of the various lords for correct colour, he noticed that their hems were touching the ground. With a great laugh he said, 'These are everyday clothes, and are not the ancient style for religious matters,' and pointed to his own clothes to demonstrate the ancient style. The hem of his gown was high, not touching the ground, and the decorated hem of his formal skirt was clearly visible. The lords were all astonished, and said, 'the ancient system was the same as Tang China, and later ages ought to conform to it.' Haruno, who wore clothing and head-dress in the ancient style, was more than six feet tall and stood out in a crowd. He never went unnoticed at a gathering. A white-haired old man such as he is hardly seen nowadays. He was eighty-two when he died.

We may also refer to the accounts of evil spirits as solid proof of the connection between Yoshitada and the writing in Shoku Nihon Koki. According to his biography in Sandai Jitsuroku, Yoshitada believed in yin and yang and observed many taboos. When evil spirits were abroad he kept his gate closed and would not admit people in order to keep the spirits out, going so far as to close his gate ten times in one month. Accordingly, Shoku Nihon Koki contains a great many entries concerning spirits. There are about thirteen entries concerning the appearances of spirits in the Palace or scripture readings to drive away evil spirits. Such entries are almost non-existent in the other National Histories. This drastic difference points to the hand of Yoshitada, for whom fear of evil spirits was an illness. What about the other compiler, Yoshifusa? He did not actually do the writing nor did his learning have any special qualities. Hence his participation is not particularly apparent, but he did put himself forward strongly in other ways. Yoshifusa's actions are recorded in unnecessary places. Here are some examples. 22nd day, 3rd month, 837. In connection with the departure of the

Shoku Nihon Koki

151

Envoy to Tang, Head of the Bureau of Palace Goods and Services Senior Fifth Rank, Lower, Prince Kusuno and others were sent with offerings to the Great Shrine of Ise. On this day the Emperor did not go to the Great Hall of Audience, because of the rain. Provisional Middle Counsellor, Junior Third Rank, and concurrently General of the Left Guard Fujiwara Ason Yoshifusa led the officials in performing business. i8th day, gth month, 839. Provisional Middle Counsellor, Junior Third Rank, and concurrently General of the Left Guard and Inspector of Mutsu and Dewa Fujiwara Ason Yoshifusa summoned a Private Secretary and gave him the edict of the Tang Emperor to store away. i/th day, ist month, 848. The Minister of the Right Yoshifusa received an imperial decree and led the officials to view archery in the Court of Abundant Pleasures. ajth day, nth month, 849. The Crown Prince called on the Emperor. He presented more than one hundred gifts in the Serene and Cool Hall, and also set out some warm food. The Minister of the Right Fujiwara Ason Yoshifusa, together with two officials and close ministers, accompanied him to the banquet. loth day, intercalary 12th month, 849. The Emperor made a tour around the capital in a palanquin. He gave gifts of money and rice to needy persons. Stopping in front of the prison, the Emperor inquired, 'Whose house is this?' Minister of the Right Fujiwara Ason Yoshifusa answered, 'This is the prison.' Thereupon the Emperor made a special decree of benevolence, pardoning all the prisoners in the jail. The attending ministers were filled with joy, shouting together, 'Long live the Emperor!' All these entries would be complete without the name of Yoshifusa; moreover they do not even deserve inclusion. Haruzumi Yoshitada helped him in this fixed purpose of obtruding his name into the National History, having no reason to oppose him. Let us finally introduce the contents of Shoku Nihon Koki. The time was peaceful, with no major events that shocked the country. The Jowa Affair was the most important political event of this reign. This was a plot in which the Fujiwara family sought to depose Crown Prince Tsunesada and to install in his place Prince Michiyasu, who was a product of the Fujiwara, giving as the formal reason the rebellion of Tomo Kowamine and Tachibana Hayanari. As the man behind the scenes was Yoshifusa, we cannot expect this book to give an account unfavourable to the Fujiwara. It coolly narrates only the surface facts as events unfolded. The incident began with Prince Abo sending a letter to Empress

152


Dowager Saga, who secretly summoned Yoshifusa and gave him the sealed letter. The letter stated that Retired Emperor Saga was about to pass away, and in the expected national disturbance they would elevate the Crown Prince to the throne and go down to the eastern provinces. However, the narration becomes unclear, saying that the contents of the letter were wordy and not concrete. In involving Prince Abo, veteran member of the imperial house and yet unfortunate, and the Sage Empress Dowager, who would be the most powerful person in the palace after Saga's death, one gets the impression that the compilers are skilfully arranging the actors in the narrative. Of course, we cannot say the account is untrue, but the method of writing fully aimed at dramatic effect. There was another rebellion, that of Funya Miyatamaro (twelfth month, 843). Secret information was leaked by a follower before the event, and Miyatamaro was promptly arrested and exiled to Izu Province. Nothing is recorded concerning the reasons for the uprising, but, since it was a year after the deposition of the Crown Prince, it may have arisen out of enmities remaining from that affair. The National History narrates only the leak of information and the process of punishment. In an entry for the fourteenth day, eleventh month, 846, a great deal of space is devoted to the petition alleging violation of the law by the priest Zengai of Horyuji Temple. Former Consultant and Great Controller of the Left Prince Masami and Former Consultant and Great Controller of the Right Wake Matsuna wrote a judgement by the Council of State referring to copper paid in lieu of punishment, and the long version of the Council of State document is appended. The core of the matter was that Zengai of Horyuji filed a suit alleging that the Temple patron Tomi Naona took property belonging to the Temple. The Controllers in the Council of State received the petition, but, since a suit by priests was illegal, the Controllers who accepted it were also in violation of the law, so the matter developed into a legal problem. The judgement given by Chief Justice Sanuki Naganao is given in detail in this order of the Council of State. In the end the affair may have been important in the world of officialdom, as it invited dismissal of the Controllers, but in a broad view it did not deserve so much space. There were no other important events in a society at peace, and the compilers were interested in pedantic legal discussions. Other events include sending the Envoy to Tang China; in fact this turned out to be the last such envoy. The ceremonies were on a large scale. There were two failed attempts before the departure, resulting in the punishment of the Vice-Envoy Ono Takamura. The National

Shoku Nihon Koki

153

History contains entries concerning the mission every year from the appointment in 834, through the departure in the seventh month of 838, to the return of the last ship to Japan in the fourth month of 840. Along with this was the appointment of Ki Mitsu as Envoy to Silla to ensure the safety of the seas. Because of the ineptitude of Mitsu, the suspicions of Silla were aroused against Japan, and the Secretariat of Silla sent a stiff note to the Council of State. There is also the arrival of the Envoy from Parhae in 842, described in an extremely courteous entry. Foreign relations of this kind were a lively aspect of this peaceful reign. There are, further, interesting accounts of natural phenomena. The highlight is the volcanic eruption on Kamitsu Island in Izu on the twenty-third day, ninth month, 840. According to the report from Izu, the eruption was caused by the resentment of the deity Awa, the principal consort deity of Mishima Taisha Shrine, who had not received a court rank, whereas the lesser consort deity had. The change of island geography is narrated beautifully, transposing it into the construction of a multi-storeyed stone palace. On the twenty-ninth day, ninth month, 838, is an entry on 'Rice Flowers.' There came a report that every day from the seventh month to this month, something like ashes fell from the sky, spreading out from Kawachi, Mikawa, Totomi, and Suruga over sixteen provinces of the Tosan and Hokuriku circuits. However, there was no damage, and the Kinai and the seven circuits all had an abundant year. It was reported that elderly farmers named it 'Rice Flowers.' These accounts show that a work devoted to the imperial court still retained the aspect of a history of the nation. COMMENTARIES

In the Hosa Library in Nagoya there is a ten-volume copy of Kawamura Masune's Shoku Koki Shikkai. A note says that it was finished in the twelfth month of 1814, but it is an incomplete work, with many gaps in the notes. The form is the same as the Shikkai on Shoku Nihongi and Nihon Koki, with notes supplied on problematic words and many Chinese source books identified. In the Books Department of the Imperial Household Agency there is a five-volume work, Shoku Nihon Koki Shiki [Private Commentary on Shoku Nihon Koki], by Yano Gendo. There is an inner note stating that it was published in April 1878 in response to a decree of December 1877 to revise the standard histories by supplying research and revision to a previously written private commentary. The difficult words in each volume are taken up, their similarities

154


and differences noted, and related works referred to. However, the theories put forward are not especially worthwhile at the present day. The best-known commentary is Muraoka Yoshisuke's Shoku Nihon Koki Sanko [Shoku Nihon Koki, Edited with Commentary]. This is a printed work of twenty volumes, bound Japanese style; the manuscript was finished around 1902, but publication was not completed until 1912. The section on the year 833 of Shoku Nihon Koki was published serially, in nine numbers of Volume 8 ofKokugakuin Zasshi [Kokugakuin Journal].8 Eighteen different texts were collected and collated, and detailed commentary is provided on the words. It is careful commentary, with research on the differences in the characters in the several texts, sources, and so on. It was selected in 1913 for the Imperial Prize, the third prize ever awarded by the Imperial Japan Academy.

CHAPTER SIX

Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku

COMPILATION

The circumstances of composition of this work are known from the Preface. In 871 Emperor Seiwa decided to compile the history of the preceding reign jnd gave a command to Fujiwara Mototsune, Minabuchi Toshina, Oe Otondo, Yoshibuchi Chikanari, Miyako Yoshika, and Shimada Yoshiomi. The year 871 was only two years after the compilation of Shoku Nihon Koki, and the Emperor, at twenty-two, had reached the age of majority and was capable of independent decisions; hence it was natural to follow the example of Shoku Nihon Koki and compile the history of the preceding reign. However, there are problems with the date 871, because the offices and ranks given for the authors are not the ones they held at that time. The first author named is Fujiwara Mototsune, but his position was recorded as Minister of the Right, Junior Second Rank, and General of the Left Guard. He became Minister of the Right on the twenty-fifth day, eighth month, 872, and he received Junior Second Rank on the seventh day, first month, 873. Ruiju Kokushi gives Junior Third Rank instead of Junior Second Rank, but according to the format for writing ranks and offices, this should read 'Junior Third Rank and shu ^jp Minister of the Right,' where shu indicates that the office is higher than that prescribed for the rank. Therefore 'Third Rank' is probably a copying error for Second Rank. The position of Minabuchi Toshina is recorded as Middle Counsellor, Junior Third Rank, Acting Head of the Ministry of Popular Affairs, and Senior Crown Prince's Mentor. He became Middle Counsellor on the twenty-fifth day, eighth month, 872, at the same time as he was awarded the Junior Third Rank. Senior Sixth Rank, Upper, and Lesser Private Secretary Miyako

156


Yoshika was formerly known as Miyako Tokimichi and changed his name on the seventh day, fifth month, 872, so it is strange that he was called Yoshika in 871. And on the thirteenth day, first month, 873, he was appointed to Junior Fifth Rank, Lower and Great Private Secretary, so the time of the command could not be later than the first month, 873. These three men all held the stated rank and position only between the seventh and the thirteenth day of the first month of 873. However, this is a tight argument, and there may not have been a hard and fast rule to give their names strictly according to their rank at the time. There is no historical source for the time of the compilation decree, and possibly their offices and ranks were written on the basis of later materials rather than on those from the time of the decree. As discussed below, the Preface was ghost-written at the command of his father by Sugawara Michizane, so carelessness may have arisen because he was not directly involved. In the case of Miyako Yoshika, formerly called Tokimichi, in later documents the compilers might have deliberately unified his name with Yoshika, by which he was then known. Moreover, in 871 Mototsune was a Great Counsellor, while Toshina and Otondo were Consultants, an exception to the rule that a Great Minister always supervised the work. Further, in the eighth month of 871, when Jogan Shiki [Procedures of the Jogan Era] was presented to the throne, the names of Toshina and Otondo were listed among the compilers. Finally, in the ninth month of 871 the Empress Dowager Junshi died, and in the ninth month of 872 the Chancellor Fujiwara Yoshifusa passed away, so 871 and 872 were eventful years at court. As it is questionable whether a decree to compile a National History would have been issued at such a busy time, doubt remains regarding the year 871 as the correct date. In his Commentary on the Asahi Shinbun Sha text of Montoku Jitsuroku, Saeki Ariyoshi concludes that 871 is a mistake for 873. As evidence he cites the offices and ranks of the compilers, as well as the Preface, which says, 'During the past three or four years, we have been remiss and negligent in our work.' Saeki says that this reference to 'three or four years' should be understood as the three or four years after 873. However, since the question of offices and ranks cannot be definitively clarified, it is difficult to conclude that the correct year was 873. Fujiwara Mototsune was an adopted son of Yoshifusa and succeeded him as Regent; he also set precedent by taking the position of First Minister. In 871 Yoshifusa was Chancellor; since he was an


157

elderly man of sixty-eight and had just completed compiling Shoku Nihon Koki, he could not have been appointed once again to compile the next National History. There was precedent for his political successor, Mototsune, to supervise the compilation of a National History. Mototsune was outranked by Minister of the Left Minamoto Toru and Minister of the Right Fujiwara Ujimune (he died on the twelfth day, second month, 872, at the age of sixty-five), but neither of them was suitable to appoint to the position over Mototsune. Minabuchi Toshina was the son of Provisional Governor of Inaba Province Minabuchi Nagakawa, a talented official who served at four imperial courts, from Emperor Saga's to Emperor Montoku's. Starting as a student of literature, Toshina held in succession the important posts of Assistant Minister of the Ministry of Ceremonial, Assistant Crown Prince's Mentor, and Controller of the Right. He was appointed Consultant in 864. Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku says, 'He was considered wise and perceptive, gifted with an understanding nature; as an official he was objective and was known to be honest and steadfast.' He was praised for his talent as a government official with literary aptitude. In the third month of 877 he held a party to esteem the agecL_in the tradition of the Tang dynasty poet Bo Juyi, at his Ono villa. Oe Otondo, Fujiwara Fuyup, Sugawara Koreyoshi, Fun'ya Arizane, Sugawara Akio, and Onakatomi Korenao all attended, where they appreciated the late spring day, reciting poems and playing the harp. Toshina passed away in the fourth month of that year, at the age of seventy. As a Consultant and Middle Counsellor with an understanding of scholarship, his appointment added a breath of fresh air to the team of compilers. Oe Otondo started as a Special Student of Literature, passed the policy examination, and moved through the posts of Lesser Private Secretary, Great Private Secretary, Scholar in the Crown Prince's Household, Assistant Minister of the Ministry of Ceremonial, and Controller of the Right. A court noble of scholarly distinction, he was appointed Consultant. By nature he was modest, without a trace of pride. He had a keen understanding of politics and knew tradition by heart; and whenever doubts about procedure arose at the court, he settled the matter by referring to precedent. Although he was a scholar, he was not unskilled in practical matters. Among his works were Gunseki Yoran [Classified Works at a Glance] and Koteihan [Moral Textbook for Emperors]. He also worked on Jogan Kyaku Shiki [Regulations and Procedures of the Jogan Era] and composed the Preface of the work. He was an ideal person to participate in the real work of editing the National History. However, as he passed away in

158


877 at the age of sixty-seven, the command to compile the history must have come out when he was already over sixty, so it is difficult to determine the actual extent of his involvement. Yoshibuchi Chikanari became Great Secretary on the first month of 868, and he appears in the National History in the fourth month of 875 as Provisional Assistant Governor of Yamashiro Province. As Great Secretary he was a natural candidate for the team of compilers. He was also appointed Lecturer at the Nikon Shoki Reading that began in 878, completing his duties at the concluding banquet in 882. Further, he became Doctor of Letters in 886. Although his specialty was the Confucian classics, since he was capable of lecturing on Nihon Shoki he was deeply learned in the National Histories, and thus qualified to be a compiler. In the fourth month of 872 Miyako Yoshika, who was Upper Sixth Rank and Lesser Private Secretary, became Officer in Charge of the Envoys from Parhae. In the first month of 873 he became Great Private Secretary, and on the second month of 875 he became Doctor of Letters; he died on the twenty-fifth day, second month, 879, in the prime of his life, at the age of forty-six. He was a scholar and literary man of whom it was said, 'He was widely learned in histories and biographies; he had a captivating poetical talent, and a voice for reciting that moved the whole capital.' He was the greatest force in the compilation of Montoku Jitsuroku, as discussed below. Shimada Yoshiomi was Junior Fifth Rank and Great Secretary on the twenty-fifth day, second month, 878, when he became Second Lecturer at the Nihon Shoki Reading, as assistant to Yoshibuchi Chikanari. On the twenty-fifth day of the eighth month of that same year, when Prince Sadayasu began his turn at the reading, Shimada was invited, along with Kose Fumio, Miyako Yoshika, and Sugano Korenori, to compose Chinese poems. When the order to compile Montoku Jitsuroku first came out, he held only Dispersed Rank, but he was added to the team of compilers as someone who would eventually attain the position of Great Secretary. These were the six men who received the original command to compile the work; but soon after the decree was issued, Emperor Seiwa abdicated, and Minabuchi Toshina and Oe Otondo died in succession in 877. In 878 Emperor \ozei changed the members of the team in order to continue the work. However, since Emperor \ozei was a child, these matters were probably decided by Fujiwara Mototsune. According to this set-up, Mototsune remained the chairman, with Consultant Sugawara Koreyoshi added to the team. Of the previous compilers, Miyako Yoshika and Shimada Yoshiomi remained, with Yoshibuchi Chikanari retiring. Sugawara Koreyoshi


159

was doubtless the replacement for Oe Otondo; he was one of the leading scholars of the time. He had been Doctor of Letters, Scholar in the Crown Prince's Household, President of the University, and Assistant Minister of Civil Affairs before becoming Consultant. He had also worked on Jogan Kyaku Shiki together with Minabuchi Toshina and Oe Otondo, and among his own works were Togu Setsuin [Phonetically Arranged Dictionary of Rhymes], Ginbo Kanritsu [Poems by Courtiers], Shuin Risshi [Regulated Verse Gathered by Rhyme], and Kaibun Ruiju [Collection of Poems Classified by Occasions]. However, in 878 he was already sixty-seven years old, and he died in 880, less than a year after joining the team. The second stage of compiling Montoku Jitsuroku was thus carried out by Mototsune, Sugawara Koreyoshi, Miyako Yoshika, and Shimada Yoshiomi; but Miyako Yoshika died on the twenty-fifth day, second month, 879, just before the work was completed. He seems to have exhausted himself in working on the book. As the Preface says, 'Yoshika lamented the slowness of completing this work, and at the cost of his life, he began at once the work of recording, but he passed away suddenly/ The three surviving men completed Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, a work of ten volumes, on the thirteenth day, eleventh month, 879. This was the first time that the word Jitsuroku (Veritable Records) was employed for the title of a National History. A work covering only one reign had already appeared, namely, Shoku Nihon Koki, but the compilers had preferred not to change its title to the more appropriate Jitsuroku and retained the older form employing ki (chronicles). However, by the time of Montoku Jitsuroku, the words 'Continued' and 'Later' had been used up, so they must have resolved to adopt a new term, and they came out with Jitsuroku. As for the method of compiling, they wrote, 'We have arranged matters chronologically and adhered strictly to the sequence of events. We have attempted to be impartial in the chronicle of events and have not omitted the most minute detail of significance. However, trivial remarks and minor affairs of little consequence have been discarded and omitted.' This principle is propounded in the preceding National Histories, but here it gives the impression of nothing more than a heading, without being anything concrete. The Preface was actually written not by the compilers but by Sugawara Koreyoshi's son Michizane. Michizane was then thirty-five years old, and, as Doctor of Letters and Second Vice-Minister of Ceremonial, he did not lack maturity and status. However, it was not a book that he had produced by his own hand. We do not know why Koreyoshi gave over the writing of the Preface to his son, but it is

160


natural that Michizane could not write sentences that soared. The perfunctory result was not flattering to either Koreyoshi or Michizane. CONTENTS

Montoku Jitsuroku is a National History covering the single reign of Emperor Montoku, from the third month of 850 to the eight month of 858, which amounted to eight years and six months. Since it is a ten-volume work, each volume covers, on average, slightly more than ten months, which is about the same proportion as Shoku Nihon Koki. It also coincides with the latter in covering the reign of a single Emperor and in its dense annalistic contents. However, it has its own special characteristics: the small number of entries related to politics and law, and the large number of biographical entries. The small number of entries on politics and law is readily apparent upon the most desultory reading. To demonstrate the quantity, a comparison can be made with Ruiju Sandai Kyaku in order to see how many of the kyaku that ought to have been included actually were. A comparison with the other National Histories has already been given in Table 4, Recording of kyaku. Of the fifty-two kyaku issued during the period covered by Montoku Jitsuroku that are recorded in Ruiju Sandai Kyaku, only two are fully recorded in Montoku Jitsuroku. There are five in which there is a variance in the date or the contents are abbreviated or summarized in Montoku Jitsuroku, and the remaining forty-five are not included at all. Thus 87 per cent of the kyaku are omitted. This is twice the rate of Sandai Jitsuroku (42 per cent) and Shoku Nihongi (43 per cent) and is much higher than Nihon Koki (51 per cent) and Shoku Nihon Koki (61 per cent). Kyaku were direct expressions of government activities, and their omission is the best evidence of the thin political coverage of the work. More specifically, what kind of kyaku were ignored in the work? Let us take two or three cases. For example, the kyaku connected with Buddhism in Ruiju Sandai Kyaku are collected in Volumes 2 and 3, in a total of 161 entries, of which eleven bear a date in the period covered by Montoku Jitsuroku. Yet not one is included in Montoku Jitsuroku, although some concern significant matters. There is a kyaku that added two persons to Enryakuji Temple as annual initiates, in accordance with a request from Ennin dated the fourteenth day, twelfth month, 850; they were to read the Kongocho-kyo [Diamond Peak Sutra] and the Soshitsuji-kyo [Sutra on the Accomplishment of Perfection], an important step in establishing the Enryakuji Temple as an esoteric sect. Three persons were added as annual initiates to


161

the Shingon sect, in accordance with the memorial of Shinzei on the seventeenth day, fourth month, 853; these people entered the priesthood at Jingo] i Temple, a significant measure in the development of the Shingon sect. Since these two kyaku were both long decrees of the Council of State, they could not have been overlooked. Thus we conclude that it was the compilers' intention from the beginning not to include such materials. On the twenty-third day, eighth month, 855, the grades of the examinations were established, with the requirements for the five grades of Lectures and three grades of Readers set out; this fundamental measure was frequently cited in kyaku of later times. Again, this is not found in the National History. Other kyaku not included: to make up the deficiency of priests in the Kashima Jinguji Temple, the provincial governor and chief priest were to select five people from among the ordinary people and train them (fifth day, eighth month, 850); the Kaiin Zanmaiji Temple was given an allotment, and two annual initiates were provided (twenty-second day, third month, 851); and the examination discourse for the annual initiates of the Kegon sect was to be revised (twenty-first day, fifth month, 851). It appears that Montoku Jitsuroku was extremely indifferent towards kyaku concerning Buddhism. One entry in Montoku Jitsuroku appears to be an exception. The entry for the twenty-second day, eighth month, 858, says, Tor the first time Lecturers and Readers were appointed for the Shingon sect in all the provinces, in accordance with the other sects/ This appears to be a summary of the text of a kyaku, and indeed a corresponding kyaku in Volume 3 of Ruiju Sandal Kyaku gives a decree of the Council of State for the fifth day, eighth month, 837: 'Priests of the Shingon sect to be appointed annually as Lecturers and Readers in the provinces.' In this case the compilers of Montoku Jitsuroku may have taken the text of the kyaku, but they made a grave error in making the year 858 instead of 837. This suggests that they did not check the original text of Jogan Kyaku, which entered the date as the fifth day, eighth month, 837. These cases are related only to Buddhism, but there are others related to the governance of the population. There is an order of the twenty-fifth day, fifth month, 853, to leave no time between the completion of surveys and the assignment of fields, and an order of the first day, tenth month, 854, to speed up the reporting of damaged fields and uncultivated fields. There is an order of the nineteenth day, ninth month, 855, regulating the salary of the technicians of the coin mint; an order of the first day, eleventh month, 855, adding one assistant secretary to the same office; and an

TABLE 8

Biographies Imperial princes, empresses Shoku Nihongi Nihon Koki Shoku Nihon Koki Montoku Jitsuroku Sandai Jitsuroku

23 3 15 11 34

1st rank

2nd rank

3rd rank

4th rank

5th rank

5

19 3 5 2 4

63 8 9 5 18

17 18 29 21 56

6

1

34 29

Priests

Criminals

6 4 7 6 8

3 2 1 2

Unknown

Total

Rate per year

1

142 38 65 80 153

1.5 4.0 3.8 9.4 5.2

163


order of the tenth day, eleventh month, 857, raising the ranks of the officials in the Office for Investigation of the Records of Outgoing Officials. All these items ought to have been recorded in Montoku Jitsuroku, but they were not. The other National Histories recorded such matters. As for allotment lands, Volume 159 of Ruiju Kokushi records three items from Nihon Koki and Sandai Jitsuroku, which shows that they were genuine historical events. Entries regarding the allotted number for the mint and the Office for Investigation of the Records of Outgoing Officials are also recorded in the other National Histories, regardless of the number of entries; this may be readily seen from the Section on Government Officials in Chapter 107 of Ruiju Kokushi. The second special characteristic of Montoku Jitsuroku is the abundance of biographies, which is best illustrated by a chart (Table 8). Here we consider a biography to be any entry that supplies, in connection with the person's death, either the identity of his parents or his age. Compared to the other histories, Montoku Jitsuroku has far more, with 6.2 times the rate per year of Shoku Nihongi, 2.5 times the rate of Shoku Nihon Koki, and 1.8 times the rate of Sandai Jitsuroku. There are cases where the National Histories recorded the deaths of persons but not their biographies; the numbers may be seen in Table 9. TABLE 9

Death notices without biographies Imperial princes Shoku Nihongi Nihon Koki Shoku Nihon Koki Montoku Jitsuroku Sandai Jitsuroku

2

2nd 3rd 4th 5th rank rank rank rank 1 1

10 2 2

118 4 21

Priests

Total

2

133 7 23 1

1

10

2

3

15

Entries that record the death of a person and the sending of condolence gifts, but do not include a biography, are also included. Starting with the 133 cases of Shoku Nihongi, each history has a number of such entries, but there is only one in Montoku Jitsuroku. In other words, it included a biography without fail at the person's death. This enthusiasm for biographies is striking in comparison to the other Histories.

164


From Table 8, it is evident that the increase in biographies in Montoku Jitsuroku resulted from enlarging the range of the court ranks eligible for biographies. Basically, each History faithfully recorded the deaths of those of the fourth rank and above in detail, but when they got to the fourth rank people, they abbreviated considerably. Montoku Jitsuroku, however, abbreviated nothing. For people of the fifth rank, Nihon Koki and Shoku Nihon Koki did not include even a notice of death. Shoku Nihongi has biographies for six people of the fifth rank, but these were exceptional cases. In Montoku Jitsuroku, the death notices and biographies for people of the fifth rank are faithfully recorded. It is not clear whether the practice extended to everyone of the fifth rank, but since they appear at the rate of 1.5 times those of the fourth rank, there were probably not many omissions. In Sandai Jitsuroku the fifth rank is included, but since there are only twenty-nine entries, in contrast to the fifty-six of the fourth rank, it is certain that a considerable number were omitted. In sum, in contrast to the other National Histories, Montoku Jitsuroku included a great number of people of the fifth rank, and this was a significant feature of the work. The biographies are thoughtful and overflowing with human interest. There is neither the stern criticism of Nihon Koki nor the formality of Shoku Nihon Koki. The compilers observed people genially and wrote with sympathy for their situations. Here is an example: 2nd day, 4th month, 850. Imperial Prince Fujii, Governor-General of the Government Headquarters in Kyushu, Prince of the Third Order, died. He was the twelfth child of Emperor Kanmu. His mother was Haruko, Junior Fourth Rank, Lower, daughter of Major Counsellor Sakanoue Osukune Tamuramaro, posthumously awarded Senior Second Rank. The Prince was an expert archer, inheriting the skill of his grandfather Tamuramaro. At one time Emperor Saga went to the Court of Abundant Pleasures to view archery rites. At the conclusion of the ceremonies, the Emperor commanded the Imperial Princes and numerous subjects to take turns in shooting. The Imperial Prince was then twelve years old. The Emperor jokingly said to him, 'You are still young, but you should take up the bow and arrow.' The Prince arose to comply with the Emperor's words; twice he shot, and twice he hit dead centre. His grandfather Tamuramaro, who was also present, was so astonished and delighted that he was unable to restrain himself. He arose and danced about, embracing the Prince. Advancing to the Emperor, he said, T once led several hundred thousand troops in an expedition against the eastern barbarians. By the grace of the Imperial prestige,


165

none were able to stand up to us anywhere. To my mind, I have studied only a few military stratagems and arts. Now this Imperial Prince is very young, yet look at his military skill! It is beyond anything that I could ever attain.' The Emperor laughed heartily, and said 'General, your praise of your grandson is too high!'

Here we see not only the excellence of Prince Fujii at archery but also Tamuramaro unreservedly rejoicing at the military accomplishment of his grandson. Even in such a famous general as Tamuramaro, there was affectionate feeling for a family member. 22nd day, 12th month, 852. Consultant and Controller of the Left, Junior Third Rank Ono Takamura died. In 834 he was appointed Vice-Envoy to Tang. In the spring of 838 the four ships of the Envoy to Tang sailed in succession. However, ship number one, with the Great Envoy Consultant, Junior Fourth Rank, Upper, Fujiwara Tsunetsugu on board, sprang a leak. By imperial decree, ship number two, that of the ViceEnvoy, was made into ship number one for the Great Envoy. Takamura protested this, saying, 'The Imperial Council is not consistent, and decisions are changed several times. Also, when the order and numbering of the ships were first determined, the best ship was chosen for ship number one, and after arrangements were made, the expedition got under way. Now the decision is entirely changed, and I am assigned a dangerous vessel. The Great Envoy has put his own welfare first, at the cost of risk and damage to others. From the viewpoint of human feelings, this is unjust. How can he be a leader when he has lost prestige? I am poor; and my parents are old and in poor health. For these reasons I ought to retire from official life, to serve my parents by drawing water and gathering firewood.' He was firmly determined in his principle, and he never set foot on board the ship again. In recent years, at the Foreign Envoy's Quarters at the Government Headquarters in Kyushu, there was a man from Tang China named Shen Daogu, who heard of Takamura's abilities and often sent him rhymed verse. Every time he saw Takamura's response, he praised the beauty of Takamura's rhymes. In the spring, ist month, 839, Takamura's name was struck from the family register because he had disobeyed the imperial decree; he was reduced to the status of a commoner and exiled to the Province of Oki. He composed a poem of ten seven-character lines on his journey to exile. The words were beautiful, and the inspiration elegant and profound; it was recited by all who knew literature. His writing at that time was unequaled in all the land. His facility in both the cursive and square types of calligraphy

i66


was in a class with the two Wangs. All students of writing and calligraphy used him as a model.

This tells the incident of the ship for the Envoy to Tang with sympathy for Takamura's position. What might have been excluded from Shoku Nihon Koki with reservations is recorded straight-forwardly. Nor did the compilers neglect to praise the true worth of Takamura as a man of letters. No doubt they had a strong affinity for literary people, but his account draws our sympathy on its own merits. Widening the range of biographies to the fifth rank, and writing such sympathetic accounts, means that the authors held affection for people and honoured human feelings. They recognized the endeavours of the people who made history and the significance of their emotions and took pleasure in giving them beautiful literary expression. Who among the compilers would have been most responsible for this? The most likely would be Oe Otondo, Sugawara Koreyoshi, and Miyako Yoshika, who were first-rate literary men but could also accomplish purposes beyond literature. However, as noted previously, Otondo was sixty-one years old in 871 and died in 877; thus he was not part of the second team of compilers. Possibly Koreyoshi was added to the second team in his place, but in 878 he was sixtyseven, and the degree to which he participated in the actual writing is doubtful. Thus we arrive at Miyako Yoshika, who worked on the history from the outset and probably had the greatest impact on its wording. Yoshika's characteristics match exactly the special features of the work. Yoshika died in the second month of 879 at the age of forty-six, ten days before the completion of the work; in 871 he was still only thirty-eight. The Miyako Ason family was formerly the Kuwabara Kimi family; in the time of Yoshika's father, Sadatsugu, it received the family name of Miyako Sukune, and in 877 it became the lowranking aristocratic family Miyako Ason. Sadatsugu finished his career as Head of the Accounts Office, Junior Fifth Rank, Lower. Yoshika had superb talent in Chinese poetry, but he was poor and without possessions, and daily life was a struggle. He was a Buddhist and deeply learned in Shingon mysteries. He was said to be resilient in build and very strong. Quite different from the ordinary literary aristocrats, he seems to have had much depth. There seems to be a relationship between his own background and the broadening of the biographies to include the fifth rank, and the human sympathy in them may have arisen because he recalled his own suffering as a member of a humble social stratum.


167

There is another particular feature of the writing style that demonstrates Yoshika's connection with the work. That is, when recording natural phenomena, a phrase was added, 'Why is this written? To record the strange.' For example: 'i4th day, 12th month, 850. There was thunder. Why is this written? To record the strange.' 'ayth day, 3rd month, 851. There were water-fowl; they were small and resembled herons. Their name is not known. They flocked onto the plum tree before the Palace. Why is this written? To record the strange.' '24th day, jth month, 851. There was a dead snake in front of the South Palace. It had been wounded on the head, as if something had bitten it. Why is this written? To record the strange.' 'Winter, 851. It was hot. Why is this written? To record the strange.' 'Spring, 854. It was cold, with frost. Why is this written? To record calamity.'

This style of recording is entirely absent from the other Five National Histories. Further, inclusion of the simple phrases 'To record the strange' and 'To record calamity' arose from the strong attachment of the authors to this style of writing. The source of these phrases is the Chinese classics, specifically, the Commentaries of Gong Yang on the Chun Qiu, where they are frequently used. For example, in Volume i, third year of Yin Gong, where it records, 'There was a solar eclipse/ it adds, 'Why is this written? To record the strange.' In the ninth month of the fifth year it says, 'There were caterpillars/ and adds, 'Why is this written? To record calamity.' The Commentaries of Gong Yang was not originally the subject of lectures at the Japanese university. However, at the suggestion of lyobe Yakamori, who had gone to China in the Nara period, from 798 on lectures were given on the Commentaries of Gong Yang and the Commentaries of Gu Liang, holding them as equivalent to minor classics. Yakamori's sons Yoshimichi and Masasada carried on, lecturing on the three Commentaries (the third being Zuo Zhuan). Thus the academic study of Gong Yang and Gu Liang attracted some scholars as a new discipline in the early Heian period. Someone among the compilers of Montoku Jitsuroku was familiar with the Commentaries of Gong Yang. We may surmise that it was Yoshika from his submission to the court on the occasion of the fire

168


in the Great Hall of Audience in the fourth month of 876, when views were requested from scholars on whether court should be suspended, and again in the fourth month of 877, when a solar eclipse took place and scholars were asked whether duties should be suspended. On both occasions he cited the Commentaries of Gu Liang. By analogy, we may suppose that he was familiar with the Commentaries of Gong Yang. In a 1668 edition of the Commentaries of Gong Yang and Gu Liang with the notation by Doshun, a preface by Shunsai cites Miyako Yoshika, lyobe Yakamori, and Fujiwara Yorinaga as Japanese who were familiar with scholarship on Gong and Gu. The source of Shunsai's information is not known, but Yoshika seems to have been conversant with the Commentaries of Gong Yang. This indicates that Yoshika was the source of entries on 'the strange' and 'calamities' and was the compiler with the deepest relationship with Montoku Jitsuroku. His interest in the circumstances of the common people, from whom he came, was responsible for the incidents found among the otherwise monotonous entries concerning the court. Such are the dialect of the common people relating to cudweed (fifth day, fifth month, 850); the tale of the eminent priest Beifun who won the adoration of women of the capital with his deceptive ascetic practices (twenty-second day, seventh month, 854); and the descent of the gods on Oarai seashore in Hitachi Province (twenty-ninth day, twelfth month, 856). He took as the material for his writing the geographical features of local regions and the traditions of the people. COMMENTARIES

In the Hosa Library in Nagoya there is the five-volume Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku Shikkai [Collected Commentaries on Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku]. Written by Kawamura Masune, it has a note that work was stopped on the sixth day, fifth month, 1815. The format is the same as for the previous collected commentaries, with accurate notes. It is a pity, however, that the work was unfinished. In the Books Department of the Imperial Household Agency there are two works by Yano Gendo, Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku Shiki [Private Commentary on Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, two volumes] and a similar work on Shoku Nihon Koki. They are very simple and not of much use. There is a note inside bearing the date May 1878. Otherwise, Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku has not attracted much scholarly attention.

CHAPTER SEVEN

Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku

CONTENTS

As in the other National Histories, the circumstances of compilation of this work are known from the Preface. According to the Preface, Emperor Uda commanded Minamoto Yoshiari, Fujiwara Tokihira, Sugawara Michizane, Okura Yoshiyuki, and Mimune Masahira to compile the history of the reigns of Emperors Seiwa, \e>zei, and Koko. The year is not recorded in the Preface, so we shall use our customary method of investigating their offices and ranks. Minamoto Yoshiari is recorded as Great Counsellor, Senior Third Rank, and, concurrently, General of the Left Guard, Crown Prince's Mentor, and Inspector of Mutsu and Dewa. In 893 he became General of the Left Guard while concurrently holding the post of Inspector. The thirteenth day of the fourth month of that year was when he also became Crown Prince's Mentor. As this was the day on which Prince Atsuhito became Crown Prince, Yoshiari could not have been Crown Prince's Mentor before that date. Tokihira was also Master of the Crown Prince's Household, and Michizane was Assistant, so for the same reason they held these posts after the thirteenth day of the fourth month of 893. Next, the lower limit is established by Michizane's concurrent appointment as Chief Envoy to Tang China on the twenty-first day, eighth month, 894. Subsequent to this he added 'Great Envoy to Tang' to his formal name, but this does not appear in the Preface. Consequently, it must have been written before the twenty-first day, eighth month, 894. Thus a target period emerges of one year and four months between the fourth month of 893 and the eighth month of 894. However, in Nihon Kiryaku [Abbreviated History of Japan] the entry for the first day, fifth month, 892, says, 'Great Counsellor

i/o


Minamoto Yoshiari, Consultant Fujiwara Tokihira, Great Secretary Okura Yoshiyuki, and others received the imperial command to have them compile the National History.'1 This presents a discrepancy of about one year. There is no basis for determining which is correct, but Nihon Kiryaku has numerous mistakes in chronology after the reign of Emperor Uda, with many double citations and datings within one or two years before or after an event, and it is likely that Nihon Kiryaku is in error. Let us surmise that 892 is an error for 893, although the date of the first day of the fifth month may be correct. Taking the first day, fifth month, 893, for the imperial command is a compromise solution, but it may not be objectionable. The selection of these compilers may have come as the result of careful thought on the part of Emperor Uda. He went against the custom of having a Great Minister or a member of the Fujiwara as chief compiler. In 893 the Minister of the Left was Minamoto Tom and the Minister of the Right was Fujiwara Yoshiyo, but both of them were seventy-two years of age, too old to compile the National History. If Uda had followed the custom of appointing the head of the northern branch of the Fujiwara family, he could have made Fujiwara Tokihira chief compiler, and to do so he just had to wait for a while. But the Emperor did not wait, and he established Great Counsellor Yoshiari as chief compiler. This Emperor did not appreciate the exclusive hegemony of the Fujiwara family. Minamoto Yoshiari was a son of Emperor Montoku and had held various positions, becoming Great Counsellor in 891. In 892, for the first time, he presented the report on miscellaneous matters for the Controllers, for which, according to Kugyo Bunin [Record of Appointments to Public Office], there was no precedent.2 Because Yoshiari was a man of talent, the Emperor made him chief compiler in an attempt to break the seeming hereditary right of the Fujiwara. This may have been one of the few measures that remained to him against Fujiwara control. However, the Emperor's hopes were disappointed, because Yoshiari died in the sixth month of 897. Whether related to this or not, the Emperor abdicated in the following month, and work was temporarily suspended. Emperor Daigo then came to the throne, and it was resolved to continue the work. The new Emperor, having no special intention of restraining the Fujiwara family, appointed Fujiwara Tokihira, Sugawara Michizane, Okura Yoshiyuki, and Mimune Masahira as compilers. Tokihira was a natural choice for chief compiler, since he was Minister of the Left. Michizane, also a Minister, was appointed as well. Two Ministers were too many, but Michizane was probably chosen especially because of his high reputation as a Confucian scholar of history and literature. Yoshiyuki and Masahira


171

were both Great Secretaries, associated with the project since its first stage. Thus no new compilers were added at the second stage. Apart from Yoshiari, they remained the same as at the first stage and carried out the compilation. This impression of the closed nature of the enterprise is confirmed by looking at the time of completion, when the work was presented to the throne. It was finished on the second day, eighth month, 901, at which time only Tokihira and Yoshiyuki remained of the compilers. The names of these two are seen in the Preface, listed proudly after the date. In the first month of that year Michizane had been convicted of treason and sent to Dazaifu, and in the second month Masahira had been made Assistant Governor of Echizen and was thus separated from the work. However, Masahira had been ViceGovernor of Bitchu at the time he was first named as a compiler - an absentee appointment. In the later appointment to Echizen, it is not known whether he left the capital, but his share of the work on the National History merited the listing of his name in the Preface. In Michizane's case, one has the distinct feeling of hearing the victorious cry of Tokihira's side after the expulsion of Michizane from the capital. We might also conjecture that the book was substantially completed earlier, and the presentation to the throne was delayed to make it come at this time, when only Tokihira and Yoshiyuki remained. One reason for such a conjecture is the unusual relationship between Tokihira and Yoshiyuki. In 901 Yoshiyuki was seventy years old. In the autumn of that year, Tokihira was master of ceremonies at Yoshiyuki's birthday party, held at Tokihira's villa. Six of Yoshiyuki's disciples and friends gathered, and they all composed Chinese poems, which are preserved in a collection entitled Zogen Howa [Poems Presented on Miscellaneous Topics]. The Preface was written by Ki Haseo. Tokihira contributed two poems of seven-word phrases under the name Tujiwara Tokihira, disciple of Yoshiyuki.' Such a lively party, held after the banishment of Michizane to the west, was an undisguised sigh of relief and joy by the Fujiwara family and the literary men who followed it, and illustrates the complexities of the scholarly literary circles of the time. The compilation of Sandai Jitsuroku inevitably had the same intellectual background. Among the five men who compiled the work, Minamoto Yoshiari and Fujiwara Tokihira were the leaders, so they probably did not participate in the actual writing. Doubtless this was entrusted to Sugawara Michizane, Okura Yoshiyuki, and Mimune Masahira. Of these three, Michizane and Yoshiyuki were opposed to one another. What about Masahira? He was a disciple of Yoshiyuki and attended

172


Yoshiyuki's seventieth birthday celebration, composing a Chinese poem for the occasion, so it is clear that he was on Yoshiyuki's side. He moved from Great Secretary to First Private Secretary and was entrusted with compiling Engi Shiki as well as attending the Engi lectures on Nihon Shoki and writing the Preface to the poems at the completion banquet. He later became a Doctor of Letters, and his poems were commended by later generations. Since he died in 926 at the age of seventy-four, he was forty-nine in 901, twenty-one years younger than Yoshiyuki. Thus he was capable of understanding Yoshiyuki's intentions for the history. Of course Yoshiyuki's intentions were carried out in this book by himself, but we may also suppose that at places they were actualized by Masahira. People of the time also thought there was a deep connection between Yoshiyuki and this book because Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku records Sandal Jitsuroku as 'Compiled by Okura Yoshiyuki.'3 Also, Shugaisho [Selected Gleanings, later Kamakura period], while recording 'Minister of the Left Tokihira received the imperial command andj:ompiled it,' determined the actual compiler, adding, 'In actuality, Okura Yoshiyuki compiled it.' According to these external signs, Yoshiyuki was the most powerful among the compilers. This is confirmed by the contents. That is, Yoshiyuki's name appears at many places in the book, in violation of the customs of the National Histories. There was a basic rule of restricting accounts of the activities of officials to those of the fifth rank and above; accounts of appointments and awards of rank also began with those of the fifth rank and above. The names of those below the fifth rank did not appear, apart from cases of special achievement. Okura Yoshiyuki was promoted from Senior Sixth Rank, Upper, to Outer Junior Fifth Rank, Lower, on the seventh day, first month, 887, and since the final, fiftieth volume of Sandai Jitsuroku covered the period from the first month to the eighth month of 887, there should have been extremely few occasions for Yoshiyuki's name to appear. In spite of this, entries involving Yoshiyuki appear eight times, starting as early as 876. i4th day, yth month, 876. Previously, in the loth month of the preceding year, Scattered Rank Okura Yoshiyuki was appointed to the Chamberlain's Office to proofread imperial letters. At the same time he instructed young princes and interested aristocrats in the palace in Yanshi Jiaxun [Instructions for the Yan Family], finishing on this date. Under imperial command, a completion banquet was held, at which the university students of literature were made to present Chinese poems.


173

This matter has no place in an account of a particular date. It is there to display the accomplishments of Okura Yoshiyuki. Yoshiyuki's name appears four times in 883. As they concern his appointment to receive the Envoy from Parhae, it was natural to record it. However, one entry says, '8th day, 3rd month, 883. Officer to Receive the Envoy from Parhae, Lesser Secretary Okura Yoshiyuki and Second Secretary in the Ministry of Ceremonial Takashina Shigenori marched to the inner palace to present a memorial and then departed. Each of them received as a gift a formal skirt of the Emperor.' Such entries as the preceding and the following seem to have been written specifically to record the individual activities of Yoshiyuki. 3rd day, loth month, 885. Previously, Great Secretary Okura Yoshiyuki presented a petition explaining that 'there are two temples in Yamato Province where miracles occur - Hase and Tsubosaka. They both have rice for lamp-expenses. The Provincial Governor is ordered to collect the interest from government rice-seed loans. However, Kojimayamadera Temple comes second to those two in producing miracles, but it has no fund for lamps. For illumination at daybreak and at night there is nothing but the stars and the moon. My request is that 400 shocks of rice-grain from my fields be given to the Provincial Governor and made part of the regular taxation income. The interest from rice-seed loans will be sent to the temple to fund bright lamps in perpetuity.' On this date an imperial order was given, granting this request.

The allotment of four hundred bundles of regular taxation to Kojimayamadera is also seen in the tax regulations of Engi Shiki, but this entry undeniably came from a desire to exalt Yoshiyuki. Turning the National History into a private thing is abominable; but, as noted previously, Yoshifusa had already done this in Shoku Nihon Koki. Sugawara Michizane does not appear to the same degree. As a bureaucrat and a scholar, Michizane occupied a position far higher than Yoshiyuki, and the range of his activities was much wider, so his name appears frequently in Sandai Jitsuroku. In addition, many of the pieces that he drafted appear as imperial decrees and reports to the throne. Nevertheless, if we take the number of entries involving Yoshiyuki as the standard, the number concerning Michizane should be perhaps double what actually appears. The collection of Michizane's Chinese poems, Kanke Bunso [The Sugawara Literary Drafts], constitutes a valuable historical source, recording chronologically his activities as well as his writings. There are incidents that were worthy of entry in the National History but

174


were not recorded. For example, he drafted the first statement of gratitude by Chancellor Yoshifusa for attendants appointed annually (fourteenth day, fourth month, 871) as well as the second statement (eighteenth day, fourth month, 871), both of which are recorded in Sandai Jitsuroku, but the third (twentieth day, fourth month, 871) is not recorded. Prince Koretaka's first statement of gratitude for special endowment is recorded (eighteenth day, tenth month, 874), but not the second (twenty-fifth day, tenth month, 874) and the third (eleventh month, 874). Another example is the bestowal of imperial papers presenting court rank to the Envoy from Parhae in the fifth month of 872, which is not recorded. Since it was a policy of Sandai Jitsuroku to record all imperial edicts and reports to the throne, these omissions constitute an exception. From this we might infer that Michizane did not participate much in the compilation of Sandai Jitsuroku. We may conjecture that Yoshiyuki managed everything by himself and that Michizane was denied power of expression. However, this conjecture is based on the unlikely assumption that Michizane wanted to exhibit himself in the same way as did Yoshiyuki. It is rash to conclude from the scarcity of entries concerning Michizane that he did not participate much in the writing; while he was not eager to record his own activities, there are sufficiently detailed entries concerning his father, Koreyoshi. For example, there is the biography of Koreyoshi at the time of his death. This was unfortunately shortened at the time of copying, so that we do not have the complete form, but as inferred from the portions contained in Fuso Ryakki* and Ruiju Kokushi, his personality and accomplishments were recorded in considerable detail, and praised. In particular his writings were recorded thoroughly, in a manner not applied to other people: 'Koreyoshi compiled Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, ten volumes; Doctor of Letters Miyako Ason Yoshika participated. By himself he wrote Togu Setsuin, twenty volumes; Ginbo Kanritsu, ten volumes; Shuin Risshi, ten volumes; and Kaibun Ruiju, seventy volumes. In addition, Kashu [Private Collection of Poems], ten volumes.' The statement that Montoku Jitsuroku was the work of a single individual, which was clearly not the case, also displays a strong bias toward Koreyoshi. On the fourteenth day, third month, 861, repairs were completed to the Great Buddha at Todaiji, and a general assembly of believers, without distinction of rank, was held. This is recorded in detail, which is acceptable, but the long prayer is recorded without omission of a single word. With regard to this it says, 'Prior to this, Junior Fourth Rank, Lower, Doctor of Letters, Provisional Governor of Harima Sugawara Ason Koreyoshi was commanded to compose the


175

prayer/ This, together with the prayer, exalted Koreyoshi's achievements. As a filial son, Michizane wanted as much as possible to leave on record in the National History his father's accomplishments. Thus we cannot see this National History as having been entirely managed by Yoshiyuki; Michizane and Yoshiyuki probably had equally large parts in its compilation. CONTENTS

Sandai Jitsuroku covers the reigns of Emperors Seiwa, \ozei, and Koko, in twenty-nine years and one month, from the twenty-seventh day, eighth month, 858, to the twenty-sixth day, eighth month, 887. There are fifty volumes, so each one covers about seven months; it contains the most detailed entries among the National Histories. It is more detailed because historical facts worthy of inclusion grew more abundant with the passing of time. Objectively, the number of people of the fifth rank and above became far more numerous. More than that, the method of compilation sought to include materials not taken up by the preceding National Histories. It included annual events and ceremonies, even though they were the same every year, and, as far as possible, the full texts of imperial decrees and memorials to the throne, which the preceding National Histories had largely abbreviated. For dates, not only are the sexagenary signs used, but the numerical dates are given with them - a particular feature of this work. In this they were following the style of the Chinese Diaries of Activity and Repose, but it further increased the size of their work. After all, the experience of compiling a National History had now been repeated several times, and, as it was an era when the scholars of history and literature made great progress, it was natural that a more sophisticated style should appear in this book. As was customary, the principles of compilation are stated in the Preface. In this compilation we have tried to be concise and correct. The activities of the Emperor are all recorded, and the Emperor's words are included. We follow up the five rituals, and the developments in all matters under the Emperor's governance. Good omens show Heaven's approval, while natural calamities are Heaven's warning to the Emperor. They show whether policies are reasonable, so we record them all. Ceremonies at court banquets, the system of festival observances, the reception of foreign envoys, and other such matters, being governed by long-established regulations, are given in outline. A few

176


explanatory notes are given where temporary matters have become matters of regular practice. Events of the street, which do not edify, and fabrications, are rejected.

This statement may be divided into four parts, illuminating the standards of selection of facts and recording in Sandai Jitsuroku. First, the actions and words of the Emperor, ceremonies of the state, government, good omens, and natural calamities are all recorded. The intention of recording all the actions of the Emperor also appears in the Preface of Shoku Nihon Koki and was natural for a National History that took the form of a Veritable Record. The five rituals were the rituals for good luck, bad luck, war, foreign envoys, and praise, the latter referring specifically to the accession, comingof-age, and funeral ceremonies of the Emperor. In Sandai Jitsuroku the accession and coming-of-age ceremonies for Emperors Seiwa and \ozei are extremely detailed. Fujiwara Tokihira's coming-of-age is also very detailed (first month, 886). This special account of Tokihira resulted from his own discretionary power as compiler, and from Yoshiyuki, who shared his intentions, but it was also in accord with the stated policy of including accounts of all ceremonies. Good omens and natural calamities were also well covered in the other National Histories, but in this history they were all included. As only portions survive of the sections on good omens and natural calamities in Ruiju Kokushi, we lack sufficient material. However, to get a glimpse of the situation, Table 10 displays the frequency in the Six National Histories of clouds, snow, and trees intertwined branches in the section on good omens, and earthquakes and fires in the section on natural calamities. If we take account of the number of years covered, the great numbers of phenomena recorded in Sandai Jitsuroku are not that surprising. Rather, every National History had a principle of recording good omens and natural calamities, and Sandai Jitsuroku was no exception. We may conclude that the intention announced in the Preface was carried out. Second, court banquets and festival rites, the reception of foreign envoys, and so on, which were regulated by fixed procedures, were given in outline, and detailed entries were cut out. In fact, looking at Sandai Jitsuroku, we see that for such things as the New Year's court banquets, ceremony of the white horses, and singing and dancing in the palace by men and women respectively on the sixteenth day of the first month, as well as the ceremonies at the Hirano, Hirose, Tatsuta, Kasuga, Kamo, and Umenomiya Shrines, there is simply an entry that they were performed, with no reference to their detailed


177

TABLE 1O

Omens and calamities Good omens

Clouds Snow Nihon Shoki Shoku Nihongi Nihon Koki Shoku Nihon Koki Montoku Jitsuroku Sandai Jitsuroku

0 7 5 3 2 8

0 1 23 0 4 18

Natural calamities

Trees with intertwined branches

Earthquakes

Fires

2 8 2 0 7 30

25 84 112 48 94 293

12 19 18 14 9 39

contents. Because the procedures were designated in detail by regulations on ceremonies and on the duties of officials, the compilers judged that there was no need to record them in the National History. Even so, by just giving the outlines, they did what the other National Histories had neglected. Recording the performance of the ceremonies every year without exception is one reason for the increase in the number of entries. Third, if there were exceptional matters that became customary through repeated practice, notes were to be added in order to explain the circumstances. These are scattered throughout Sandai Jitsuroku. Let us take an example. 'iQth day, 8th month, 858. The YinYang Bureau reported that at night a star had entered the Shibikyu Palace. It was red as blazing fire, and more than ten feet in length. Generally when there are astronomical changes in wind and clouds, the head of the Yin-Yang Bureau consults with the doctors of astronomy and they submit a sealed report. The history compilation office obtains a draft from the Yin-Yang Bureau and records it in the book of history.' This entry records that the Yin-Yang Bureau reported a change in the stars; it records the method of reporting in such cases and the usual procedure by which it was recorded in a history book. Unlike court banquets and festival ceremonies, which had longestablished written regulations, procedures in government offices were regulated by custom. This National History tries to explain these, which is considerate of the reader. Fourth, they rejected fabrications and everyday affairs of the street that did not serve any purpose in edifying the people. There

178


are examples in the other National Histories of matters that the compilers rejected in similar fashion. The statement regarding Shoku Nihongi, in 797, says, 'Neither detailed accounts of ordinary matters, nor events that do not conform to orthodox practices, are included.' Nihon Koki says, 'Bothersome details and insignificant words are not included in this record.' Shoku Nihon Koki says, 'Everyday small things, matters of rice and salt, are abbreviated or rejected.' Montoku Jitsuroku says, 'Trivial remarks and minor affairs of little consequence have been discarded and omitted.' The concrete nature of these trivial words and minor affairs is most clearly explained in Sandai Jitsuroku, which summarizes them as matters in the daily life of the people which were rejected on the ground that they did not serve to edify. How far was this policy actually carried out in Sandai Jitsuroku ? We find examples not of matters of everyday life, but of fabrications, at least according to our modern reasoning; the people of the time may have sincerely thought them warnings of Heaven or pathetic natural calamities. The mystery of a giant snake eating a scripture 3Oth day, 5th month, 872. At the detached hall of the provincial temple in Suruga, a giant snake appeared. There was a thirty-one volume set of the Nirvana Sutra made into one scroll, and this snake ate it. The people who saw this bound up the tail of the snake with a rope and hung it upside down from a tree. After a while it coughed up the sutra, fell to the ground, and appeared half-dead. Then it suddenly revived.

The Demon Strangler in front of the Ceremonial Hall igth day, 7th month, 886. At 10 PM, a tall man appeared in front of the Ceremonial Hall, coming and going, wandering about. The people on duty in the palace saw him and were frightened into a faint. People in front of the quarters of the Left Guard lighted a lamp and also got a view of him. Then in the vicinity of the quarters of the Left Guard, there came a voice like that of a person being strangled. He was called the Demon Strangler.

The mystery of the beauties in En no Matsubara [Banquet Pine Grove] i7th day, 8th month, 887. At 10 PM on this night a certain person reported that a passer-by had said, 'Three beautiful women were in the western part of the desolate Banquet Pine Grove, east of the Hall of


179

Military Virtues in the palace enclosure. They took a walk toward the east and encountered a man beneath the pine trees. Handsome and beautifully dressed, he came out and talked to one of the women, taking her hand. The woman fell instantly in love with him and went under the tree. After a while, hearing no voices, the others became alarmed and went after her. There lay on the ground her hands and feet, and no body or head. The men on duty at the camp of the Right Guard, who came to see her, found no corpse. The person who had been there had suddenly vanished.' The people at the time thought that this was an ogre who had changed his form and carried out this slaughter.

A disturbing voice in the east and west halls of Chodoin in the middle of the night The next day many priests from various temples were invited to carry out a scripture reading, and they lodged in the east and west halls of Chodoin. During the night they unexpectedly heard a disturbing voice. The priests struggled with each other to rush out of the halls, but then it suddenly became quiet. Each one was asked the reason why he went out, but none knew. They were puzzled, and said 'It must have been some natural being.' This month, in the palace as well as in the city, there were thirty-six such unfounded mysterious stories and rumors, but they cannot all be recorded here.

In the last case, the compilers knew that it was an unfounded story, but they recorded it, seemingly unable to bear throwing it out. On the whole, however, such stories are extremely few. In this respect the work differed from books like Fuso Ryakki, which recorded many fabricated tales. The result was that the National Histories were uninteresting and not much read, while the likes of Fuso Ryakki circulated widely; this is because of human desire for history, which is the same in ancient times and modern times alike. Volumes 1-29: Emperor Seiwa

The chronicles of Emperor Seiwa go from Volume i to Volume 29, including nineteen years from his accession to his abdication (eighth month, 858, to eleventh month, 876). First a pre-accession history is given, as in the other National Histories. When he became Crown Prince, on the twenty-fifth day, eleventh month, 850, it says, 'he was nine months old/ and then,

i8o


Prior to this there was a foretelling song: Oe o koete Hashiri koete Odori agari koete Wareya mamoru ta niya Saguri asari hamu shigiya Oi shigiya.

Flying over boughs Running and flying over, Climbing, leaping and flying over Hunting in the paddy I guard, Hunting and eating - the snipe The robust snipe.5

Knowledgeable people said that 'Oe' (boughs) referred to 'Oe' (elder brothers).

Thus Sandai Jitsuroku interprets the foretelling song to mean that Prince Korehito (Emperor Seiwa) was destined to precede his elder brothers as Crown Prince. This matter also appears in Montoku Jitsuroku, but there it is simply a matter of Korehito receiving the imperial command to become Crown Prince, and the reaction in society is not dealt with at all. Leap-frogging the Crown Prince over his elder brothers was a high-handed plan of Yoshifusa to expand the power of his own family, and others could scarcely have approved. Montoku Jitsuroku was compiled close to Yoshifusa's era, and the compilers were afraid to criticize him, but thirty years had elapsed since Yoshifusa's death, when Sandai Jitsuroku was written. We may rightly see this work as containing a critical meaning, however roundabout. The chronicle of Emperor Seiwa does not contain accounts of major events, apart from the destruction by fire of the Oten Gate, the comings and goings of pirates from Silla in the seas near Tsukushi, the eruption of Mount Fuji, and the formation of the five lakes nearby. In among the accounts of the decline of state finance, it records a great number of cultural accomplishments. In particular there are numerous accounts of promotions in rank for Shinto shrines, a valuable indicator that a return to Japanese culture was developing in an era when Chinese culture was still dominant in many areas. For those who died during this time, there are biographies of the aristocrats Fujiwara Yoshifusa, Fujiwara Yoshimi, Minamoto Sadamu, Minamoto Hiromu, Minamoto Makoto, Haruzumi Yoshitada, and the monks Ennin and Shinzai. Of course the biography of Yoshifusa is quite detailed, but, unfortunately, in the present text of Sandai Jitsuroku, the volume containing Yoshifusa's death in 872 is a shortened version made at the time of copying, so we do not have the full biography. The biographies of Fujiwara Yoshimi (first day, tenth month, 867) and Haruzumi Yoshitada (nineteenth day, second month, 870) are well set up, fully describing the men and their


181

accomplishments. The biography of Shinzai (twenty-fifth day, second month, 860) is substantially the same as that found in Kikeshu [Ki Family Collection], in the writings of Ki Haseo;6 Ki seems to have written it because Shinzai was a member of his family, and the compilers of Sandai Jitsuroku used it in their text. There is a note that a final copy of Miyoshi Kiyoyuki's Chisho Daishi Den [Biography of the Great Teacher Chisho]7 was sent to the history compilation office, so probably this biography of Shinzai was also sent to the history office. Sugawara Michizane and Okura Yoshiyuki would not have hesitated to use it because of their friendly relationship with Ki Haseo. The biography of Ennin (fourteenth day, first month, 864) is a long document, the most detailed biography in Sandai Jitsuroku. The text is similar to Jikaku Daishi Den [Biography of the Great Teacher Jikaku] by Prince Shinjaku.8 This biography was unfinished when Prince Shinjaku died, and it was finished by his son Minamoto Hideakira. His younger brother Moriaki bound it and sent it on the third day, eleventh month, 939. Thus the compilers of Sandai Jitsuroku could not have seen the completed version, but they probably used as historical materials the same kind of old records that were used for the biography. Minamoto Sadamu (third day, first month, 863), Minamoto Hiromu (twenty-fifth day, first month, 863), and Minamoto Makoto (twenty-eighth day, intercalary twelfth month, 868) were all sons of Emperor Saga, and similar wording and format are found in all three biographies. The family biographies mentioned in Ryo no Gige, as 'family biographies sent in by worthy families/ may have provided the materials for these.9 Later members of the Genji family, descended from Emperor Saga, may have entrusted the writing of biographies of their ancestors to scholars and sent these to the Ministry of Ceremonial. In this line of thinking, the biographies of Fujiwara Yoshimi and Haruzumi Yoshitada may also have been based on family biographies. Those that consist entirely of praise and contain no criticism seem to have been based on such house biographies. This resulted in the absence of disciplined sharpness in the biographies of Sandai Jitsuroku. Volumes 30-44: Emperor Yozei

The chronicle of Emperor Yozei is found in the fifteen volumes from Volume 30 to Volume 44, covering more than eight years from the twelfth month of 876 to the second month of 884. The pre-accession history is the same as for Emperor Seiwa, and, similarly, it ends with

182


his abdication. \ozei's abdication was actually a deposition by Fujiwara Mototsune, but the National History just records the surface facts without reference to Mototsune's manoeuvres. The Emperor sent a letter to Mototsune, saying that, since it was difficult for him to retain the symbols of office owing to illness, he wanted to abdicate as soon as possible. Preceding this is an entry stating that a courtier, Minamoto Masaru, was suddenly murdered in the audience hall. The entry includes a mystifying note: 'Matters in the palace being secret, no one outside knew.' Later records tell us that the murder took place by the Emperor's own hand (e.g. Gyokuyo, twentieth day, eleventh month, 1172; related by Kiyowara Yorinari). Sandai Jitsuroku gives the impression of trying to keep this secret and recording merely the surface incident. Later, the Emperor, who loved horses, secretly raised them in the palace, and there were many related acts of lawlessness by courtiers. It records that Fujiwara Mototsune came to the palace and drove these people away. This is all that Sandai Jitsuroku has to say about the deposition of the Emperor, which is perhaps the furthest extent to which a National History could go. Compared to previous reigns, many things happened during the reign of Emperor \ozei. Among them was a rebellion by naturalized aborigines that broke out in 878 and shook the court for more than a year. It was caused by the oppressive management by the governor of the Akita fort, and the power of the naturalized aborigines swelled to the stage where they seized the fort, burned the houses of the district governor and the people, and got hold of all the military equipment in the province. Mototsune appointed the reputable Fujiwara Yasunori as Provisional Governor of Dewa and commanded him to put down the rebellion; he won the confidence of the naturalized aborigines through justice and mercy and was able to recover the fort without fighting. Sandai Jitsuroku gives the above circumstances by recording the post station report by Governor of Dewa Fujiwara Okiyo around the twenty-ninth day, third month, 878, and the responding government order, continuing with occasional entries of reports and orders. The compilers probably used official records stored in the Ministry of Central Affairs. In some cases they made a note, such as 'Report of the post station in Dewa Province. Document lost' (fourth day, eighth month, and fourth day, ninth month, 878), conscientiously recording the existence of a document and its loss. However, for the most part it clearly records the actions of the naturalized aborigines and the measures of the government forces, vividly describing the tense situation in Dewa. At this point, the peaceful and inactive


183

narrative of Sandai Jitsuroku becomes highly dynamic. Judging from the commands issued one after another, the court was under great strain. There exists a separately published biography of Yasunori, 'Biography of Fujiwara Yasunori/ compiled in 907 by Miyoshi Kiyoyuki. At the end of the biography, Kiyoyuki becomes Great Inner Secretary, and, according to the 'Gangyo era notes/ he witnessed Yasunori's strategy for the eastern expedition, so perhaps the same materials were used by Sandai Jitsuroku. As a biography of Yasunori, it naturally focused on him more than did Sandai Jitsuroku. When Yasunori returned to the capital by government order in the fourth month of 880, the people at the court all praised his accomplishment, expecting high reward for his merit. However, Yasunori declined such favour, while, on the other hand, there was no punishment for the governor of the Akita fort who had caused the rebellion. Public opinion censured Mototsune for distorting the system of rewards and punishments, but this does not appear in Sandai Jitsuroku . The compiler, Tokihira, would not place on record the failure of his father, Mototsune. In a similar entry, there was a rebellion of naturalized aborigines in Kazusa (second month, 883), which was put down in ten days. The Governor of Kazusa was reprimanded for his hastiness in sending his report by post station courier; there were many regional disorders, but none were sufficiently important to justify emergency communications. With respect to the government of the people, there was an allotment of farmland fifty years after the preceding allotment (twelfth month, 879). In the eleventh month, Middle Counsellor and Head of the Ministry of People's Affairs Fujiwara Fuyuo presented a financial proposal for designating forty cho as government land in the Kinai and allocating its harvest as rank stipends and princely stipends. The financial difficulty of the state had deepened since the time of Emperor Seiwa, and strong new solutions had become necessary. Retired Emperor Seiwa died at the Enkakuji Temple in the twelfth month of 880. Sandai Jitsuroku gives an extensive biography, praising the Emperor. The Essay of Praise says, The Emperor's manners were most elegant. He was solemn and serene as a deity. He was tolerant, bright, and magnanimous and gave kind counsel in a gentle way. He would not easily speak without the advice of a counsellor. In his conduct he always adhered to formality. He enjoyed reading books and classics, and his thoughts lay deep in Buddhist teachings. He was never interested in the pleasures of hunting

184


with hawks and dogs and fishing. His resolve was great, and he had much ability as a ruler.

It goes on to praise the splendid government of the Jogan era. Towards Tomo Yoshio, who burned the Oten Gate, the Emperor took a firm attitude and refused to pardon his crime. His religious practice after his abdication was severe. His death was as majestic as his life: he died miraculously in sitting position with crossed legs, as though he were alive. The compilers gave the highest possible praise to the retired Emperor. The death of Junna Empress Dowager Masako also appears (twenty-third day, third month, 879). Similarly, the compilers put their hearts into praising her virtue. Regarding the deposition of her son Tsunesada as Crown Prince, it says, 'The Empress Dowager trembled with anger, wept, and bore enmity against her mother the Saga Empress Dowager.' This manner of writing suggests that the Saga Empress Dowager Kachiko was responsible; it was a clever technique adopted out of fear of the Fujiwara family. In addition, biographies are given of scholars who died in the period - Sugawara Koreyoshi (thirtieth day, eighth month, 880), Oe Otondo (third day, eleventh month, 877), and Miyako Yoshika (twenty-fifth day, second month, 879); they were shortened at the time of copying, so we do not have the full texts. The biography of Ariwara Narihira of Ise Monogatari [Tales of Ise] fame is left intact, but the original text was short. He is assessed only as: 'His appearance was refined and handsome, and his character carefree and bold. He had no scholarly ability, but composed good Japanese poetry' (twenty-eighth day, fifth month, 880). In light of his later reputation as a great poet, this account must be considered inadequate. Volumes 45-50: Emperor Koko The chronicle of Emperor Koko occupies six volumes, from Volume 45 to Volume 50, covering the period from the second month of 884 to his death in the eighth month of 887. There is a pre-accession history that praises his person and includes an anecdote of the Envoy from Parhae, who saw him as a prince and predicted that he would come to the throne. There is no Essay of Praise at the time of the Emperor's death, since the pre-accession history contained praise enough. As the Emperor felt that he owed a great deal to Fujiwara Mototsune for promoting him to the throne, he paid special attention to the good treatment of Mototsune. First, he consulted the scholars in


185

the various disciplines on the duties of the Chancellor and inquired what the corresponding office was in China (twenty-ninth day, fifth month, 884). On the basis of their investigation, he gave a command that all matters be entrusted to Mototsune as Chancellor, and every report and command be discussed with him (fifth day, sixth month, 884). As the Emperor was fifty-five years old, it was improper to give the position of Regent to Mototsune, so he signalled clearly that Mototsune would perform the duties of Regent while holding the position of Chancellor. This was the origin of the later office of First Minister (Kanpaku). In the fourth month of 885 the Emperor gave an order reducing his own apparel by two kinds of silk floss, in the interest of economy. He refused the request of the nobles to go further by curtailing the stipends for people of the fifth rank and above, saying it was enough for the Emperor alone to wear thin clothing (third day, sixth month, 885). The Emperor and Mototsune had a productive ruler-subject relationship, and the administration of the Ninna era may be considered a success. However, as the Emperor died after only three years, they were unable to reap a rich harvest. Among the notable people who died in this period was His Holiness Soei. He was the priest who guided Retired Emperor Seiwa's entry into religion and led him on a pilgrimage to the famous mountain sites (twenty-sixth day, third month, 884). COMMENTARIES

One commentary is Sandai Jitsuroku Koji Ko [Origins of Sandai Jitsuroku, three volumes], by Asuha Takaaki. This is a useful work, which shows the sources for the Chinese words in the book. Takaaki was a retainer of Fukui domain in Echizen Province, the adopted son of the shrine official of Asuha Shrine. He was promoted as far as Junior Fourth Rank, Upper, and Acting Head of the Treasury Bureau, dying in 1759 at the age of eighty-eight. There is a note in the book, '8th month, 1742. Takaaki, age seventy-one/ and two Japanese poems. Although there is no published version, manuscript copies are often found, so it seems to have circulated. It is recorded that there were similar works of Takaaki on Shoku Nihongi, Shoku Nihon Koki, Montoku Jitsuroku, and Nihon Isshi [Dispersed Works of Japan], none of which are found in libraries. Their circulation must have been small. Nevertheless, his studies of the origins of words in the entire Five National Histories demonstrate his deep interest. He deserves not to be forgotten in the history of research on the Six National Histories.

186


In the Hosa Library in Nagoya there is Kawamura Masune's twenty-five-volume Sandai Jitsuroku Shikkai [Complete Commentary on Sandai Jitsuroku]. A note in the last volume says, 'Draft completed, 3 p.m., last day of the month, 4th month, 1817.' To make commentaries on all the Five National Histories in order, starting with Shoku Nihongi, took him twelve years (1806-17). The format and the style in the commentary are the same for all the Five National Histories, as he sought for the sources in Chinese books. The later the volumes, the larger the gaps; probably he intended to do research and fill them in later, but they remained unfinished. At the end of each volume is written, 'OWARI PROVINCE - Kawamura Hidene and his son Masune - Shikkai,' making his father Hidene a co-author; but since Hidene had died in 1792, he did not participate in writing the commentaries on Shoku Nihongi and the rest, which were begun in 1806. It shows the filial piety of Masune, who published these works in the spirit of his father.

CHAPTER EIGHT

Afterword

SHINKOKUSHI [ N E W N A T I O N A L H I S T O R Y ]

The Six National Histories ended with Sandai Jitsuroku, but the court did not give up compiling National Histories. A history compilation office was set up for the next book, and a Head and other officials were appointed. The evidence for this is the seventeen imperial orders appointing the Head and the people who should work there, which appeared during the thirty-three years from 936 to g6g.1 These are given in chronological order in Table 11. The list in Table 11 may be incomplete, but on the basis of these materials, the idea to compile the next National History arose thirtysix years after Sandai Jitsuroku, at which time personnel were appointed to the office. In comparison to previous histories, the interval was quite long - Montoku Jitsuroku was begun three years after the preceding history and Sandai Jitsuroku fourteen years after its predecessor. Nevertheless, there was a strong desire to continue the National Histories. In 936 a reading of Nihon Shoki was held, an indicator of great interest in the National Histories. In the history compilation office the participation of the Oe family is noticeable. Oe Otondo had been one of the compilers of Montoku Jitsuroku, but no member of the family had participated in any other National History. This time his grandson Asatsuna worked as a member, from 936, and then as Head, from 954. After Asatsuna's death in 957, his cousin Koretoki became Head. How long he remained such is not known - perhaps until his death in 963. Thus the Oe family may have been involved with this National History for twenty-eight years. In the section on compiling National Histories in Shingishiki cited previously, one Consultant was to be appointed

TABLE 11

Imperial commands related to Shinkokushi Emperor

Date

Position

Suzaku Suzaku Suzaku Suzaku Suzaku

29/11/936 29/11/936 29/11/936 22/12/937 28/9/945

Head Head Compiler Compiler Compilers

Murakami Murakami Murakami Murakami Murakami

22/6/948 13/6/953 29/6/954 09/3/956 11/7/956

Compiler Compiler Head Compiler Compilers

Murakami

28/12/957

Head

Murakami Murakami

28/12/957 13/2/963

Compiler Compilers

Murakami Reizei Reizei Reizei

28/8/964 07/3/968 22/8/968 13/2/969

Compiler Compilers Compilers Compiler

Name Fujiwara Tsunesuke Taira Koremochi Oe Asatsuna Yoshitomo Shigami Naki Motomori, Suguri Yoshinari, Kami Fujieda Hatabe Yasuhira Minu Saneka Oe Asatsuna Mifune Moritoki Taira Sueaki, Kiyowara Nakaumi Oe Koretoki Tachibana Naomoto Sugano Masamune, Ihara Tsurasuke Nukada Yoshihide Hida Korenobu, Oishi Kiyokado Hata Haruki, Kamo Mitsusuke Heki Satoaki

Other

Replaced Fujiwara Toshihiro, Kasa Masamochi Replaced deceased Oe Asatsuna

Replaced Minu Saneka Replaced Nukada Yoshihide

Afterword

189

after the Great Minister. Asatsuna and Koretoki fulfilled this requirement and directed the work. What kind of book resulted? In the section on imperial chronicles in Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, after the Six National Histories and RuijuKokushi there is listed 'Shinkokushi, forty volumes/ which must refer to this work. Then follows a note, 'Compiled by Asatsuna, or else by Lord Seishin. From Ninna (887) to Engi (901).'2 'From Ninna to Engi' means from Emperor Uda to Emperor Daigo, so it must have been a forty-volume National History of the reigns of those two Emperors. 'Compiled by Asatsuna' refers to the fact that he was the Head, while 'Lord Seishin' refers to Fujiwara Saneyori, who was the Minister of the Left from 947 to 967 and then Chancellor until 970, thus fulfilling the requirement for a Great Minister. However, Shugaisho [Humble Selections, late Kamakura period] contradicts this, saying that Shinkokushi consisted of fifty volumes, not forty. It explains, 'During the reign of Emperor Murakami, Lord Ononomiya received the imperial command and compiled this work. It is also known as Zoku Sandai Jitsuroku [Sandai Jitsuroku Continued].'3 The name Zoku Sandai Jitsuroku indicates a National History of three regions, which would include Emperors Uda, Daigo, and Suzaku, adding one reign to those of Uda and Daigo, as described in Shojaku Mokuroku. The increase to fifty volumes would be in accord with this expansion of coverage. Thus there are two references to Shinkokushi: as a forty-volume history of two reigns and as a fifty-volume history of three reigns. The fact that it existed in this double form, that the name Shinkokushi was not the formal name, and that there is no record of a presentation of a completed work, suggests an unfinished manuscript. This is the view of Ban Nobutomo (Hikobae, Volume 8) and Wada Hidematsu,4 which I also hold. Shinkokushi has not been handed down, but dispersed portions are found in several works, which are collected in Wada's Kokusho Itsubun. It consists of outlines and short sentences, and for a National History it is noticeably unpolished. Volume 10 of Todaiji Yoroku [Essential Documents of Todaiji Temple], entitled 'Zatsuji Sho no yo' [Other Writings on Miscellaneous Matters], itemizes entries that pertain to Todaiji in the Five National Histories. Following this, under the heading 'Shinki [New Chronicle], twenty volumes,' are thirty entries for the period from 889 to 966. From the order in which they are quoted, it can be concluded that they were taken from Shinkokushi.5 This was the theory of Ban Nobutomo. However, Wada's Kokusho Itsubun includes only eight of these thirty entries in Todaiji Yoroku, from the Ninna era to 910, as

igo


being taken from the text of Shinkokushi.6 The reason Wada rejected the material after 910 is not known, but since the reign of Emperor Murakami, comprising the Tenryaku, Tentoku, Owa, and Koho eras, was outside the scope of Shinkokushi, it was natural not to include Emperor Daigo in the Engi and Encho eras that were within the scope of Shinkokushi. Perhaps Wada thought that the citations in Todaiji "Yoroku from 'Shinki' stopped before these eras, because these five items appear under a new heading 'Owari Shoji [Matters Related to Manors in Owari Province]/ However, they really must be viewed as continuous quotations from 'Shinki/ The portion after Tenryaku consists of citations from the same book. Was 'Shinki' the same book as Shinkokushi? The form of the writing in the early part is the same as that in the National Histories, but the latter part is rougher. Nor does the statement that 'Shinki' consists of twenty volumes tally with either version cited above, setting Shinkokushi at forty or fifty volumes. Thus 'Shinki' may consist of passages concerning the Todaiji Temple that were taken from Shinkokushi for the reigns of Emperors Uda and Daigo and from such works as Geki Nikki for later years. There is a problem concerning the number of volumes in Shinkokushi. Michinori, the lay priest Shinzei, possessed Shinkokushi and listed it in his library catalogue as follows: i bundle - 9 volumes. Ninna and Kanpyo eras. i bundle - 4 volumes. Kanpyo era to Engi era [listed under chest no. 58]. i bundle - 8 volumes. From Encho i (923) to 8 (930). i bundle - 10 volumes. From Engi 11 (911) to 22 (922). However, 14 (914) and 21 (921) both missing [listed under chest no. 59]. i bundle - Nai Shinkokushi. 4 volumes [listed under chest no. 80]7

In the portion of the Encho and Engi eras in chest number 59, clearly one volume was devoted to each year. What was the apportionment for the Ninna, Kanpyo, and Engi eras in chest number 58? There is a problem as to where the Kanpyo and Engi eras are demarcated, and there may also be volumes missing from them. Ban Nobutomo thought that the character for 'ten' had somehow been dropped from the word 'fourteen' for the number of volumes on Kanpyo and Engi, and that originally there were fourteen. If so, then given that there were more than twenty-three years in Emperor Uda's reign (eighth month of 887 to 910), the nine volumes listed plus the fourteen speculated to have existed total twenty-three, making a rate of one volume per year. The reigns of Emperors Uda and Daigo totalled

Afterword

191

forty-three years, so if this rate held throughout the work, the forty volumes of Shinkokushi would fall short only by three. The forty volumes listed in the catalogue are a large number, and there may be some room for adjustment, so that the principle of one volume per year is not totally destroyed. However, the theory that further volumes were added for the reign of Emperor Suzaku upsets the rate. His reign lasted for sixteen years, and if they were covered in ten volumes, the entries must have been sparse in comparison to the previous two reigns. Since it was an unfinished manuscript, there was no time to work on the later part. More research is needed on these problems. Why was Shinkokushi not presented as a completed work? When the head compiler Oe Asatsuna was appointed in 954 he was already sixty-nine years old, and he died in 957 at the age of seventy-two. He was replaced by Koretoki, who was seventy; he died at the age of seventy-six. Both of them were old, the first reason for thinking that the work did not progress well. In addition it appears that there were no talented people among the Confucian scholars and secretaries appointed to assist them. Behind this lack of ability was the sudden decline in historical and literary scholarship in the tenth century. From its beginning the enterprise of compilation was short of skills. However, a more important reason for the inability to complete Shinkokushi was the decline of the state. Because of financial distress, government projects were curtailed, the will of the courtiers to pursue ideals declined, and administration became a dispirited series of patchwork, stop-gap measures. Inevitably these conditions hampered the compilation of National Histories, which was one of the symbols in the ritsuryo state. The compiling of kyaku and shiki, the minting of coins, and so on, ended in the reigns of Emperors Daigo and Murakami. The times were changing.

RUIJU KOKUSHI [CLASSIFIED NATIONAL HISTORY] Following the Six National Histories there was, in contrast to the failed Shinkokushi, Ruiju Kokushi, which classifies the annalistic entries in the Six National Histories under headings. This is useful for searching for materials. This work, consisting of two hundred volumes, was compiled by Sugawara Michizane. This is known, of course, from Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku* and from such works as Kanke Godenki, compiled in 1106 by Michizane's fifth generation descendant, Sugawara Nobutsune.9 In Volume 5 of Kanke Bunso there is a preface to a Chinese poem of

192


893, 'On the occasion when the Emperor commanded me [Michizane] to classify the ancient histories.'10 This makes it clear that Michizane was commanded by Emperor Uda in the Kanpyo era to classify the entries in the National Histories. Also, the oldest biography of Michizane, Kitano Tenjin Goden [Biography of the Kitano Deity], in the storehouse of Egara Tenjin, confirms this: 'In the Kanpyo era Michizane received the imperial command, and compiled Bunso Kokushi [Elucidated National History] in one-hundred volumes; these have been handed down.' However, the number of volumes described here differs from the commonly accepted number of 200. We must consider this discrepancy, together with the old question of whether or not Michizane succeeded in classifying the entire Six National Histories. In Kanke Godenki the date of completion is clear: 'On the loth day, 5th month, 892, he presented Ruiju Kokushi.' If we take this date as correct, then Sandai Jitsuroku had not been completed, and we should not expect to find any items from Sandai Jitsuroku in Ruiju Kokushi: yet we do. Supposing we reject this date on the ground that it was confused with the date of the command to compile Sandai Jitsuroku given in Nihon Kiryaku, the first day, fifth month, 892.11 Michizane had already been exiled to Kyushu before Sandai Jitsuroku was finished, so he still could not have classified the entries in it. This gave rise to Ban Nobutomo's theory that the portions from Sandai Jitsuroku in Ruiju Kokushi were added by later people. This is a good argument as far as it goes, but there is room for development. For additions by later people, the portions from Sandai Jitsuroku are merged too well into the overall form. Thus I have long speculated that Michizane secretly classified the entries in Sandai Jitsuroku before it was presented. Intertwined with this question is the structure and character of the book, which we must first explain. Ruiju Kokushi classifies the entries in the National Histories under headings, and the ideas of the compiler can be seen in the way the headings are set up and the materials chosen. Both of these are extremely well done. The idea for such a book was probably derived from the classified books that were circulating in China at that time. Classified books were needed for making poems and organizing knowledge. They flourished in the Tang dynasty, taking the necessary texts from the classics and producing, as separate works, classified compilations with headings. In Nihonkoku Genzai Sho Mokuroku [List of Books Currently in Japan, 891], half a dozen classified works that had come to Japan in the Heian period were listed.12 Reference might also have been made to Kansojirui (discussed under Shoku Nihongi, Chapter 3)

Afterword

193

and Tencho Kyaku Sho (discussed under Nihon Koki, Chapter 4), both of which classified under headings the entries from the annalistic National Histories. With precedents within and outside Japan, the idea for Ruiju Kokushi was born. It was reasonable to follow the precedents of these books in setting up the headings. However, Ruiju Kokushi is not a complete imitation, for independent ideas are put forth. The headings are divided into major headings and detailed sub-headings. There are eighteen major headings in Ruiju Kokushi as it presently exists: Gods of Heaven and Earth, Emperors, Imperial Consorts, People, Annual Events, Music, Awards Banquets, Memorials and Presentations to the Throne, Government, Punishments, Offices, Literature, Rice-Fields, Good Omens, Natural Calamities, Buddhism, Customs, and Special Customs. In addition, about five other headings are thought to have existed. However, the full number is not known because only sixty-two volumes exist at the present day; the last 138 have been lost. The detailed subheadings are numerous. The section 'Gods of Heaven and Earth' extended to twenty volumes, but only thirteen now remain. They contain twenty-seven sub-headings, such as The Age of the Gods, The Great God of Ise, Imperial Princesses Serving at the Ise Shrine, Ise districts, The Great Gods of Kamo, Imperial Princesses Serving at the Kamo Shrines, The Great God of Hachiman, Enthronement Ceremonies, Festival of New Rice on the 23rd Day of the nth Month, Repose of Souls, and Offering to Ise on the nth Day of the 6th and 12th Months. This two-stage method of writing headings was used in Tang books such as Yiwen Leiju and Chuxueji. Another method of Tang classified books was also adopted, namely, recording the same item twice in related sections. One reference is detailed and the other is an outline; the outline employs a note saying, 'The matter is detailed in section so-and-so.' Another method was to indicate the heading under which details would be found by appending notes in smaller characters: 'IMPERIAL PRINCESSES SERVING AT ISE SHRINE; see detached palace;' 'THE GREAT GOD OF HACHIMAN; see Kashii Shrine, Iwashimizu Shrine.' Most of the major headings, such as Annual Events, Emperors, Offices, and People, appear in the Chinese classified books. These are examples of following the precedents of Tang classified works. But there are contrasting examples in Ruiju Kokushi of consideration for matters peculiar to Japan and to Michizane's own ideas. For example, Michizane set up the category The Gods of Heaven and Earth, and put it first in the book. This method had been adopted

194


previously, in the Taiho and \o"ro codes and in such works as Kanso Jirui, so Michizane was not the first to use it. It was adopted in consideration of the circumstances of Japan; however, in the section on the Gods of Heaven and Earth, Volumes i and 2 of The Age of the Gods were copied without alteration from Nihon Shoki. The principle of classification was not used, probably because of Michizane's belief that it applied to entries in a chronology, whereas The Age of the Gods was told without dates and should be regarded as a unified whole. The placement of Buddhism near the end of the work, starting in section 174, reflected the ideas of the compiler. In the law codes, Nuns and Priests came right after The Gods of Heaven and Earth. In Kanso Jirui, Buddhist Temples came right after Gods of Heaven and Earth. But in Ruiju Kokushi, Buddhism was separated from The Gods of Heaven and Earth and placed at the end of the book between Calamities, Customs, and Special Customs. This is because Michizane saw Buddhism as part of the culture that came from foreign countries, revealing his strong consciousness of the importance of Japan's own culture. Second, Michizane used a certain device for recording entries. For each entry, the name of the Emperor, the year, month, and day were given, from which could be ascertained the particular National History that was the source. The name of the source work could have been given, but Ruiju Kokushi does not do this. By the same token, if the year alone is known, there is no necessity to write the name of the Emperor. Nevertheless, Ruiju Kokushi strictly records the name of the Emperor upon every change of reign, so that the reign in which each event occurred is perfectly clear. Moreover, the method of recording the Emperor's name was not just a mechanical transplantation from the National Histories. As discussed previously, in Shoku Nihongi and Nihon Koki there are cases where the division between reigns is not clear. For example, Emperor Kanmu died on the seventeenth day, third month, 806, but Nihon Koki included events up to the sixteenth day, fifth month, 806, in the volume on Emperor Kanmu. The next volume began on the eighteenth day of the fifth month, with the accession of Emperor Heizei. In Ruiju Kokushi, however, events of the twenty-fourth and twenty-ninth day of the third month and the thirteenth day of the fourth month are placed under Emperor Heizei, not under Emperor Kanmu. This strictness of method came from the recognition that the Emperor's reigns were central to the National Histories. Third, with regard to the names of Emperors, Ruiju Kokushi does not blindly follow the original works, which used a variety of meth-

Afterword

195

ods: Shoku Nihongi gave either the Japanese posthumous name or Chinese-style name; Nihon Koki gave the Japanese posthumous name and, in addition, the names of the preceding and following Retired Emperors; Sandai Jitsuroku gave the names of the preceding and following Retired Emperors, except for Emperor Koko. Ruiju Kokushi uniformly used the Chinese-style name or the equivalent honorary title or posthumous title. The names of the preceding and following Retired Emperors could be understood in the context of a National History close to the times, but Ruiju Kokushi, further away in time, would be ambiguous. Thus Emperors Saga, Junna, Seiwa, and \5zei, called by their posthumous names or by the names they selected upon retirement, are appropriate. There is also the matter of the year in which change of era names took place. Basically, in the Six National Histories the new era name was used for the entire year. Even if the change took place in the middle of the year, the new era name was applied retroactively to the first month. However, this could not have been the case as historical fact. Ruiju Kokushi paid attention to this point and used the old era name up to the day of the change and then switched to the new name. For example, in the reign of Emperor Montoku the era name Ninju 4 (854) was used until the thirtieth day of the eleventh month, when it was changed to Saiko. Montoku Jitsuroku used the era name Saiko from the beginning of 854, but in Ruiju Kokushi the entries up to the eleventh month are referred to without exception as Ninju 4. This approach was natural enough, but only a person who truly understood the Six National Histories could have taken it. How was a complicated entry for a single day divided up for placement into the detailed sections? It appears that the original purpose of writing Ruiju Kokushi was not purely scholarly concern, but rather the practical aim of providing a reference work for administration, so the method of selecting entries was always directed towards practical convenience. As discussed above, in cases where the entry for a single day contained two or more items, the entire text was entered under the main item, and related materials were entered under the secondary items. This was an attempt to give priority to the practical value of the entry. Moreover, this method did not mechanically collect all similar items under one heading. As Volume 99 contains the details of awards of rank, one might expect to find the full texts of all appointments collected there, but this is not the case. The awards of ranks to regional shrine officials, senior Shinto priests, junior Shinto priests, secularized monks, natives of southern Kyushu, and naturalized aborigines are not included in the section of officials, but are found in the appropriate sections on the

196


Gods of Heaven and Earth, Buddhism, and Customs. Accounts of awards in the section on officials were limited to people of the fifth rank and above, reflecting a strong consciousness of bureaucratic society. No material was added. The compiler transferred only the text of the National Histories and made no alterations or additions of his own. Only when the text is omitted does the phrase 'etc., etc.' appear; and when matters are cited twice, it is noted, 'This matter is detailed in such-and-so section.' Because of such thorough adherence to the original texts, mistakes and omissions of the original histories can be corrected by using this book, and missing entries can be restored. This has brought immeasurable benefit to later generations. These methods of compilation in Ruiju Kokushi also apply to the entries from Sandai Jitsuroku. This is the reason for saying that the portions from Sandai Jitsuroku are too well integrated into the overall structure to be considered additions by later people. But there remains the problem of whether Michizane was able to make classifications from Sandai Jitsuroku. In Ruiju Kokushi, the manner of setting up the chapters reveals that the portions from Sandai Jitsuroku fit well. Some volumes consist entirely of material from Sandai Jitsuroku - one volume on prayers in the section 'Gods of Heaven and Earth' (Volume 12); three volumes on Ranks of the Gods (Volumes 15-17); and two volumes on award of ranks in the section on officials (Volumes 100-1). In addition, there may have been other sections, such as 'Appointments,' which are now lost. If these were added later, the volumes would have differed from the original book, and the final number of 200 arose by chance due to later additions. The number of new headings that consist entirely of material from Sandai Jitsuroku is fairly large: repose of souls in the section Gods of Heaven and Earth; the Emperor's coming-of-age ceremony, the posthumous name of the retired Emperor, presentation of cheese for pharmaceutical use, and the retired Emperor's funeral clothing in the section on Emperors; biwa-guitar in the section on Music; standards for timber, and trade goods in the section on Government Principles; Genba-ryo, the department in charge of Buddhist temples and foreigri guests in the section on Government Departments; the moon in the section on Good Omens; spring and autumn lanterns for the Emperor, ranks of Buddhist priests according to their experience, Ajari-leader of Enryakuji Temple, Mt. Hiei, retirement of priests, certification documents for priests and nuns, and excommunicated priests in the section on Buddhism. These are set up in exactly the same way as the portions

Afterword

197

from the rest of the Five National Histories, and the method of quoting in detail and in rough outline, as well as 'the method of placing notes on location of the detailed entries, are the same. If later people made these additions, they were surely superior scholars. Could this have been accomplished by a trusted retainer to whom Michizane taught the principles for classifying the whole of the Five National Histories? Did Michizane order him to extend it to Sandai Jitsuroku, which would soon be completed? Michizane's exile came about suddenly, so it is doubtful that there was time to give such a command. His eldest son, Takami, and his illegitimate son, Atsushige, carried on the scholarly traditions of the family, but their scholarly ability did not match their father's. His disciples would have shunned association because of his disgrace, so it is unlikely that they kept his wish and made the additions from Sandai Jitsuroku. The theory that later people added the portions from Sandai Jitsuroku does not stand up very well. Kitano Tenjin Goden says there existed Bunso Kokushi, one hundred volumes, which may mean that no additions had been made around the period 931-47, when this work was written. The understanding is that the part compiled by Michizane consisted of one hundred volumes and that a title had not yet been determined for the work. The explanation about the title may be true, but the figure of one hundred volumes is suspect, because if one hundred volumes were devoted to the Five National Histories, and another one hundred to Sandai Jitsuroku, the work would be unbalanced. In the original histories, 140 volumes covered from Nihon Shoki to Montoku Jitsuroku, while Sandai Jitsuroku consisted of fifty volumes. Even if the basis for distributing the volumes was changed, one hundred volumes could not have been extended to two hundred by the addition of Sandai Jitsuroku. The number one hundred is either a mistake for two hundred, or simply a way of indicating a large number; the exact number of one hundred should not be a subject for discussion. The problem of additions to Ruiju Kokushi needs further study. NIHON KIRYAKU

[ A B B R E V I A T E D C H R O N I C L E S OF J A P A N ]

We must take note of Nihon Kiryaku, an annalistic history book associated with the Six National Histories. However, the author is not known and the number of volumes is uncertain. There are various names for the work: Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku calls it both Nihonshi Kiryaku [Abbreviated Chronicles of the History of Japan] and Nihon Shiryaku [Abbreviated History of Japan],13 and Yurjun Koji calls it Nihon Kirui [Classified Chronicles of Japan]. The name Nihon Kiryaku

198


is used in Kamo Sukeyuki's Nihon Isshi and in the Mito domain's Dai Nihon Shi, and thereafter it became widely used. According to Yubun Koji, the Nihon Kirui in the Bakufu library consisted of twenty volumes from Emperor Monmu to Emperor Go Ichijo; in 1614 it was borrowed from the palace of the Retired Emperor and copied. The Nihon Kiryaku published in 1850 by Yamazaki Tomoo at the command of Hanawa Hokiichi consisted of fourteen volumes, from Emperor Daigo to Emperor Go Ichijo. There are many copied versions of this project under such names as Kudai Ryakki [Abbreviated Chronicles of Nine Reigns], and it is said that Yamazaki Tomoo had ten variants when he printed it. In contrast, there is a version that goes from the Age of the Gods to Emperor Go Ichijo, which was handed down in Ichijoin in Nara, passed through the possession of Prince Kuni, and is now in the library of the Imperial Household Agency. This was included in Kokushi Taikei and has had a wide circulation. When Nihon Kiryaku is mentioned, it is generally in reference to this version. The character of Nihon Kiryaku differs greatly between the period covered by the Six National Histories and the period following. For the first period it consists of excerpts taken from the Six National Histories, while for the following period it consists of material from Shinkokushi and documents of various government circles. In the latter part the entries are extremely brief, and the dating is careless; it is no more than an unfinished manuscript. The first part consists of almost faithful excerpts from the Six National Histories, so it is useful in correcting the original works. As mentioned previously, Nihon Isshi used this work and Ruiju Kokushi to restore the missing text of Nihon Koki. However, the excerpting of documents in Nihon Kiryaku lacks the exactitude of Ruiju Kokushi. Instead of the original text of the National History, here and there the compilers took the sense of the original and added words of their own. Many cases of appointment of people to offices are simply represented by the word Appointments/ and promotions in rank are recorded by nothing more than 'Promotions.' From this we learn that on the date in question appointments or promotions took place, but we learn nothing concrete about the text of the National History. There are similar cases of imperial commands being noted: 'An imperial command said such and so.' The opposite is also true: many excerpts added or changed words of the National Histories. An example of the addition of sentences follows the description of the Emperor in the chronicle of Emperor Hanzei: 'A certain book says he was 2.8 metres tall, and his teeth were 3 centimetres long.' Since there are no similar examples, this

Afterword

199

may have been a note added to the original text by later people, so the compilers of Nihon Kiryaku may be innocent. An example of the compilers' consciously adding words into an important entry is found with regard to Emperor Konin, 770. Momokawa Den [Biography of Fujiwara Momokawa] is quoted for the circumstances of the death of Empress Shotoku and Momokawa's investiture of Prince Shirakabe. Momokawa Den is listed in Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku as a book wherein his biography appears among others, and it probably gave an account of Momokawa's achievements.14 The compilers of Nihon Kiryaku, wanting to give a detailed account of the political change following the death of Empress Shotoku, cited this work, but this violated the fundamental policy of making excerpts from the National Histories. Not only that, there was an error in the dates. Nihon Kiryaku reads, 'On the ist day of the nth month, mizunoe-rat, the Emperor ascended the throne in the Great Audience Hall/ whereas Shoku Nihongi says, 'ist day, loth month, tsuchinoto-ox. The Emperor ascended the throne in the Great Audience Hall.' Moreover, the first day of the eleventh month was not even mizunoe-rat. Momokawa Den was not a very carefully written work. An important case was the quotation of passages from Shoku Nihongi (before deletions) to show the facts of the incident involving Fujiwara Tanetsugu in 785. In the original text of Shoku Nihongi, the Otomo and Saeki group put forward Crown Prince Sawara and opposed moving the capital city to Nagaoka, assassinating Fujiwara Tanetsugu, who backed the move. Subsequently a curse arose from Prince Sawara, and this portion of the text was deleted at the command of Emperor Kanmu. When Fujiwara Nakanari gained power during the reign of Emperor Heizei, he restored the deleted passages in order to manifest the accomplishments of his father, Tanetsugu. Later, during the reign of Emperor Saga, after Nakanari had died, the passages were deleted a second time, and thus do not appear in Shoku Nihongi. However, Nihon Kiryaku recorded the passages before the original deletion, and these have become extremely important historical materials. The compilers must have seen both the deleted and undeleted versions and used the latter to supply deficiencies. It is most fortunate that the compilers of Nihon Kiryaku saw the undeleted version of Shoku Nihongi. Before the date, the compilers gave the year of the sexagenary cycle, and they maintained this method throughout the work, but this was not found in the original texts. In the period covered by Nihon Shoki, they gave the Emperor's age when he became Crown Prince, at his accession, and at his death. If it did not appear in the

2OO


original text, the Emperor's age was calculated from other entries. They changed the Japanese-style name of the Emperor into Chinese style in the titles throughout the headings, which is also seen often in the texts. Shoku Nihongi lacked clarity regarding the distinction between the reigns of Emperor Shomu and Empress Koken, but Nihon Kiryaku ends the entry on Emperor Shomu with his abdication in favour of the Crown Princess in the seventh month of 749 and begins the reign of Empress Koken from the first month of 750. The boundary was made clear, but the entries from the seventh to the twelfth month of 749 were entirely omitted. This was a mistake made in the interest of preserving order, by which the facts were lost. We must also discuss the chapters on the Age of the Gods. Nihon Kiryaku does not take excerpts from Nihon Shoki for the Age of the Gods: it takes the whole thing. The material is taken from the Tankaku Collection text, which contains a note that it was copied in 1306 by the priest Ken-a. Originally, Nihon Kiryaku, like Fuso Ryakki, had no account of the Age of the Gods and probably began with Emperor Jinmu. The account of the Age of the Gods was added by later people, using the Tankaku Collection text. Ruiju Kokushi did not classify the material on the Age of the Gods, transferring the text without change; this was the result of a decision by the compiler. The format of Nihon Kiryaku is similar to Ruiju Kokushi in that the material from The Age of the Gods is not excerpted, but its character is completely different in that the original compiler was not involved in the later addition of The Age of the Gods. Finally, when was Nihon Kiryaku written? In the latter part, the last entry is in 1036, during the reign of Emperor Go Ichijo. Another clue is the entry for the eighteenth day, seventh month, 1034, which says, 'The Crown Princess, Imperial Princess of the First Grade, gave birth to the second imperial grandchild at the residence of Crown Prince's Mentor Minamoto Yukito. This is Emperor Go Sanjo.' Thus the entry was recorded after the bestowal of the posthumous name of Emperor Go Sanjo, perhaps in the reign of Emperor Shirakawa (r. 1072-86) or Emperor Horikawa (r. 1086-1107). There are no clues to the date of the first part, but it may have been before the completion of the latter part. On the twentieth day, eighth month, 829, during the reign of Emperor Junna, it says, 'Second Grade Imperial Princess Sakehito died. She was the Princess of Emperor Konin.' The character used here for Ko in Konin, namely, 'broad, spacious' ( £k ), was also used throughout by Ruiju Kokushi, which may indicate that the first part of Nihon Kiryaku was compiled after Ruiju Kokushi. Elsewhere, however, Nihon Kiryaku uses the reg-

Afterword

201

ular character for Emperor Konin, namely, 'sparkle' ( T!G ), in its headings. No conclusion can be drawn from a single use of Ko, meaning 'broad, spacious.' The date of the first part, excerpts from the Six National Histories, must remain unexplained.

CHAPTER NINE

Conclusion

This concludes our study of the Six National Histories and the works relating to them. As works of superior scholarship by the outstanding men of their age, the Six National Histories command the greatest respect. Nihon Shoki was the first attempt in Japan to base a history on documentary records, and its latter part is a reliable history. In its other aspect, as a transmitter of legends and ancient oral materials, it provides insight into the ideas of ancient Japanese society and gives us a check on Kojiki. The time has long since gone when all the contents of Nihon Shoki were considered authentic history; but neither should they be regarded as fabrications in their entirety. They must be subjected to intense scrutiny, both theoretical and empirical, and the validity of each entry must be confirmed or rejected. In places, the text of Nihon Shoki was clearly fabricated, particularly where the phrasing can be traced to Chinese sources; but in other cases involving legends and myths, where verification is difficult, fabrication should not be assumed. Multi-disciplinary studies of ancient societies confirm our insight that such materials may have originated from historical events. Thus a thorough search through ancient documents is required before judging the authenticity of an entry. However, much of the material was changed or distorted during transmission through generations. We have also noted cases where the methods of the compilers, such as collecting similar materials, originally scattered over time and space, into the account of one era, have the effect of obscuring their precise historical reference. Such problems are not found in the other Five National Histories since they are based on documents and cover historical, not legend-

Conclusion

203

ary, times. Yet they too must be carefully checked and not artlessly cited as unimpeachable authorities, for they contain many errors and biases. But after such examination, their contribution to the historical record becomes impressive. We have noted the special characteristics of the other National Histories, such as the severe biographies of Nihon Koki and the warm-hearted biographies of Montoku Jitsuroku, both of which enrich the human record. However, there are also limitations in every work, such as the intrusion of family interests or the deletion of unpleasing materials. More generally, the scope of the entire series was narrow, being confined mainly to the imperial court; and within that narrow scope, the Histories concentrated on appointments and promotions. Shoku Nihongi is almost unreadable in places, with long lists of appointments and promotions. At the same time, such scrupulous listing of awards of offices and names constitutes a valuable source for other aspects of history. Although the modern tendency is to regard this exhaustive recording of appointments and promotions as self-interested at best and mindless at worst, perhaps they knew what they were doing, for, under patient examination, the lists help reveal social developments. And in Shoku Nihongi, the complete inclusion of applications for change of name by immigrant families from Korea and China reveals the process by which they were integrated into Japanese society. In terms of ideology, the compilers of the Six National Histories subscribed without hesitation to the ideal of the Japanese imperial state, which in their time had no malevolent intentions. Because this ideal of the imperial state transcended their family interests, the compilers of the Six National Histories were able to work out a method of roughly equitable representation of the various families as important historical actors. We have noted the cases where compilers took advantage of their position to put themselves or their families forward; but they are surprisingly few. For the most part, the compilers subordinated particular interests, including their own, to the general interest. Japanese Confucian idealism in antiquity was genuine, and the imperial state, which had guided the Japanese nation out of danger of foreign domination in the seventh and eighth centuries and directed the cultural and political growth of the country, seemed worthy of their admiration. Perhaps because of their complete devotion to the imperial state, the compilers of the Six National Histories were able to criticize the Emperors themselves as well as administrators who failed to achieve the ideal standards of Japanese government. For the most part, the authors of these histories preserved the duty of the historian, first

2O4


articulated in China, of stating the truth without reservation. The record they left of the Japanese nation in ancient times remains as an invaluable source for our understanding.

Appendices

i: R E I G N D A T E S OF E M P E R O R S TO AD 930

NOTE: The existence and dates of at least the first fourteen Emperors are historically indeterminate. Female Emperors are indicated by 9i Jinmu 660-585 BC 2 Suizei 581-549 BC 3 Annei 549-511 BC 4 Itoku 510-477 BC 5 Kosho 475-393 BC 6 Koan 392-291 BC 7 Korei 29O-215 BC 8 Kogen 214-158 BC 9 Kaika 158-98 BC 10 Sujin 97-30 BC 11 Suinin 29 BC-AD 70 12 Keiko 71-130 13 Seimu 131-19O 14 Chuai 192-2OO Empress Regent Jingu 201-269 15 Ojin 270-310 16 Nintoku 313-399 17 Richii 400-405 18 Hanzei 406-410 19 Ingyo 412-453 20 Anko 453-456 21 Yuryaku 456-479 22 Seinei 480-484

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4i 42 43 44 45

Kenzo Ninken Buretsu Keitai Ankan Senka Kinmei Bidatsu \omei Sushun Suiko 9 Jomei Kogyoku $ Kotoku Saimei $ Tenji Kobun Tenmu Jito 9 Monmu Genmei 9 Gensho 9 Shomu

485-487 488-498 498-506 507-531 531-535 535-539 539-571 572-585 585-587 587-592 592-628 629-641 642-645 645-654 655-661 662-671 671-672 673-686 690-697 697-707 707-715 715-724 724-749

206 46 Koken 9 47 Junnin 48 Shotoku $ 49 Konin 50 Kanmu 51 Heizei 52 Saga 53 Junna

Appendices 749-758 758-764 764-770 770-781 781-806 806-809 809-823 823-833

54 Ninmyo 55 Montoku 56 Seiwa 57 Yozei 58 Koko 59 Uda 60 Daigo

833-850 850-858 858-876 876-884 884-887 887-897 897-930

2: E N G L I S H WORKS R E L A T E D TO THE SIX NATIONAL H I S T O R I E S Beasley, W.G. 'Traditions of Historical Writing in Japan and China.' Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan, 3rd series, no. 7 (Nov. 1959) Borton, H. 'A Survey of Japanese Historiography.' American Historical Review 43, no. 3 (Apr. 1938) Hall, J. 'A Decade of Reform Work in Japan at the Opening of the vmth Century.' Transactions and Proceedings, Japan Society, London, no. 15 (1916-17) Hall, J.W. 'Historiography in Japan.' In H. Stuart Hughes, ed., Teachers of History: Essays in Honor of Laurence Bradford Packard. Ithaca, NY: Amherst 1954 Linn, J.K. 'The Imperial Edicts of the Shoku Nihongi.' PH.D thesis, Yale University 1950 Nishimura, Yasko. 'The Role of Poetry in Japanese Historical Writing: Rikkokushi (Six National Histories).' PH.D. thesis, University of Toronto 1982 Robinson, G.W. 'Early Japanese Chronicles: The Six National Histories.' In W.G. Beasley and E.G. Pulleyblank, eds., Historians of China and Japan. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1961 Sansom, G.B. 'The Imperial Edicts in the Shoku Nihongi (700-790 AD).' Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan (Dec. 1924) Shimizu, Osamu. 'Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku: An Annotated Translation with a Survey of the Early Ninth Century in Japan.' PH.D. thesis, Columbia University 1951 Snellen, J.B. 'Shoku Nihongi: Chronicles of J'apan, Continued, AD 697-791.' Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan, 2nd series, no. 11 (1934), no. 14 (1937)

Notes

TRANSLATOR S INTRODUCTION

1 D.L. Philippi, trans., Kojiki (Princeton University Press and University of Tokyo Press 1969), 41. 2 This provenance of Kojiki as stated by its Preface has long been doubted by scholars, especially in view of the strong contrast between the Classical Chinese language of the Preface and the hybrid Japanese language of the text, but no consensus has been reached on revised date or authorship. The dates given above by the translator were also accepted by Sakamoto. For updated reviews, see Mitani Ei'ichi, 'Kojiki,' Jidaibetsu Nihon Bungakushijiten, Jodaihen [Dictionary of Japanese Literary History by Periods, Ancient Period] (Yuseido 1987); and Kurano Kenji, 'Kojiki,' Shincho Nihon Bungaku Jiten [Shincho Dictionary of Japanese Literature] (Shinchosha 1988). 3 W.G. Aston, trans., Nihongi: Chronicles of Japan from the Earliest Times to AD 697 (London: Allen and Unwin 1956; reprint of 1896 edition), n, 350. The origins of Nihon Shoki have also been subjected to extended scholarly investigation but, as with Kojiki, no widely accepted revision of the original understanding has emerged. See Yokota Ken'ichi, 'Nihon Shoki/ Jidaibetsu Nihon Bungakushi Jiten; and Kojima Noriyuki, 'Nihon Shoki,' Shincho Nihon Bungaku Jiten. 4 G. Kato, trans., Kogo Shui: Gleanings from Ancient Stories (Meiji Japan Society 1925). 5 Because of its diligence in recording government documents in full and its general accuracy, Shoku Nihongi is commonly used as a text in Japanese university courses on reading ancient documents. A new scholarly edition by Aoki Kazuo, Inaoka Koji, Sasayama Haruo, and Shirafuji Noriyuki - the first of a projected five volumes - appeared in 1989 in the

208

Notes to pp. xvi-xxi

series Shin Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei [New Compendium of Classical Japanese Literature], published by Iwanami Shoten. 6 Osamu Shimizu, 'Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku: An Annotated Translation with a Survey of the Early Ninth-Century in Japan' (PH.D. thesis, Columbia University 1951), 25. 7 Sakamoto, Rikkokushi, 13. 8 For a translation of the Charter Oath, see W.T. de Bary, R. Tsunoda, and D. Keene, eds., Sources of Japanese Tradition (Columbia University Press 1959), 643-4. 9 Okubo Toshiaki, 'Nihon Rekishi no Rekishi/ [The History of Japanese History], Nihon Kindai Shigaku no Seiritsu [The Formation of Modern Japanese Historical Scholarship], Okubo Toshiaki Rekishi Chosakushu [Collected Historical Writings of Okubo Toshiaki], Vol. 7 (Yoshikawa Kobunkan 1988), 41-2. 10 Ibid., 54. On Ludwig Reiss, see Kanai Madoka, 'Rekishigaku: Ludwig Reiss o Megutte' [Historical Studies: On Ludwig Reiss], Oyatoi Gaikokujin, 17:Jinbun Kagaku [Foreign Employees, 17: Human Sciences] (Kajima Shuppankai 1976), 107-201. 11 The influence of the Six National Histories also continues in the chronicles of the Emperors. Chronicles were produced of Emperor Meiji (r. 1868-1912), Meiji Tennoki, and Emperor Taisho (r. 1912-26), Taisho Tennoki; in August, 1989, the Imperial Household Agency announced that a sixteen-year project would be devoted to producing the chronicles of Emperor Showa (r. 1926-89), Showa Tenno Jitsuroku. However, no one claims that these chronicles of the Emperors constitute the history of the nation in the periods covered. 12 Shigaku Zasshi, Vol. 2 (1890), no. 17, 230-40; no. 18, 279-92-; no. 20, 420-33; no. 21, 487-501; no. 22, 562-78. 13 The poem involved recondite allusion to an incident in ancient Chinese history, which only Emperor Go Daigo understood. See H.C. McCullough, trans., The Taiheiki: A Chronicle of Medieval Japan (Columbia University Press 1959), 107-25. 14 Shigaku Zasshi, Vol. 2 (1890), no. 23, 636-50; no. 24,728-42; no. 25,799-811. 15 Okubo Toshiaki, 'Yugamerareta rekishi,' [Distorted History], Nihon Kindai Rekishigaku no Seiritsu, 146. 16 This belief that Christianity provided the core and the dynamics of Western nations was common in Japan, being first given expression in Aizawa Seishisai's Shinron [New Theses] in 1825; see Bob T. Wakabayashi, AntiForeignism and Western Learning in Early Modern Japan: The New Theses of 1825 (Harvard University Press 1986). Few Japanese saw the emergence of the modern nation states in tandem with the decline of Christianity. 17 J. Pittau, Political Thought in Early Meiji Japan, 1868-1889 (Harvard University Press 1967), 177.

Notes to pp. xxii-xxvii

209

18 Ueda Masaaki, Kita Sadakichi (Kodansha 1978), 96-105. 19 R.K. Hall, trans., Kokutai no Hongi: Cardinal Principles of the National Essence of Japan (Harvard University Press 1949). 20 Inoue Kiyoshi, 'Nihon Teikoku Shugi to Kokushigaku; [Japanese Imperialism and the Study of Japanese history], in Inoue and Mori Koichi, Yugamerareta Kodaishi [Ancient History Distorted] (Mainichi Shinbun Sha 1973)/17-20. 21 lenaga Saburo, Ichi Rekishi Gakusha noAyumi [The Progress of a Scholar of History] (Sanseido 1977), 104-5. 22 'Shuppanho Ihan Jiken Kankei Monjo: Joshinsho,' [Documents Related to the Matter of Violation of the Publication Law: Written Statement], Tsuda Sokichi Zenshu [Complete Works of Tsuda Sokichi], Vol. 24 (Iwanami Shoten 1965), 261-570. 23 Kodaishi no Michi (Yomiuri Shinbun Sha 1980), 128-34. Fifty years later, Emperor Jinmu continues to be recognized as founder of the imperial line. On 7 July 1990, newly married Prince Aya (retitled Prince Akishino on the occasion of his wedding) went with his commoner bride, Kawashima Kiko, to Kashihara Jingu Shrine, where Emperor Jinmu is enshrined, to announce their wedding to the spirit of the first Emperor. Thus the imperial house recognizes the reign of Emperor Jinmu as historical fact. Although there was left-wing protest against the royal wedding as part of the Emperor system, no mainstream historian of ancient times arose to remind the nation that Emperor Jinmu may not have existed. Academic historians have little interest in specifically denying historical misconceptions; and perhaps their widespread carelessness in referring to the age of Emperor Jinmu, without stating that this is a convenient form of reference and not necessarily accurate, has helped to perpetuate the myth. Meanwhile, in 1990, Kashihara Jingu celebrated the 2,65oth anniversary of the founding of the imperial line by Emperor Jinmu. Since this took place in democratic Japan, Sakamoto's submission to the requirement of the authoritarian state of 1940 to celebrate the 2,6ooth anniversary does not appear as reprehensible as even he thought. 24 Discussion with Kanai Madoka, Professor Emeritus, Historiographical Institute, Tokyo University, August 1990. 25 Kodaishi no Michi, 114. 26 Sakamoto Taro, 'Kokushi Taikei to Kuroita Hakushi' [Kokushi Taikei and Dr. Kuroita], Koten to Reikishi [The Classics and History] (Yoshikawa Kobunkan 1972), 427-31. 27 Discussion with Professor Sasayama Haruo, Department of Japanese History, Tokyo University, July 1988. 28 Kodaishi no Michi, 258-9. 29 Sakamoto Taro, Waga Seishun [My Youth] (Yoshikawa Kobunkan 1987), 39.

2io

Notes to pp. 3-6

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 Different pronunciations of Chinese characters were adopted by the Japanese in three historical periods. The first is Wu pronunciation (Japanese: go-on) after the Wu kingdom (222-80); it is the Japanese rendering of Chinese pronunciation in that era. Brought to Japan by priests and immigrants from Paekche, it came to be used most in Buddhist terms. The second is Han pronunciation (Japanese: kan'on), referring not to the Han dynasties but to China in general. Japanese renderings of the standard pronunciation of Zhangan, capital of the Tang dynasty, were brought to Japan by Japanese envoys and overseas students and came into general use in government and scholarship. The third is Tang pronunciation (Japanese: to-on), brought to Japan in subsequent eras by priests and traders, which is generally found in specific compound words. Dictionaries commonly use for illustration the pronunciation of the character fT (primary meanings - to go, to carry out). In Wu pronunciation it is gyo; in Han pronunciation it is ko; and in Tang pronunciation it is an, as in the compound word andon (faj^j;), a paper-covered lamp stand. 2 Ryo no Shuge, Part i, Shintei Zoho Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 23 (1966), 59-60, 67. 3 Ibid., 67. 'Ancient Records' is a work cited in small print after 'Compiles the National History/ under Duties of the Head of the Library Bureau. It appears many times in Ryo no Shuge but is not otherwise identified. From its contents it has been surmised that it was written between 737 and 740. Miura Hiroyuki, Ryo no Shuge Shakugi [Exposition of Ryo no Shuge], ed. Takikawa Masajiro, (Naigai Shoseki Kabushiki Gaisha 1931), 6. 4 This is found in small print under the duties of the Head of the Ministry of Central Affairs. It says, 'According to the Miscellaneous Laws, if there are omens etc.", but the actual 'main text' of the Miscellaneous Laws referred to by Sakamoto is not extant. Ryo no Shuge, 59-60. 5 Ibid., 60. Shinryo Shiki is also unidentified: Miura Hiroyuki, Ryo no Shuge Shakugi, 10. 6 Iwahashi Koyata, 'Kokushi to Senkokushisho' [National Histories and the National History Compilation Office], Jodai Shiseki no Kenkyu [Studies in Ancient Historical Writing] (Yoshikawa Kobunkan 1956), 277-84. 7 Ryo no Shuge, Part i, 63. 8 Ibid. The author and date of the 'Shaku' commentary are unknown. Miura Hiroyuki, Ryo no Shuge Shakugi, 9. 9 Iwahashi, 'Kokushi to Senkokushisho.' 10 Kogo Shui, Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 25 (1939), i. 11 Ibid., 10. 12 Ruiju Sandai Kyaku, Shintei Zoho Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 25 (1965), 29. 13 W.G. Aston, trans., Nihongi: Chronicles of Japan from the Earliest Times to AD

Notes to pp. 7-32

211

687-697 (Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle 1972; reprint of 1896 edition), Vol. I, 79. 14 Zenrin Kokuho Ki, Preface, Zoku Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 30, Part i (1976), 316. 15 Godansho, Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 21 (1930), 328. 16 Nichureki, Shiseki Shuran, Vol. 23 (Kondo Kappansho 1901), Ch. 11, section Washo [Japanese Books], National Histories part, 208. 17 Iwahashi, Jodai Shiseki no Kenkyu, 267-84 18 Honcho Getsurei, Shinko Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 4 (1931), 302, 306, 308, etc.; Sato Shigemi, 'Ruiju Kokushi Ko' [On Ruiju Kokushi], Shigaku Zasshi [Journal of Historical Studies], 11:5 (May 1900), 596. 19 Man'yoshu Nanji, Zoku Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 16, Part 2 (1923), 518,521. 20 Imanishi Haruaki, 'Rikkokushi no Tairei' [Models for the Format of the Six National Histories], Ishihama Sensei Koki Kinen, Toyogaku Ronso [Essays in Far Eastern History, in Honour of Professor Ishihama Juntaro's Seventieth Birthday] (Osaka: Kansai Daigaku 1958), 33-48. 21 Ibid. 22 Dairi Shiki, Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 4 (1931), 258. 23 Omodaka Hisataka, Man'yoshu Chushaku [Annotated Man'yoshu], Vol. 20 (Dai Nihon Insatsu Kabushiki Gaisha 1957), 237-9. 24 Ruiju Sandai Kyaku, 67-8. C H A P T E R TWO: NIHON

SHOKI

1 'Nihon Shoki K6' [On Nihon Shoki], Hikobae, Ban Nobutomo Zenshu, Vol. 4 (Naigai Insatsu Kabushiki Gaisha 1907), 5-6. 2 Honcho Getsurei, 316-17. 3 Nihon Shoki Shiki, Kohon [The 'A' Text of Nihon Shoki Shiki], Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 8 (1965), 3. 4 Engi Tengyo Nihongi Kyoen Waka Jo, Zoku Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 15, Part i, 48. 5 Koryuji Engi, Dai Nihon Bukkyo Zensho, Vol. 83 (Kodansha 1972), 238. Also cited in Choya Gunsai [Classified Records of Court and Country 1116], a classified collection of poems and public documents by Abe Tameyasu: Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 29, Part i (1951), 37. 6 Shaku Nihongi, Kokushi Taikei, vol. 8 (1965), 6. 7 Ryo no Shuge, Part 2, Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 24 (1966), 775. 8 Omodaka Hisataka, ed., Manyoshu Chushaku, Vol. i, 90-6. 9 Koya Zappitsu Shu, Zoku Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 12, Part i (1979), 76. 10 Jogu Shotoku Taishi Den Hoketsuki, Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 3 (1930), 685. 11 'Nihonsho to Nihongi/ Shigaku [Historical Studies], Vol. 5, no. 8. 12 Kanda Kiichiro, 'Nihon Shoki to iu Shomei' [On Nihon Shoki as the Name of the Book], Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei Geppo [Monthly Bulletin of Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei], July 1965,1-3. 13 Kojima Noriyuki, Jodai Nihon Bungaku to Chugoku Bungaku [Ancient Japanese Literature and Chinese Literature], i, (Hanawa Shobo 1962), 287-96.

212

Notes to pp. 35-45

14 Aston, Nihongi, n, 403. 15 Wada Hidematsu, Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku Kosho [Studies on Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku] (Meiji Shoin 1936), 34-7. 16 Hirata Toshiharu, Nihon Koten no Seiritsu no Kenkyu [Studies in the Formation of the Japanese Classics] (Nihon Shoin 1959), Ch. 2, 66-129. 17 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku Kosho, 34-7. 18 Iwahashi, Jodai Shiseki no Kenkyu, i, 114-52. 19 Ota Yoshimaro, Kodai Nihon Bungaku ShichoRon, in: Nihon Shoki no kubun gensho to Kojiki [Trends in Classical Japanese Literature in: The Divisions in Nihon Shoki in Relation to Kojiki], (Nan'undo Ofusha 1962), 112-21. 20 Nihon Shoki Shiki, Kohon, 3-4. 21 Engi Tengyo Nihongi Kyoen Waka Jo, 48. 22 Okurayama Ronshu, Part i, Nihon Shoki Kakkan Seiritsu no Ichikosatsu [On the Formation of the Volumes in Nihon Shoki], 106-21. 23 Konosu Hayao, 'Nihon Shoki Hensan ni tsuite: Toku ni Shiyo Goku ni tsukite Mitaru' [On the Compilation of Nihon Shoki: With Emphasis on Word Usage], Nihon Shogaku Kenkyu [Research in Studies on Nihon Shoki], Vol. i (1939). 24 Ota, Kodai Nihon Bungaku Shicho Ron, in, 53-110. 25 Aston, Nihongi, n, 204. 26 Ibid. 27 Fujii Akitaka, 'Kinmeiki Bukkyo Denrai no Kisai ni tsuite' [On the Entry on the Arrival of Buddhism in the Chronicle of Emperor Kinmei], Shigaku Zasshi, Vol. 36, no. 8 (Aug. 1925), 653-6, argues that the passage was formed by altering words of the scripture passage. 28 Inoue Kaoru, 'Nihon Shoki Bukkyo Denrai Kisai K6' [On the Entry on the Arrival of Buddhism in Nihon Shoki], Nihon Kodai no Seiji to Shukyo [Politics and Religion in Ancient Japan], (Yoshikawa Kobunkan 1961), 189-233. 29 Kojima Noriyuki, 'Nihon Shoki no Jussaku' [The Composition of Nihon Shoki], Jodai Nihon Bungaku to Chugoku Bungaku, i, 368-74. 30 lenaga Saburo, ed., Jogu Shotoku Hoo Teisetsu (Sanseido 1951), 138. 31 Dai Nihon Komonjo [Documents of Japan], (Tokyo Teikoku Daigaku, Shiryo Hensanjo), Vol. 24 (1939), 378. 32 Dai Nihon Komonjo (Tokyo Teikoku Daigaku, Insatsu Kyoku), Vol. 3 (1902), 89. A misprint gives Sakamoto's reference to Volume 2, not Volume 3; however, the correct date is given. 33 Aston, Nihongi, i, 163. 34 Donald L. Philippi, trans., Kojiki (Princeton and University of Tokyo Press 1969), 236-7. 35 Aston, Nihongi, i, 256; Philippi, Kojiki, 322. The point of the tale of the ship in Nihon Shoki is that it was light and swift; in Kojiki, the remains of the ship when it became dilapidated were made into a zither of special

Notes to pp. 46-61

36

37 38

39

40 41 42 43 44

45

46

47

213

quality, which became the subject of a song. Aston and Philippi both render the name of the ship as Karano. It is not certain how many Fudoki were originally written; as Sakamoto notes, only five survive. While they were local records compiled by local officials, the forms and terms were prescribed by the central government. (Naoki Kojiro, Nishimiya Kazutami, and Okada Seishi, 'Sosetsu: Fudoki no Seiritsu' [Overview: The Formation of the Fudoki], Nihon Shoki, Fudoki (Kadokawa Shoten 1978), 279-80.) Thus it is possible that the central government intended from the beginning to use the Fudoki for the Nihon Shoki history project. Aston, Nihongi, 11, 260-3. Ato no Sukune Chitoku Nikki is cited three times and Tsuki no Muraji Omi Nikki once. Shaku Nihongi, 199-200. Nothing more is known about any of the individuals associated with these memos than what is recorded in Nihon Shoki. None of these works has survived independently. Thus the citation of them in Nihon Shoki inadvertently provides the oldest written sources for ancient Korean history. However, contemporary Korean scholars dislike using them because of their alleged bias against the Korean kingdoms. As Sakamoto notes, they seem to be respectful towards the Japanese Emperor and nation; for Koreans, excessively so. Kojima Noriyuki, 'Nihon Shoki to Ruisho' [Nihon Shoki in Relation to Similar Works], Jodai Nihon Bungaku to Chugoku Bungaku, i, 375-405. With changes from Aston, Nihongi, i, 391. Aston, Nihongi, n, 87. Both the female, Amaterasu, and the male, Susano-o, produced children. Sakamoto's views about the relations between the Yamato people and the Izumo people, based entirely on ancient documents, have not been drastically altered by the findings of the extensive archaeological work done since his work was published in 1970. See Joan R. Pigott, 'Sacral Kingship and Confederacy in Early Izumo/ Monumenta Nipponica, Vol. 44, no. i (Spring 1989). In the field of education, the American Occupation authorities insisted on the rewriting of textbooks strictly separating myths from historical facts. See John Caiger, 'lenaga Saburo and the First Postwar Japanese History Textbooks,' Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 3, Part i (Jan. 1969). Tajima Mori was sent by Emperor Suinin to the Eternal Land (presumably China) to obtain tachibana orange trees, which bear inedible fruit esteemed for its fragrance and medicinal properties. Tajima Mori, finding upon his return that the Emperor had died, composed a poem and himself died. Aston, Nihongi, i, 186-7. Miyatsuko referred to a family rank; most were converted into the seventh rank of muraji in the Eight-Rank Reform of 684. The suffix osa,

214

Notes to pp. 62-76

meaning chief, is problematical. Inaki seem to have been regional families of officials, most of which were converted into the eighth rank, also called inaki, in the Reform of 684. 48 The meaning of this is not clear; see Aston, Nihongi, i, 251. 49 Ibid., i, 262-3. This story was traditionally given great significance as the introduction of Chinese learning into Japan. Its historicity is difficult to determine; and in any case it is not likely that such contacts were so limited. 50 The Crown Prince was guilty of incest with his half-sister, who was the one to be punished. Ibid., i, 323-5. 51 Hakuson exchanged his slow horse for the swift one, but it inexplicably turned into a clay haniwa horse. Ibid., i, 357-8. 52 Defeated in love and overturned in an exchange of poems, the Crown Prince had Shibi attacked in force and killed. Ibid., i, 399-402. 53 Jogiiki, in Wada Hidematsu, Kokusho Itsubun, 250-1. 54 There is a scholarly theory, not adopted by Sakamoto, that the throne was empty for two years not because of the compilers' error, but because these two Emperors on the one hand, and Emperor Kinmei on the other, engaged in a struggle between opposing courts, as in the period of the Southern and Northern courts in the fourteenth century. Hayashiya Tatsusaburo, 'Keitai Kinmei-cho Nairan no Shiteki Bunseki' [Historical Analysis of the Civil War between the Courts of Keitai and Kinmei], Kodai Kokka no Kaitai [The Dissolution of the Ancient State] (Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai 1955). 55 The granaries (miyake) were under direct government control. Nihon Shoki noted their establishment because the extension of bureaucratic control in the fifth and sixth centuries over long-established granaries marked an important stage in the development of Yamato state power. The struggle for control with regional families continued until the reorganization of the granaries in the Taika Reform of 645. 56 Pillow words (makura kotoba) in Japanese poetry were fixed epithets, usually of five syllables, preceding the noun; some, like Shikishima, carried much emotional significance. 57 The message was in black ink on a black feather; Wang Chini steamed it and transferred the characters to silk, where they were visible. Further, he was the only one who could decipher it. Aston, Nihongi, n, 91. 58 Nihon Shoki Shiki, Kohon, 7. 59 Kanke Godenki, Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. i (1931), 504. 60 Shaku Nihongi, 35-69; Hirata Atsutane, Koshicho, Kaidaiki, Koshi Niten no Ron [Two Classics of History], Part i, Hirata Atsutane Zenshu, Vol. 5 (Heibunsha 1977), 49. 61 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 21 (1930), 526. 62 Shaku Nihongi, 14-16.

Notes to pp. 76-87

215

63 Nihon Shoki Shiki, Kohon, 15-50. 64 Tsukishima Hiroshi, Heian Jidai no Kanbun Kundokugo ni tsukite no Kenkyu [Studies on the Rendering of Kanbun into Japanese Readings in the Heian Period] (Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai 1965), 132-3. 65 Kasuya Koki, 'Nihon Shoki Shiki Kohon no Kenkyu' [Study of the 'A' Text of Nihon Shoki Shiki], Geirin [The Arts], Vol. 19, no. 2 (1968). 66 The mistake is in Shaku Nihongi, 14, which gives Jowa 6 (839). 67 Nihongi Korei, in Shaku Nihongi, 14-15. 68 Ibid., 17. 69 Nihon Shoki Shiki, Shiki Teibon, Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 8, 185-205. This records questions to and answers from the lecturer reading the contents of: Nihon Shoki. 70 Nihon Kiryaku, Kokushi Teikei, Vol. 11 (1965), 96. 71 Historical-literary scholarship refers to Kidendo, one of the four branches of study at the Heian university. It included the study of the Chinese clasical histories, especially Shi Ji, Han Shu, and Hou Han Shu and such literary works as Wen Xuan. The other branches of scholarship were: - Myogyodo, ethics, based on such works as the Analects of Confucius and the Classic of Filial Piety, but also including the important historical work Zuo Zhuan; - Myobodo, law, especially based on the ritsuryo codes - this field eventually became confined within the Sakanoue and Nakahara families; - Sando, mathematics - although this had practical applications for astronomy and calendar-making it was the least esteemed field of study. It became hereditary within the Ozuki and Miyoshi families. See Momo Hiroyuki, Jodai Gakusei no Kenkyu [Studies on the Scholarly System of Ancient Times] (Yoshikawa Kobunkan 1983), 62-126. 72 Yamazaki Ansai, Fuyoshu, in Nihon Koten Gakkai, Yamazaki Ansai Zenshu [Complete Works of Yamazaki Ansai] (Perikan-sha 1978), Vol. 5,10. 73 Since it was a history of Japan written by Japanese, Norinaga thought it unnecessary to put 'Japan' in the title; it should have been simply Shoki. 74 Izu no Chiwaki, Soron, Kokiron, Part 4, Tachibana Moribe Zenshu, Vol. i (Tokyo Bijutsu 1967), 14. 75 Muraoka Tsunetsugu, 'Tachibana Moribe no Gakusetsu' [The Scholarly Theories of Tachibana Moribe], Zotei Nihon Shisoshi Kenkyu [Studies in the History of Japanese Thought, Enlarged and Revised] (Iwanami Shoten 1940), 282-3. 76 Koshicho, Kaidaiki, Koshi Niten no Ron, Hirata Atsutane Zenshu, Vol. 5, 67. 77 Ibid., 92. 78 Ibid., 94-5. 79 Nihon Shoki K6/ Ban Nobutomo Zenshu, Vol. 7, 5-12. 80 'Nagara no Yamakaze Furoku,' Ibid., 520-69; Nihongi Nenryaku K6/ Hikobae, 13-28.

216

Notes to pp. 88-117

81 Sakamoto was among the scholars who compiled the Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei edition (Iwanami Shoten, 2 vols. 1967-8).

CHAPTER THREE: SHOKU NIHONGI 1 Shingishiki, Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 4 (1931), 296. 2 Prince Otomo reigned as Emperor Kobun for eight months in 671-2 and died in the Jinshin War. He was not officially included in the roster of Emperors until the Meiji Period. 3 Kamatari, who was the only person in history to receive this Special Cap Rank, did so because of his services to Emperor Tenji in the Taika Reform of 654. 4 Shoku Nihongi mentions only the two elder brothers, Ojimaro and Azumaro; Sakamoto says Ojimaro, Azumaro ra, suggesting that all of them were released. 5 Ruiju Sandai Kyaku, Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 25 (1965), 107-08. 6 Ibid., 112-13. 7 Emperor Junnin (r. 758-64), grandson of Emperor Tenmu and the seventh son of Prince Toneri, was a victim of the power struggles of his era. He succeeded Empress Koken (r. 749-58) under the influence of Fujiwara Nakamaro (706-64). Nakamaro steadily enhanced his own powers and was granted the name Emi Oshikatsu by Emperor Junnin. Meanwhile, former Empress Koken's regained strength under the influence of the priest Dokyo (7-772) led to a brief war in which Emi Oshikatsu was defeated. Emperor Junnin was deposed and exiled to Awaji and was thenceforth known as the Lord of Awaji. He was given the posthumous name Emperor Junnin in 1871. Koken reascended the throne as Empress Shotoku (r. 764-70). 8 Senmyo-style decrees were imperial decrees in the Japanese language, as opposed to materials in kanbun. They were customarily issued on such occasions as the New Year, an accession, a change of era name, and the establishment of the Crown Prince. In Nihon Shoki they were converted into kanbun. The recording of senmyo-style decrees in their original language in Shoku Nihongi makes it a valuable source for the study of ancient Japanese language. 9 That is, the connection of the compilers with the Paekche-descended singers led them to include a song using the Man'yo syllabary, which was rarely done. 10 The crime was the Kusuko Incident of 809-10, in which Retired Emperor Heizei, believed to be under the power of his wife, Kusuko, attempted to return the capital city to Nara, leading to military actions. The event shocked the court. It is discussed in Chapter 4, Nihon Koki, Chronicle of Emperor Saga.

Notes to pp. 118-35

217

11 Honcho Hoka Monjo Mokuroku, Zoku Zoku Gunsho Ruiju (Zoku Gunsho Ruiju Kanseikai 1985), 153-4. 12 Sai-6 - unmarried prince or princess sent to Ise and Kamo shrines at the time of accession of a new Emperor. 13 Sai-e - priests and nuns gathered together and given purification food. 14 'Kanso Jirui/ in Wada Hidematsu, Kokusho Itsubun (Dai Nihon Insatsu Kabushiki Gaisha 1940), 148-50. 15 Ibid., 148. 16 Saikyuki, Shintei Zoho Kojitsu Sosho (Meiji Tosho Shuppan Kabushiki Gaisha 1952), Vol. 18, 4. This text gives Taiho 3 (703) for the first occasion; Wada and Sakamoto both corrected it to Taiho 2 (702). The Saikyuki text also gives Hoki i (770) for the second occasion; Wada notes a variant of Reiki i (715), which is also given by Sakamoto. Another ancient text also gives Hoki i (770): Ryosho [Selections from the Laws], Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 4 (1931), 243. 17 Kokusho Itsubun, 149. 18 Ibid., 148-9. 19 Ibid., 149-50. 20 Tsuken Nyudo Zosho Mokuroku, Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 28 (1939), 197. 21 Ban Nobutomo Zenshu, Vol. 4, 81,123-6, 456. 22 The former library of the Owari Tokugawa, now belonging to Nagoya City. C H A P T E R FOUR: NIHON KOKI 1 Wake Kiyomaro (733-99) was one of the leaders in resisting the attempted ascension to the throne of the priest Dokyo. A key device in the struggle was an oracle obtained by Kiyomaro from the Usa Hachiman deity, stating that only a descendant of the Sun Goddess could take the throne. Kiyomaro was exiled but returned to prosperity in the capital after the downfall of Dokyo in 770. 2 The entire biography occupies one page in Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 3 (1930), 697. 3 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, 531. 4 Sakamoto's interpretation here is forced, as Nihon Koki noted the high expenses but concluded that later generations would be grateful. Otsugu appears to have modified his opinion in the context of making a personal criticism of the Emperor. It is also possible that someone other than Otsugu wrote this assessment of the Emperor. 5 This is known as the Kusuko Incident, because it was understood to have arisen from the influence of Fujiwara Kusuko over Retired Emperor Heizei. In 809 Heizei abdicated in favour of his younger brother, Emperor Saga, and set out to return to Nara with the support of a number of high

218

Notes to pp. 137-42

officials. It became evident that Retired Emperor Heizei intended to restore Nara as the capital city. Early in 810 the court of Emperor Saga mobilized in resistance, setting up a military alert and closing the three barriers to the capital. After inconclusive military actions, Emperor Heizei abandoned his plan and took holy orders. Fujiwara Kusuko committed suicide by taking poison; her brother, Nakanari, was executed in prison. The capital was shocked by the event, which threatened the first major military confrontation since the Jinshin War of 672. Fujiwara Kusuko had served at the court of Emperor Kanmu, but was dismissed for impropriety. When Emperor Kanmu died in 806, she made a comeback at the court of Emperor Heizei, becoming his principal wife, gaining Junior Third Rank, and allegedly exercising much influence. It is believed that she feared the loss of her position and power for a second time when Emperor Heizei became ill and abdicated to Emperor Saga, so she conspired with her brother Nakanari and persuaded Emperor Heizei to move the capital to Nara. 6 Ruiju Sandai Kyaku, 270. 7 Ibid., 406. 8 It was not considered reprehensible for the Emperor to admit to clouded judgement under the influence of love. The occasion and the themes were artificial and were meant to evoke the humanity of the poet through the expression of feelings. 9 Sandai Jitsuroku, Biography of Imperial Prince Nakano, seventeenth day, first month, 867. 10 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, 525. 11 Honcho Hoka Monjo Mokuroku, 155. 12 Seiji yoryaku, Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 28 (1964), 60-1. 13 There were three compilations of Kotai Shiki, for the Enryaku, Jogan, and Engi eras, which are collected in Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 26 (1965). A misprint in Sakamoto's text mistakenly refers to Enryaku Kotai Shiki rather than to Engi Kotai Shiki and gives Enryaku 12 (793) and Enryaku 14 (795) rather than Engi 12 (912) and Engi 14 (914). For the text of the orders, see Ruiju Fusen Sho, Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 27 (1965), 144,147. C H A P T E R F I V E : SHOKU NIHON KOKI

i In 866 there was a fire at the Oten Gate that threw the capital into an uproar. Minamoto Makoto (819-68) was first convicted of arson, but further investigation revealed that Tomo Yoshio (809-68) was guilty; he was sentenced to death less one degree, which was exile. It appears that his motive was to frame Makoto, a well placed political rival of good family. Yoshio was the son of a disgraced official and may have been born in exile; he owed his position to scheming for the favour of the Fujiwara.

Notes to pp. 142-3

219

Historians agree that Fujiwara Yoshifusa skilfully exploited the crisis to take control of the government, becoming Chancellor (Daijo Daijin) for his nephew Emperor Montoku in 866 and advancing other members of his family. This marked an important stage in the decline of the ritsuryo state. 2 Sandai Jitsuroku, Biography of Minamoto Makoto, twenty-eighth day, intercalary twelfth month, 868. 3 Sandai Jitsuroku, Biography of Abe Yasuhito, twenty-third day, fourth month, 859. 4 Toshi fureba As the years stream by yowai wa oinu my own life passes before me shika wa aredo still I am renewed hana o shi mireba when I but see the blossoms mono omoi mo nashi my heart's sorrows disappear L.R. Rodd, trans., Kokinshu: A Collection of Poems Ancient and Modern (Princeton University Press 1984), 63. 5 The Jowa Incident of 842 was critical in bringing the Fujiwara family to its long-envisaged ascendancy as Chancellors (Daijo Daijin) and Regents (Sessho) for the adult Emperors. An arrangement had been worked out between Emperor Saga and his successor and younger brother, Emperor Junna, to alternate the throne between their offspring. The lines of each of these two Emperors had rival supporters at the court. Under the arrangement, Emperor Saga's son ascended the throne as Emperor Ninmyo in 833, and Emperor Junna's son Tsunesada was established as Crown Prince and was slated to follow Emperor Ninmyo as the next sovereign. However, upon the death of Retired Emperor Saga in 842, there arose the Jowa Incident, in which it was alleged that Crown Prince Tsunesada was at the centre of a plan by Tomo and Tachibana to raise a force against the state. Tomo and Tachibana were exiled, some sixty members of their court faction were implicated, and Tsunesada was deposed as Crown Prince. Instead of Prince Tsunesada, Emperor Ninmyo's son Michiyasu was made Crown Prince and succeeded to the throne as Emperor Montoku. The long-standing historical interpretation is that Fujiwara Yoshifusa orchestrated the affair in order to bring the pliant Prince Michiyasu, of whom Yoshifusa was a maternal uncle, to the throne as Emperor Montoku. Yoshifusa became the first Fujiwara Chancellor during Emperor Montoku's reign and the first Fujiwara Regent for his nine-year-old successor, Emperor Seiwa.

22O

Notes to pp. 145-81 i Emperor Saga (r. 809-23)

2 Emperor Junna (r. 823-33) Crown Prince Tsunesada, deposed 842

3 Emperor Ninmyo (r. 833-50) = Fujiwara Junshi, younger sister of Yoshifusa 4 Prince Michiyasu, Emperor Montoku, (r. 850-58) Yoshifusa Chancellor (Daijo Daijin) 5 Emperor Seiwa (r. 858-76) Yoshifusa Regent (Sessho) 6 Tencho: Ten years from 824 to third day, first month, 834 Jowa: Fourteen years from 834 to thirteenth day, sixth month, 848 Kasho: Three years from 848 to twenty-eighth day, fourth month, 851. 7 Naito Torajiro, Shina Shigakushi [History of Chinese Historical Scholarship] (Kobundo, 2nd ed. 1952), 259. 8 Kokugakuin Zasshi, vol. 8 (1902), nos. i, 2, 4,5, 7, 8, 9,11,12. C H A P T E R SIX: NIHON MONTOKU TENNO JITSUROKU There are no notes to Chapter Six.

CHAPTER SEVEN: NIHON SANDAI JITSUROKU 1 Nihon Kiryaku, Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 10 (1965), 539. 2 Kugyo Bunin, Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 53 (1964), 149. 3 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, 522. 4 Fuso Ryakki, Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 12 (1965), 131-2. 5 Translation from Sey Nishimura, 'Retrospective Comprehension: Japanese Foretelling Songs/ Asian Folklore Studies, Vol. 45,1986, 57. 6 'Todaiji Sojo Shinzai Den' [Biography of Archbishop Shinzai of Todaiji], Kikeshu, Kaidai Shakumon, 31-2, accompanying Kikeshu, Kunaicho Shoryobu Hen (Yoshikawa Kobunkan 1978). 7 Chisho Daishi Den, Zoku Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 8, Part 2 (1978), 716. 8 Jikaku Daishi Den, ibid., 683-99. 9 As specified in Ryo no Gige, the duties of the Head of the Ministry of Ceremonial included the editing of biographies of meritorious families.

Notes to pp. 187-99

221

There follows in small print, 'The worthy families present their family biographies; the Ministry compiles them.' Ryo no Gige, Kokushi Taikei, Vol. 22, 38.

CHAPTER EIGHT: AFTERWORD 1 Ruiju Fusen Sho, 289-94. 2 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, 522. 3 Shugaisho, Kojitsu Sosho (Yoshikawa Kobunkan 1906), Vol. i, 58. 4 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku Kosho, 82-3. 5 Jodaiji Yoroku, Zoku Zoku Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 21 (1986), 190-4. 6 Wada Hidematsu, Kokusho Itsubun, 54-7. 7 Tsuken Nyudo Sosho Mokuroku, 193-4. It is not clear whether the last line should be read as 'Nai Shinkokushi' [Within, Shinkokushi] or as 'Naishin Kokushi,' the title of an unknown work. 8 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, 522. 9 Kanke Godenki, Shinko Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. i (1931), 504. 10 Kanke Bunso, Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei, Vol. 72 (Iwanami Shoten 1966), 394. 11 Nihon Kiryaku, 539. 12 Nihonkoku Genzai Sho Mokuroku, Zoku Gunsho Ruiju, Vol. 30, Part 2 d979)/ 4ii13 The entry in Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, gives only 'Nihonshi Kiryaku.' Wada Hidematsu discusses it under the title 'Nihonshi Kiryaku' and notes the variant names 'Nihon Shiryaku' and 'Nihon Kiryaku.' Honcho Shojaku Mokoroku Kosho, 24. As Sakamoto notes below, it is now widely known as Nihon Kiryaku, the title that is used in the Kokushi Taikei edition. 14 Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, 531.


Original Text Index

ABBREVIATIONS

NS: Nihon Shoki SN: Shoku Nihongi NK: Nihon Koki SNK: Shoku Nihon Koki NMTJ: Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku NSJ: Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku RK: Ruiju Kokushi

Ariwara Narihira, assessed as handsome and talented poet, NSJ, 184 Awata Mahito, dialogue with Chinese about Japan, SN, 104 Bidatsu, Emperor, non-believer in Buddhism, NS, 70 Demon Strangler appears in front of the Ceremonial Hall, NSJ, 178 Dokyo. See Shotoku, Empress Enrolment of 15 shrines as government shrines, SNK, 146

cuckoo, NK, 138 Fujiwara Tsugutada, biography as a modest, untalented official, NK, 98 Fujiwara Yoshifusa, accompanies Emperor Ninmyo to a banquet, SNK, 151

Fujiwara Yoshifusa, identifies jail for Emperor Ninmyo, SNK, 151 Fujiwara Yoshifusa, leads officials to view archery, SNK, 151 Fujiwara Yoshifusa, orders edict of Tang Emperor stored, SNK, 151 Fujiwara Yoshifusa, as Provisional Middle Counsellor, leads officials, SNK, 151

Foretelling song predicts accession of Emperor Seiwa, NSJ, 180 Fujiwara Sonondo, poem on

Giant snake eats Nirvana Sutra, NSJ, 178

224

Original Text Index

Heizei, Emperor, criticized for changing era name, NK, 133 Ikeda Haruno, conformity to Chinese dress code of short gown, SNK, 150 Izumo Takeru, poem of sword, NS, 45 Junna, Emperor, Assessment as cost-conscious, but vicious Emperor, RK, 134-5 Kanmu, Emperor, Assessment as diligent but extravagant Emperor, NK, 133-4 Kanmu, Emperor, poem on cuckoo, NK, 138 Kanmu, Emperor, poem on snow, NK, 138 Kenzo, Emperor, events during his reign adapted from Chinese sources, NS, 50-1 Kinmei, Emperor, events during his reign adapted from Chinese sources, NS, 51 Kogen, Emperor, biography follows style of Han Shu and Hou Han Shu, NS, 16 Konin, Emperor, Essay of Praise at his death as virtuous ruler, SN, 18-19 Kyaku (regulations on domestic administration) on taxes, etc., SN, 106 Michi Kimi Obitona, Model Governor in Chikugo and Higo, SNK, NSJ, 107 Minabuchi Toshina, objective and honest official, NSJ, 157 Miyako Yoshika, death through overwork on Montoku Tenno Jitsu-

roku, NMTJ, 159 Miyako Yoshika, talented man of scholarship and letters, NSJ, 158 Montoku, Emperor, exemplary behaviour as 9-year-old Crown Prince, SNK, 149 Muneyasu, Prince, exemplary behaviour at age 7, SNK, 149 New Year's poem in a singing and dancing party in court, SN, 108-9 Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku, principles of compilation, NSJ, 175-6 Ninmyo, Emperor, rides on palanquin for Empress Dowager, SNK, 148-9 Offerings to Kashii Shrine, SNK, 146 Officials appointed for funeral of Emperor Ninmyo, SNK, 147 Ogre eats a woman in Banquet Pine Grove, NSJ, 178-9 Okura Yoshiyuki donates funds for lamps to Kojimayama-dera Temple, NSJ, 173 Okura Yoshiyuki instructs princes and aristocrats on Yanshi Jiaxun, NSJ,

172

Onakatomi Morouo, who appreciated arts but craved wealth, NK, 136 Ono Takamura, refusal to exchange ships with Envoy to China, NMTJ, 165-6 Owari Muraji Hamanushi, at age 113, performs dance and gives poems, SNK, 147-8 Presentation of Buddha's ashes in the Palace, SNK, 146 Reading of Benevolent King Sutra in the Palace, SNK, 146

Original Text Index Reading of Great Wisdom Sutra in 7 great temples of Nara, SNK, 146 Reading of Great Wisdom Sutra in Ceremonial Hall, SNK, 146 Sakanoue Tamuramaro, brave general of the frontier, NK, 136-7 Sakanoue Tamuramaro, pleasure at grandson's archery, NMTJ, 164-5 Seiwa, Emperor, Essay of Praise at his death, NSJ, 183-4 Shingon'in, Todaiji Temple, establishment of 21 monks, SNK, 29 Shoku Nihongi, 794 Memorial of Presentation, RK, 9O-1 Shoku Nihongi, 797 Memorial of Presentation, NK, 92-3 Shotoku, Empress, assessed as merciful but permitted cruel rule by Dokyo, SN, 19 Song of courtships at a popular pic-

225

nic, SN, 114 Strange natural phenomena, NMTJ, 167 Strange voice disturbs priests in Chodoin, NSJ, 179 Sugawara Koreyoshi compiles Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, etc., NSJ, 174-5 Tajihi Mahito Kiyosada, appointed Governor of Ise, SNK, 147 Tamura, Prince, exemplary behaviour at age 7, SNK, 149 Toneri, Prince, commanded to compile Nihongi, SN, 35 Yamato Yakamaro, who had no talent but kind to old friends, NK, 136 Yin-Yang Bureau report on a star included in Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku, NSJ, 177


General Index

Age of the Gods, xxiv; in Kojiki, 53; in Nihon Kiryaku, 198, 200; in Nihon Shoki, xiv-xv, 51-6; in Ruiju Kokushi, 193-4 Akishino Yasundo, xi, compiler of Shoku Nihongi, 100 Amabeuji Keizu, 75 Asano Shikatori, compiler of Nihon Koki, 129 Awata Ason Mahito, 104 Ban Nobutomo, 30, 87,120-1 Bunka Shureishu, 10,123,124,127, 129 Bunso Kokushi, 192,197 Chisho Daishi Den, 181 Chun Qiu, 4,11,14; and Commentaries of Gong Yang, 167-8; and Commentaries of Gu Liang, 167-8 Chuxueji, 193 Dai Nihon Hennenshi, xviii-xix Dai Nihon Shi, xvii, xx, xxvii-xxviii, 10,198 Dai Nihon Shiryo, xix Daihannyagyo, 146 Dairi Shiki, 23, 24,123,124,127,129

Eiga Monogatari, xvii, 11 Emi Oshikatsu, 112, 216 Enchin Zokusei Keizu, 75 Engi Kinmochi Shiki, 78 Engi Koki, 30 Engi Kotai Shiki, 140 Engi Shiki, 23,172,173 Engi Tengyo Nihongi Kyoen Waka Jo, 30 Fudoki, 46, 61, 66 Fujiwara - Fuyutsugu, compiler of Nihon Koki, 123-4 - Mototsune, xii; compiler of Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, 155-7,182 - Otsugu, xii; compiler of Nihon Koki, 100,124,128; debate on virtuous government, 100,134, 138-9 - Sadatsugu, compiler of Nihon Koki, 124 - Saneyori, 80 - Tadahira, 80 - Tokihira, xii, 79-80; compiler of Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku, 170-1 - Tsugutada, xii; compiler of Shoku Nihongi, 96-8

228

General Index

- Yoshifusa, xii; compiler of Shoku Nihon Koki, 143,150-1 - Yoshino, compiler of Nihon Koki, 126-7,129 Fundamental Dicta, 44-5, 50, 55, 58, 64, 65, 67 Furu Takaniwa, compiler of Nihon Koki, 129 Fuso Ryakki, 28,174,179, 200

lida Takesato, 30, 87-8 Imperial Chronicles, 43-4, 60 Imperial Chronicles and Fundamental Dicta, 33-4, 52,55, 58-9, 68 Ise Monogatari, 184 Ishikawa Natari, compiler of Shoku Nihongi, 101 Iwanami Shigeo, xxiv Izu no Chiwaki, 86

Gangoji Engi, 47-8, 70, 71 Gangyo Shiki, 81 Gekan Jirui, 119-20 Geki Nikki, 146,190 Genmei, Empress, xiv, 35 Gensho, Empress, 35 Ginbo Kanritsu, 159 Godansho, 7, 8 Gukansho, xvii Gunseki Yoran, 157 Gyokuyo, 181

Jikaku Daishi Den, 181 Jindai no Maki Fuyoshu, 83 Jindai no Maki Moshiogusa, 83 Jindaishi no Atarashii Kenkyu, 88-9 Jingikan Ki, 112 Jinmu, Emperor, 56-8; 2,6ooth anniversary of, xxiv-xxv Jinno Shotoki, xvii Jiu Tangshu Jinji Zhi, 15 Jodai Nihon no Shakai oyobi Shiso, 88-9 Jogan Kyaku Shiki, 157,159 Jogan Shiki, 156 Jogu Shotoku Hod Teisetsu, 44 Johei Shiki, 81 Jowa Affair, 151-2, 219-20 Junna, Emperor, 125,126-7,128 Junnin, Emperor, 112, 216

Han Changli Waiji, 15 Han Ji, 12,14 Han Shu, 4,15-16, 50,129 Hare-cane ceremony, 23 Haruzumi Yoshitada, compiler of Shoku Nihon Koki, 143-4,149-50 Hayashi Jussai, xviii Heizei, Emperor, 117,134-5,199 Hieda Are, xiv, 33, 34, 36 Hikobae, 87,120-1,189 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, xxiii Hirata Atsutane, 30, 34, 86-7 Hoken Taiki, 9-10 Honcho Getsurei, 7, 9, 30 Honcho Hoka Monjo Mokuroku, 118, 139 _ Honcho Shojaku Mokuroku, 75,132, 139,172,189,191,197,199 Hou Han Ji, 12,14 Hou Han Shu, 12,15-16,50, 51 Hozumi Mitate Shujitsu, 44

Kada Azumamaro, 85 Kaibun Ruiju, 159,174 Kamitsukeno Okawa, compiler of Shoku Nihongi, 101-2 Kamiyo no Maki Koketsu, 82 Kamo Mabuchi, 85 Kanke Bunso, 173,191 Kanke Godenki, 191,192 Kanmu, Emperor, xi, xxv, 98-9,101, 116-18,133-4 Kanso Jirui, 118-19,120,139,192,194 Kashu,174 Kawamura Hidene, 49, 84-5,121, 186

General Index Kawamura Masune, 121-2,153,168, 186 Keichu, 85 Keikokushu, 10,124,127 Ki Kiyondo, compiler of Nihon Shoki, 35, 38 Kikeshu, 181 Kitano Tenjin Goden, 192,197 Kiyowara Natsuno, compiler of Nihon Koki, 126 Kodaishi no Michi, xxv Kogansho, 85 Kogo Shui, xv, 6, 83 Kojiki, xiv; compilation of, 33-4, 37; date of beginning of, 33, 36; date of completion of, 34; and Emperor Keitai, 67; and Emperor Yuryaku, 65; expedition to Silla in, 62; and Fundamental Dicta, 44-5; and Imperial Chronicles, 43; pillow word in, 68; and Yamato Takeru, 60 Kojiki oyobi Nihon Shoki no Kenkyu, 88-9 Kojikiden, 85,120 Kokinshu, 10 Kokushi, 3-6 Kokusho Itsubun, 119,139,189 Kokutai no Hongi, xxiii Kongocho-kyo, 160 Konin, Emperor, xi, 18-19,199, 200-1 Konin Kyaku Shiki, 123,124 Konin Shiki, 30, 38, 75, 76-7 Konkomyo-Saisho-O Gyo, 42 Koryuji Engi, 30 Koshicho Kaidaiki, 75, 86-7 Koshin Kaden, 137 Koteihan, 157 Koyasan Zappitsu Shu, 31 Kudai Ryakki, 198 Kugyo Bunin, 170 Kume Kunitake, xx-xxi

229

Kuroita, Katsumi, xxii, xxvii Kusuko Incident, 135, 217-18 Kyaku, 106 Liang Shu, 50, 69 Lushi Chunqiu, 67 Man'yoshu, 24, 31, 83 Man'yoshu Chushaku, 82 Man'yoshu Jidai Nanji, 8-9 Mikami Sanji, xxiii, xxvii Mimune Masahira, compiler of Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku, 170-2 Minabuchi Toshina, compiler of Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, 155, 157 Minamoto: Makota, 142-3; Tokiwa, compiler of Nihon Koki, 128-9; Yoshiari, compiler of Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku, 169-70 Minbusho Rei, 132 Minobe Tatsukichi, xxii-xxiii Miyake Fujimaro, compiler of Nihon Shoki, 38 Miyako Yoshika, compiler of Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, 155-6, 158,166-8 Momokawa Den, 199 Montoku, Emperor, 141,142,155 Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku. See Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku Shiki, 168 Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku Shikkai, 168 Motoori Norinaga, 85-6,120 Nagara no Yamakaze, 87 Nakashina Kotsuo, compiler of Shoku Nihongi, 100 Naoyo, Prince, compiler of Nihon Koki, 126 National History. See Kokushi Nihon Gaishi, xx Nihon Isshi, 140,198

230

General Index

Nihon Kiryaku, 78,117,137,140,169, 170,192,197-201; variant names of (Nihonshi Kiryaku, Nihon Shiryaku, Nihon Kirui), 197 Nihon Koki, xii; compilation of, 123, 128; compilers of, 123-8; contents of, 130-9; coverage in, xii; date of beginning of, 123; date of completion of, 130 Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, xii, xvi; compilation of, 155-60; compilers of, 155-9; contents of, 160-8; coverage in, xii; date of beginning of, 155-6; date of completion of, 159 Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku, xii, xvi, xviii; compilers of, 169-75; contents of, 175-85; coverage in, xii; date of beginning of, 169-70; date of completion of, 171 Nihon Shinwa no Kenkyu, 89 Nihon Shoki, xi, xiv, xv; apportionment of writing in, 38-40; Chinese sources in, 49-51; compilers of, 33-7; contents of, 51-74; coverage in, xi; date of beginning of, 33-5, 36-7; date of completion of, xi; and Kojiki, 33-4, 36, 37, 43, 44-5, 60, 62, 65, 67; Korean sources in, 48-9, 62, 66, 69; lectures on, 76-81; Nihongi as variant name of, 30-4; Reading Completion banquet for, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81; repetition of entries in, 41-2 Nihon Shoki Jindai Kojutsu Sho, 82 Nihon Shoki Sanso, 82 Nihon Shoki Shinko, 88 Nihon Shoki Tsushaku, 42, 87-8 Nihon Shoki Tsusho, 84, 85, 88 Nihongi, alternative name for Nihon Shoki, 30-4. See also Nihon Shoki Nihongi Hydchu, 87

Nihongi Jindai Sho, 82-3 Nihongi Korei, 76, 78 Nihongi Kunko, 85 Nihongi Kyoen Waka Jo, 38 Nihonkoku Genzai Sho Mokuroku, 192 Ninmyo, Emperor, xii, 128,129,148, 149/151 Nin'okyo, 146 Nintoku, Emperor, 64-5 O Yasumaro, xiv, 34, 37, 38 Oe: Asatsuna, compiler of Shinkokushi, 187,188,191; Koretoki, compiler of Shinkokushi, 187-8,191; Otondo, compiler of Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, 157-8 Okagami, xvii, 11 Okura Yoshiyuki, compiler of Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku, 170-3 Omi Mifune, 102 Ono: Minemori, compiler of Nihon Koki, 127; Takamura, 165-6 Paekche Pon'gi (Kudara Hongi), 48, 49, 68, 69 Paekche Sinch'an (Kudara Shinsen), 48, 66, 67 Paekchegi (Kudara Ki), 48, 49, 62, 64, 66 Post stations, 27 Qian Han Shu, 12 Reiss, Ludwig, xix Rekicho Shoshi Kai, 120 Ruiju Fusen Sho, 140 Ruiju Kokushi, 7, 8,10, 26, 75, 83, 90, 113,119,123,134,136,137,140,155, 163,174,176,191-7,198, 200; compilers of, 191-7; contents of, 192-7, coverage in, 191-2; date of beginning of, 191-2; date of completion of, 192-7

General Index Ruiju Sandai Kyaku, 6, 25, 28, 109, 119,160,161 Ryo no Gige, 10,126,181 Ryo no Shuge, 4, 5, 31 Ryounshu, 10,123,124,127 Saga, Emperor, xvi, xxv, 123,124, 125 Saikyiiki, 119 Sakamoto Taro: and anniversary of Emperor Jinmu, xxiv-xxv; education of, xxv-xxvi; and Imperial House, xxvii-xxviii; and Tsuda Sokichi, xxvi Sakanoue: Imatsugu, compiler of Nihon Koki, 127; Tamuramaro, 164-5 San Guo Zhi, 50 Sandai Jitsuroku. See Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku Sandai Jitsuroku Koji Ko, 185 Sandai Jitsuroku Shikkai, 186 Sanjo Sanetomi, xviii Sawara, Prince, 116,117,199 Seiji Yoryaku, 139 Seiwa, Emperor, 155,179-80,183-4 Shaku Nihongi, 30, 47, 75, 76, 77, 78, 81-2, 88 Shashoso Mokuroku, 44 Shi Tong, 11 Shigeno Yasutsugu, xix, xx Shiji, xviii, 11, 17, 50, 129 Shimada Kiyota, compiler of Nihon Koki, 127 Shimada Yoshiomi, compiler of Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, 158 Shingishiki, 97,123,142,187-9 Shinkokushi, 7,187-91; compilers of, 187-9; contents of, 189-91; coverage in, 189-91; date of beginning of, 187; date of completion of, 189 Shinryo Shiki, 4 Shoki Shikkai, 49, 84-5

231

Shokki Shikkai, 120,121-2 Shoku Koki Shikkai, 153 Shoku Nihon Koki, xii; compilation of, 141-2; compilers of, 141-4; contents of, 144-53; coverage in, xii; date of beginning of, 141; date of completion of, 144 Shoku Nihon Koki Sanko, 154 Shoku Nihon Koki Shiki, 153 Shoku Nihongi, xi, xvi; Assessments of Emperors in, 18-19; biographies in, 19; compilation of, 90-6; compilers of, 96-102; contents of, 103-18; coverage in, xi-xii; date of beginning of, 90-6; date of completion of, xi; deletions in, 115-18; and eras, 18; genealogies of, 74-5; imperial edicts in, 19-20; and memorials, 90-1, 92-3; recording of dates in, 18; and reigns, 17-18 Shoku Nihongi Kosho, 120,121,122 Shotoku, Empress, 19 Shotoku, Prince Regent, 71-2 Shotoku Taishi Den Hoketsuki, 31 Shugaisho, 172,189 Shuin Risshi, 174 Sima Qian, xviii Six National Histories (Rikkokushi), xi-xiii, 3-10; authenticity of, 20-2; and Chinese works, 14-17; cited in ancient to Tokugawa works, 6-10; common characteristics of, 10-13; coverage and omissions in, 22-9; poetry in, 24, 45, 80,108, 114,138,148,180 Song Shu, 49 Soshitsuji-kyo, 160 Sugano Mamichi, xi, compiler of Shoku Nihongi, 98-100 Sugawara - Koreyoshi, compiler of Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, 158-9, 174-5

232

General Index

- Michizane, xii, 159-60; compiler of Ruiju Kokushi, 191-2,193-4,197> compiler of Sandai Jitsuroku, 173-5 Swi Shu, 49, 50, 66, 70, 72 Tachibana Moribe, 86 Taiheiki, xx Taima Nagatsugu, 102 Takahashi Ujibumi, 30, 32 Tangjian, 15 Tanikawa Kotosuga, 84 Tencho Kyaku Sho, 139-40,193 Tenmu, Emperor, xi, xiii, xiv, 55; compilation of Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, 33-4, 36 Todaiji Yoroku, 189-90 Togu Setsuin, 159,174 Tokugawa Jikki, xviii Tomo Yoshio, compiler of Shoku Nihon Koki, 142-3,184 Toneri, Prince, xi, 35-6, 37 Tsuda Sokichi, xxvi, 63, 88-9; trial of, xxiii-xxiv Tsuji Zennosuke, xxv, xxvi, xxvii Tsuken Nyudo Zosho Mokuroku, 120 Uda, Emperor, 170 Uiyamabumi, 10 Uzu no Yamakage, 86

Wake Kiyomaro, 131-2 Wake Kiyomaro Den, 132 Wakun Shiori, 84 Wei Zhi, 49, 63 Wen Xuan, 50, 66, 69 White horse ceremony, 23-4 Yakushikyo, 145 Yamada Furutsugu, compiler of Nihon Koki, 129-30 Yamatoshi Fu, 132 Yamazaki Ansai, 37, 83 Yiwen Leiju, 50, 67,193 Yoshibuchi Chikanari, compiler of Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku, 158 Yoshida, Togo, xxii Yoshimine Yasuyo, compiler of Nihon Koki, 124 Yozei, Emperor, 180-2 Yubun Koji, 197,198 Zenrin Kokuhoki, 6 Zho Zhuan, 167 Zhou Li, 3 Zizhi Tongjian, 147 Zogen Howa, 171 Zoku Sandai Jitsuroku, 189 Zoku Tokugawa Jikki, xviii Zuo Zhuan, 11,14

Sakamoto, Taro - Six National HistoryJapan

Recommend Documents