Jump to content

Yamatai Kyushu Theory

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Onel5969 (talk | contribs) at 17:00, 23 February 2022 (AFC draft (via script)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Topographic map of Kyushu area

The Yamatai Kyushu theory is the theory that the Yamatai kingdom was located in Kyushu rather than in Honshu as the Yamatai Honshu Theory proposes

The theory proposes that the original capital of Japan was located in Kyushu, and then when the Kofun period began the Yamato Kingship moved the capital east to the Kinai region, before eventually moving to Kyoto, and then Tokyo the current capital

See also: Wajinden

Overview

Main article: Yamatai

The Yamato District, Fukuoka is located in the Yamato Province of Chikugo Province. In his "Foreign Affairs Record", Chikugo Province, Yamato District, Fukuoka Since then, the mainstream of academic circles has been divided into two mainstream theories: the "Honshu theory (by Naitō Torajirō and others) and the "Kyushu theory (by Shiratori Kurakichi and others). The Kyūshū theory, however, has a different explanation. The Kyushu theory, however, is divided into two camps: one that claims that the Yamataikoku was "moved" (the "To-kyo" theory) and the other that it was not. The "To-sen" theory says that the Yamataikoku moved to the Kinai area and became the Yamato Kingdom.

Main article: [[:Yamatai Honshu Theory]]

There are two theories about the subsequent Yamatai Kingdom: one is that it was conquered by the Kinai forces, and the other is that it moved eastward and conquered the Kinai.[a]。In the past, it was the first time that the Japanese government had been involved in the war, and the first time that the Japanese government had been involved in the war.[b][c]

Basic Rationale

The Kyushu theory of the Yamatai location is based on the Northern Kyushu wide area theory centered on Itoshima City in Fukuoka Prefecture, Mii County in Fukuoka Prefecture, Dazaifu in Fukuoka Prefecture (Dazaifu in Fukuoka Prefecture, Usa Jingu in Oita Prefecture, Saitobaru Kofun Cluster in Miyazaki Prefecture, and Kumamoto Prefecture, Kuma District, Kumamoto in Miyazaki Prefecture, and Kuma District, Kumamoto in Kumamoto Prefecture.

The basic arguments for the Kyushu theory of the Yamatai Kingdom include the following.

Basis

  • If we consider the distance from Obikata-gun to the Queen's country as an itinerary rather than a straight line, out of the 12,000 ri, we have already used 10,500 ri to get to Itokuni, which is located in Fukuoka Prefecture, and the remaining 1,500 ri (three times the distance of 500 ri from Suiroku to Itokuni, which is located in Karatsu City, Saga Prefecture) is not enough to locate the Yamatai Kingdom beyond Kyushu.[d]
  • If we compare the Gounakukoku, which was in conflict with the Yamataikoku, to the power of Kumamoto (Kuma), we can assume that the official of the Gounakukoku, "Goukochi Heigu," is a transliteration of "Kikuchihiko.[e]
  • In the Wei-Shi-Wan-Jin Den, there are three descriptions of the Yamataikoku as being south of Itokuni and Nukuni, and east of Kaikidoji (latitudinally it corresponds to Okinawa Prefecture). There are also three places where it is said that the Yamatai Kingdom was located south of Itokuni and Nukuni, and east of Kaikaku Toji (roughly corresponding to Okinawa Prefecture in latitude).
  • The description in the "Wei Ji Wa Jinden" introduces the small countries in northern Kyushu, but does not mention the details of the influential Aki Province (Aki Province), Kibi Province and Izumo Province that must have existed in the western part of the Kinki region where the Honshu theory compares to Touma Province, and completely lacks the description of the route from Ito Province to the Kinki region.
  • "Kojiki" and "Nihonshoki" mention the Emperor's conquest of Kyushu, including the defeat of Kumaso, suggesting that Kitakyushu was outside the sphere of influence of the Yamato Court until the time of Emperor Keiko. In addition, if Kitakyushu was ruled as a federated state from Kinai to Kitakyushu in the 3rd century, it raises questions about the recent research on the establishment of Kunizo in the 6th century. In addition, the Korean peninsula in the same period was in a state of parallel small states, and it is difficult to imagine that the Japanese state took the lead in creating a wide-area coalition government from northern Kyushu to Kinai.
  • Based on the view that the "burial chamber with coffin and no burial chamber" that describes the burial method of the Yamataikoku in the Book of Records of the Wei Dynasty is considered to be a jar coffin, many jar coffins have been excavated in the Kitakyushu region, and many tombs with sarcophagus and no burial chamber have appeared. Also, from the description of "no burial chamber," burial tombs in the Kinai region with a burial chamber are not applicable.[f]
  • Fukuoka, Itoshima City, where a large mirror with a design of flowers on the inside excavated from the Hirabaru site is the same type and size as the Yatagami mirror in the Five Books of Shintoism of the Ise Grand Shrine, suggesting a possible relationship with the belief in the sun goddess such as Amaterasu.
  • In Kurume City, Fukuoka Prefecture, there is the Gionyama burial mound, which Hisao Hoga says matches well with the description of Himiko's tomb in the Book of Records of the Wei Wei People in terms of its size, burial accessories, sarcophagus burial chamber, main body and surrounding mass grave (Hoga thinks it may be a martyr tomb).
  • There is a theory that the Hashibashi grave mound, which is said to be the oldest stylized forward and backward circular mound in Nara Prefecture Sakurai City, was built in the latter half of the 3rd century and is considered to be Himiko's burial mound. However, after the death of Himiko, a male king ascended to the throne, but it is recorded that the country was in turmoil again, and it is almost impossible to build a burial mound with the largest mound at that time when the country was in turmoil. In addition, there are no traces of martyrdom in the area surrounding the tomb. In addition, the tombs of neighboring countries such as the Korean Peninsula at that time were all around 30 meters on each side, and it is unreasonable to assume that Japan was the only country to build a huge tomb (Chopsticks Tomb). In addition, the Museum, Archaeological Institute of Kashihara, Nara Prefecture, which conducted the Archaeological excavation of the Hokenoyama burial mound, which is said to predate the Chopsticks Tomb in terms of age. Archaeological Institute of Kashihara, Nara Prefecture, who conducted Excavation of the Hokenoyama burial mound in 2008, concluded that the burial mound was built in the middle of the 3rd century based on the excavated artifacts.[1][2]、Because the range of Radiocarbon dating results of burial chamber wood is reported to include the first half of the 4th century[3]、Some have questioned the dating of the middle of the 3rd century.[4]。
  • In addition to the fact that not a single triangular-rimmed divine animal mirror has been unearthed from Chinese or Korean sites, the number of mirrors unearthed nationwide far exceeds the 100 that have been recorded.

On the other hand, the weaknesses of the Kyushu theory are as follows.

Rebuttal

  • That the goods and rank presented by Wei to the queens were Most favoured nation treatment comparable to the Otsuki clan state in the west, and unlikely to have been presented to a small lord.[g]
  • It is also important to note that the number of people in the country is not necessarily the same as the number of people in the country. However, it is unlikely that the envoy checked the number of houses in all of Japan, and the number of houses listed cannot necessarily be determined to be accurate, as it is thought to include hearsay from the Japanese.
  • The existence of kofun tumuli and settlements in the Chugoku and Kinki regions that are much larger than those in Kyushu. However, since the Kyushu theory does not adopt Himiko's era as the theory of the beginning of the Kofun period, this is not an argument against it.
  • It is based on the old theory that the construction of the tumulus began after the 4th century, but this theory was proposed by Sahara Makoto and others in 1966, and Sahara himself withdrew it in 1975, and the 3rd century theory is now widely supported. However, based on the above-mentioned report on the Hokenoyama burial mound, there have been discussions to revise the start of this theory.

The question of how to consider a third-century chronological mirror

Early on, Kaichiro Yabuta and Koichi Mori, following the general understanding at the time that the Kofun period began in the 4th century, argued that "triangular-rimmed mirrors were found only in kofun tombs, and none were found in tombs of the Yayoi period, the period of the Yamataikoku. Yayoi period, the era of the Yamataikoku. Therefore, the triangular-rimmed divine animal mirror is not from the Yamataikoku period, but was forged by the later Yamato Kingship to show its relationship with the Yamataikoku. Most of the subsequent Kyushu theorists, such as Yasumoto Yoshinori and Hoga Toshio, have followed this theory or have come close.
Some argue that the triangular-rimmed divine animal mirror is either a mirror from Wu or the work of a Wu artisan, and dates from after 280, when the land of Wu was conquered by the Western Jin. However, stylistic theory suggests that it was not made by Wu, and at least the inscription Xuzhou cannot be attributed to the territory of Wu.[h]. If we consider these to be manufactured after 280 years, it is difficult to understand consistently why the years written on the chronological mirrors are concentrated from 235 years to 244 years in the Three Kingdoms Period. In addition, according to the view of Kyushu theorists, the so-called "mirror of Himiko" is a later Han mirror, but the later Han mirrors, which are concentrated in Kitakyushu sites during the Yayoi period, are mainly dated to the 1st century due to the situation of excavations with written materials in China, and do not reach the period of Himiko. Those from the second century are small in quantity and have been excavated in the Kinai region as well, so Kitakyushu does not seem to have an advantage. However, if we consider Kinai and Kitakyushu as two different forces, we cannot determine their locations based on their superiority alone.

Items that were once considered to be the basis for the Kyushu theory, but are no longer considered important

  • The Dōtaku civilization, which was widespread from the Kinki to the Tokai regions and practiced rituals with Dōtaku, is a tool mentioned in the Wajinden, and is also mentioned in the Nihonshoki, of Points (swords), mirrors, and Magatama. However, with the increase in the number of excavated sites, it is becoming more and more likely that the civilization was destroyed by the Hoko yari. However, with the increase in the number of excavated sites, such as the Yoshinogari site, where bronze bells and swords have been found in the "Dotaku culture area," and the Molding In addition, the Wajinden In addition, the fact that the descriptions in the Wajinden do not mention rituals, and that a wide variety of ritual vessels, not just three types, were used in each land before the 6th century, are also reasons why they are not considered important in the Kyushu theory.

Shortest distance theory

The concept of "short ri" has been proposed for the distance problem. Short ri" is a theory that one ri in shakkan method is not about 434m but about 75-90m (76-77m in concept) (Zhoubi Suanjing).[i]. In the Book of Records, it is said that the distance from Gouja Korea to Tsushima is 1,000 ri, and from Tsushima to Iki Island is 1,000 ri, but the actual distance is also about 70 km each, supporting that the short ri was adopted. In fact, the distance from Obikata-gun to Gujin Korea is 7,000 square miles, as stated in the Book of Records. This is the first time that we have seen such an event. In addition, if this short distance is adopted, Himiko's burial mound, which had a diameter of 100 paces, would have a diameter of about 30 meters, which is a refutation of the theory that the burial mound of Himiko is the Hashihaka Kofun.

Advocates

Advocates of the Kyushu theory of the Yamataikoku include Arai Hakuseki, Shiratori Kurakichi, Dairoku Harada, Taku Tanaka[5],Takehiko Furuta, Kenzaburo Torigoe, Toshiaki Wakai[6]、There are Biten Yasumoto, Toshio Hoga and others. In addition, it is said that research based on domestic materials such as "Kiki" tends not to be taken into consideration, despite the indications of Taro Sakamoto's "The Birth of the Nation" and Hidesaburo Hara, and Toshiaki Wakai said about this tendency before the war. He criticizes the repressed theory of Sokichi Tsuda as being caused by being touted even after the war.[6]。

Main specific areas

Chikushi Plain

Yamamoto-gun theory

The Yamamoto-gun theory has been supported for a long time and is based on the fact that Yamamoto-gun has a large population and is likely to be related to the name "Yamato".

Amagi and Asakura theory

The theory of Amagi and Asakura at the Hiratsuka Kawazoe site.

Kurume theory

The theory that Kurume, which is in the Oi County area, is the Yamatai country. There is also a theory by Hisao Hoga that the Gionyama burial mound in Kurume City is Himiko's mound.[7]。

According to the Nihon Shoki

According to Nihon Shoki, the 12th Emperor Keiko visited Yame Prefecture in the autumn of his 18th year on the throne, and as he was marveling at the beautiful mountain range past Mount Fuji, Monkey Oumi, the Lord of Mizunuma Prefecture, mentioned that the goddess Yame Tsuhime was always in the mountains, and that this goddess was the origin of the name of the once existing Yame Province.

In Ding You, he arrived at Bainu County. Then, he crossed Vine Mountain and looked south to Asuka Point, and the imperial edict said, "The mountain is overlapping and beautiful. If the gods have their mountains," he said. That is why the name of Hachimoku was given.

 

In the Bungo Province Fudoki, there is an anecdote that when Emperor Keiko visited Hita County in Toyo Province (an area adjacent to Yame City in Fukuoka Prefecture), he talked with a goddess named Hisatsuhime, who was disguised as a human, and there is a theory that this princess is also Himiko.

Fukuoka Prefecture

Fukuoka Plain theory

This is a theory that the Fukuoka Plain, where Nakkoku is thought to have been located, was also adjacent to the Yamatai Kingdom. There are many different theories. There is also a theory that the route radiated from Itokuni and Nukoku.

The Hakata theory

Western Kyushu

Saga Plain theory

The Saga Plain theory is a theory that the route from Karatsu to the Saga Plain is along the Matsuura River or along the current Japan National Route 323. It also includes the Yoshinogari site, and is widely accepted as the Yoshinogari theory.

Sasebo theory

Northeast coast of Kyushu

Usa theory

The Usa theory refers to the area around Usa Shrine, the main shrine of Hachiman Shrine, as the Yamatai Kingdom. The Usa clan (Usa Kunizou), who cooperated with Emperor Jimmu during Jimmu's Eastern Expedition, exist in this area.

Kyoto-gun theory

A theory that the area is around present-day Yukuhashi City and Karita Town.

Kagoshima Prefecture

The Eastward Expansion Theory

Eastern Expedition Theory

Whether or not one accepts Jimmu's Eastern Expedition as historical fact, research based on domestic sources such as the Kiki suggests that the Dynasty (Jimadai Kingdom) established in Kyushu moved eastward to the Kinai region. There is a theory that the Dynasty (the Yamatai Kingdom), which was established in Yamatai, moved eastward to Kinai. There are two types of theories: those that link this eastward movement to myths such as Jimmu's Eastern Expedition and Tenson kōrin, and those that say it has nothing to do with Kiki myth. There are also many theories about the timing and form of the relocation to the east in relation to the Kyushu dynasty theory (see Yamatai Kyushu Theory#Alternative theory).

Shiratori Kurakichi, Tetsuro Watsuji[8] However, in the Post-war period, the use of Japanese mythology as a source material was avoided in history and history education. However, this theory continued to develop after the war, mainly at the University of Tokyo.

Masao Kume proposed the two dynasties side by side theory, which envisaged the Queen Country of Tsukushi (the main capital) with a distance of 10,000 miles between itself and the Queen Country, and the Queen Country of Kinai (the sub-capital) with a distance of 30 days by sea (20 days by water from the south to the south, and then 10 days by water from the south to the Yamataikoku). It is also important to note that there is a large amount of information on the history of the Japanese Empire in Japan. In addition to the above, it is important to note that there are many other factors that may affect the success of this project. In addition to the above, there are many other interesting facts about the history of Japan.

Shuichi Kuriyama, Katsumi Kuroita, Tomojiro Hayashiya, Tadao Iijima, Kiyoshi Wada.[9]、Kazuo Enoki[10]、Masayoshi Hashimoto, Seiji Uemura, Kisaburo Ichimura, Taro Sakamoto[j]、Kouzane Inoue[k]、Koichi Mori, Naruo Nakagawa, Kenichi Tanigawa, Takeo Kaneko、Nunome Junro, Yasumoto Minori, Okuno Masao and others are the discussants.

Minority levy

However, throughout the history of Northeast Asia, there has been no other example of an entire country being moved unless there was a national crisis, and from the standpoint of clan movements, geography, and science, there was no such thing as an eastward movement on a national scale. The reason for the expedition, which is a weakness of the above theory, is that it was the result of a search for a new land by kings, which is common in the history of Northeast Asia.

Hisao Takaraga, Michiyuki Adachi, and others are discussants.

Alternative theory

Main article: Kyushu dynasty theory

One theory proposed by Takehiko Furuta is the Kyushu dynasty theory, which states that until the end of the 7th century there was a dynasty representing Japan (Dazaifu was the Capital city) in Kyushu, and that Yamatai was the predecessor of the Kyushu dynasty, and that the Kyushu dynasty was later established, but was destroyed in the Battle of Baekgang. In the past, there have been those who argue that Kyushu is comparable to the Five Kings of Wa from Yamataikoku to Five Kings of Wa, from Tsurumine Boshin to Post-war, including Naganuma Kenkai.

However, this theory is currently being criticized by several scholars of Oriental and Japanese history, including Mitsusada Inoue, Kazuo Enoki, and Yukihisa Yamao.

See Also

Footnotes

Annotations

  1. ^ The former assumes the conquest of Kitakyushu during the Keiko, Seigyo, and Chuai dynasties, as seen in the Chronicles. The latter theory is based on the fact that the Jimmu's Eastern Expedition is a reflection of the Jimmu's Eastern Expedition, but some argue that the Book of Sui is unacceptable as it may differ considerably from the existing mythology. However, it is possible that the writings in the Book of Sui
  2. ^ In the latter half of the Edo period, scholars of Japanese studies proposed the theory of "false arrogance" (the theory that Kyushu forces presumed to have presided over the Imperial Court. These include Hon'i Nobunaga's "Onokebisu Gaikoku", Tsurumine Boshin's "Sogoku Gaikoku Ko", and Kondo Yoshiki's "Seihan Gensetsu".)
  3. ^ In modern times, there is the Kyushu dynasty theory by Takehiko Furuta and others (the theory that the representative dynasty of the Japanese archipelago was consistently located in Kyushu and declined after the Battle of Baekgang. (This theory has received some attention in academic circles, including the publication of an article in Shigaku zasshi. This is a theory that has received much attention in academic circles.
  4. ^ Miyake Yonekichi states that the 12,000 ri is the distance to Fuyakuni, where the distance is known, and Yamada Yoshio states that this is not the actual distance, which is partly unknown, but merely the sum of the 7,000 ri to Gwoja Korea and the 5,000 ri of the circumference of the Japanese land. This is not a combination of the real distances, which are partly unknown, but merely the sum of the 7,000 ri to Gouja Korea and the 5,000 ri of the Japanese land. The Takehiko Furuta, who advocates the Kyushu dynasty theory, advocates a reading that "the same route is marked twice, as distance and number of days, for the sake of accuracy".
  5. ^ The Kinai theory does not seem to give any special interpretation to the official name, even if it considers Gounakukoku to be a force from Keno or the Tokai region, such as Kuwana or Kano. Naito Konan, who holds the Kinai theory, ascribes Gu-nu-kuni to Kumaso and "Gu-ko-chi-beigu" to Kikuchi-hiko, in view of the violent clashes between the imperial court and Kumaso in the reign of Emperor Keiko, which he considers to be close to the time of the Yamataikoku. This would mean that the direction is correct here, but he says there is no problem with the description of Gounakukoku because it belongs to a different system from the itinerary article. In Weilüe it is written "拘右智卑狗", but this can be regarded as a typographical error, since in ancient Japanese the vowel never appeared in the middle of a word. The Kibi, Izumo, and Higashi-Shikoku theories consider the Gugnu Kingdom to be a Kawachi power.
  6. ^ There is an opinion that the Hokenoyama burial mound, which was built at the same time as the Chopsticks Tomb or even earlier, has a coffin and burial chamber and was built in the first half of the 4th century.
  7. ^ The Kyushu theory says that the treatment was intended to put pressure on Wu. The aforementioned Takehiko Furuta says that the treatment was given to him for his achievement in quickly switching from the Gongsun regime to Wei.
  8. ^ It is generally considered to be the domain of Cao Wei.
  9. ^ In a conversation with Shigeru Tanimoto in "Correcting the 'Distortions' of Ancient History," Takehiko Furuta says, "When I wrote 'There Was No 'Yamatai Kingdom,' I thought it was 75-90 meters, but now I am thinking in terms of 76-77 meters.
  10. ^ However, Dr. Sakamoto later endorsed the views of Dr. Taku Tanaka in his book, "The Yamatai Kingdom Written in the Sea" in the January 1979 issue of the Journal of Shinto History, and praised it as "an extremely powerful basis for the theory of Chikugo Yamato-gun in the Yamatai Kingdom.
  11. ^ In "History of Japan 1: From Myth to History" published in 1960, he stated that the eastward shift of the Yamatai Kingdom was the most natural interpretation.

Sources

  1. ^ Hokenoyama kofun no kenkyū = Studies of the Hokenoyama Tumulus. Nara Kenritsu Kashihara Kōkogaku Kenkyūjo, 奈良県立橿原考古学研究所. Nara-ken Kashihara-shi: Nara Kenritsu Kashihara Kōkogaku Kenkyūjo. 2008. pp. 289–291. ISBN 978-4-902777-61-1. OCLC 608290238.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  2. ^ "ホケノ山古墳と箸墓古墳". 橿原考古学研究所附属博物館 (in Japanese). Retrieved 2019-10-28.
  3. ^ Hokenoyama kofun no kenkyū = Studies of the Hokenoyama Tumulus. Nara Kenritsu Kashihara Kōkogaku Kenkyūjo, 奈良県立橿原考古学研究所. Nara-ken Kashihara-shi: Nara Kenritsu Kashihara Kōkogaku Kenkyūjo. 2008. pp. 191–192. ISBN 978-4-902777-61-1. OCLC 608290238.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  4. ^ "『ホケノ山古墳の年代について』". 邪馬台国の会 (in Japanese). Retrieved 2019-10-28.
  5. ^ "田中卓『海に書かれた邪馬台国―ついに明かされた女王国の秘密 (1975年)』". 神社と古事記 (in Japanese). Retrieved 2022-02-01.
  6. ^ a b 1958-, 若井敏明 (2010). 邪馬台国の滅亡 : 大和王権の征服戦争. Yoshikawa Kōbunkan. ISBN 978-4-642-05694-6. OCLC 587064942. {{cite book}}: |last= has numeric name (help)
  7. ^ 宝賀寿男 (2001-12-20). "卑弥呼の冢補論-祇園山古墳とその周辺-". 季刊・古代史の海. 26. 「古代史の海」の会: 62–96. ISSN 1341-5522.
  8. ^ The Ancient Culture of Japan, 1919
  9. ^ 1956 "Ancient Japan from the Perspective of Oriental History"
  10. ^ The "Yamatai Kingdom," published in 1960, and the Hyuga origin theory.

Category:Hypotheses Category:Pages with unreviewed translations Category:Yamatai

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yamatai_Kyushu_Theory&oldid=1073618444"