Cummings wrote:
Some years ago I saw something about the
chronology of early Japanese emperors in I think "
The
Guiness Book of World
Records" It claimed the 6th Emperor Ko-an Tenno who
traditionally is given a
reign of 102 years actually reigned for around forty
(ca 120- 180) and that the
founder Jimmu Tenno actualy ruled ca 40 - ca 10 bc.
Jimmu`s immediate successors supposedly ruled
from
father to son thus:
Suisei
Annei
Itoku
Ko-sho
Ko-an
Ko-rei
Ko-gen
Kaikwa
Sujin
Suinin
Keiko
Saimu
Chuai
OjIn (whose mother Empress Jingo had an
impossibly
long pragnancy; ? was
Ojin postumous and Jingo regent until He reached his
majority?)
Nintoku
Richu (eldest son of Nintoku) Note: ruled in 5th
century ad
Hanzei(2nd son of Nintoku)
Ingyo (4th son of Nintoku)
Anko (son of Ingyo)
Yuryaku (brother)
Seinei (son of Yuryaku) given name Shiraka
Kenso (grandson of Richu) given name Woke
Ninken (brother ) given name Oke
Buretsu(son of Ninken, died without heirs)
Keitai married Princess Tashiraka, sister of his
predecessor)
Ankan (son of Keitai, uncertain if Tashiraka was
his mother)
Senka (son of Keitai, uncertain of mother)
Kimmei died 571 (born 509?- died 571) son of
Keitai
by Princess Tashiraka,
ancestor of all future Emperors)
_____________________________________________________________________
This message goes to the heart of what methodology and
proof usually gets required in this group and, imo, in
any proper research of medieval genealogy.
J.W.Cummings really appears to have selected carefully
what he sent, at what stage of the traditional list to
stop. I just wonder why he did not mention anything
about methodological and source quality concerns, as
to that very carefully selected sample from the
'official list'.
Kimmei, or Kinmei, was the first monarch of Japan who
is attested in contemporary documents. All the earlier
ones (= the alleged beings on the above list) are
known basically from non-contemporary material which
is generally of folklore nature, i.e myths and
legends.
Only four persons (three males and one female) in the
list above have there at least some of their
contemporary names mentioned, whereas everyone except
Tashiraga, has identification of the name which has
nothing to do with how the one was known
contemporarily, and everything to do with what name
was concocted to each one by the much later posthumous
practice of naming monarchs. The list is successful in
that regard also: it gives next to nothing
contemporary-identifiable. Which of course is a nice
feature in a otherwise carefully selected list which
has no contemporary archival attestation to begin
with.
A few generations backwards from 'Kinmei' could very
well be accurate enough in genealogical sense. Some of
them can be said to be attested in "near-contemporary"
material, and also, a genealogical memory is usually
believed to stretch a few generations backwards in a
reliable way, procuding a somewhat credible genealogy
- barring motives of deliberate fabrication or
specific easiness of some detail to be remembered
incorrectly.
Usually, monarchs from Jimmu to Chuai (the father
whose son was legendarily born three years after the
father's demise) have been regarded as too mythical to
be taken seriously in any genealogical way. They may,
at worst, be aspects of tribal totems or pantheon of
semi-divines depicting some phenomena, rather than
real human beings. Even if they -with small
likelihood- represent a memory of an once existed
human being, they could be unrelated ones, from tribal
stories of remarkable heroes of the past, and arranged
into a list by some later concoction, becoming thus a
direct dynasty. All those are bets to get dubbed as
"mythical monarchs", without any value for any
genealogy aiming at historical accuracy.
Between on one hand 'Ojin' (and his mother Jingu kogo)
and on the other hand the historical days of 'Kinmei',
legend material bears features that imply a
verisimilitude with possible historical account. They
and their genealogy are based on later chronicles, not
on contemporary material. One would however do better
if one picks from careful sources what these
individuals actually had as their contemporary name,
to have a possibility to identify them from chronicles
and from occasional archaeological finds. 'Ojin' was
rather king Hondawake to his contemporaries. And
'Kinmei' was rather great king Amehara Oshiharaki
Hironiwa. In between, there are the
chronicle-mentioned kings Shiraga, Woke, Oyoke, and
empress Tashiraga, those names being presumably
identifiable to their contemporaries.
This bunch of monarchs are prone to the sin of
folklore in genealogical regard: their genealogy may
be twisted by later chronicle compilers to suit
legitimacy values of the rulers of the later
'twist-doing' era. This concern renders really grave
doubt to those points of male-line connections, a
ruler being third or fifth generation descendnt in
male line of an earlier ruler, the males in between
being non-descript ones (just a list of begots and
begats) even in the words of the chronicle which
concocted those lineages.
J.W.Cummings has succeeded to give a list of those
Emperors of Japan (from the first to the twenty-ninth)
who actually, in light of historical knowledge, were
not emperors, not ruled over all or even most of
Japan, and very likely were not contemporarily
perceived in all cases as successors of each other (=
a consistent list), were generally not known with
those names in their own era, and none of them except
the twenty-ninth, is attested in any contemporary
document. Instead, they are such, out of whom a later
concocter has created a start for the list.
Really a feat, to have all those features in a "list
of Emperors of Japan".
Reminds me of the wordplay of Voltaire: the Holy Roman
Empire is not holy, not Roman, nor an empire.
The Guinness Book of World Records would do better,
imo, to forget all about the 6th Emperor Ko-an Tenno.
There is no historical record from where anything
detailed can be taken to mean a measurable record.
The 'founder' Jinmu tenno's actual rule is, imho, a
contradiction in terms, it being impossible to prove
he actually existed and had something to do with
actual ruling, not to speak of difficulties in dating
a mythical creature. I am aware that some members of
this scm group get jabbed about not having a life, but
firstly I would like to see how any mythical being
like Jinmu tenno had a life. Any dates for his
so-called life can only be based on
backwards-counting, from earliest historical dates,
using some measure stick for the length of a
generation (of a genealogy known to be mythical and
totally unreliable as to fourteen first entries in the
"genealogy") in amend to mythical counts of years.
Whereas there would be tad more sanity in
reconstruction of a real chronology for rulers
mentioned in the list between Hondawake ('Ojin') and
Amehara Oshiharaki Hironiwa ('Kinmei'). As I mentioned
above, their existence and doings have an appearance
of verisimilitude.
According to the chronicles which are the only sources
about the very existence of that family tie, king
Hondawake (mentioned with the much-later-concocted
name Ojin in the list) was born to his mother Jingu
kogo only three years after the death of her husband,
and Hondawake's mythical father, 'Chuai'. Jingu kogo
was, according to same chronicles, herself descended
from the same dynasty as her mythical husband 'Chuai'.
One can charitably assess that legends used year in
place of "length of one growth period in agriculture"
= 'harvest year', and there being three or more
harvests within one solar year (the mentioned
pregnancy thus taking some seven or eight months). Or,
one can assess that Jingu kogo was sonless, managed to
take over the power in her husband's land (however
small the kingdom was, perhaps one or two provinces)
and had a heir sired by someone else, but presenting
the boy as child of the preceding male ruler. Or one
can surmise the appearance of a mythically born son,
like some other creeds have a boy born of a virgin, a
boy born from a river, a son of some god, etc.
The existence of 'Ankan', 'Senka' and 'Keitai' is
based only on non-contemporary chronicle. The same
chronicle leaves no uncertainty about who was mother
of 'Ankan' and 'Senka' - according to Kojiki chronicle
(a careful person would find the reference in the AT
which I sent) it was lady Meko-no-Iratsume Wohari
(from the dynasty of chieftains in Owari), an earlier
concubine or consort of king Ohoto of Koshi [to much
later world, known by posthumous, concocted name
'Keitai'], herself daughter of lord Kusaka-no-Muraji
Wohari, chieftain in what became Owari.
Thus, any uncertainty as to their mother is a creation
of someone else than the source which is attesting
their very existence. Which uncertainty is uncalled
for, if their very existence is not put under
uncertainty. Be their very existence in doubt, it
would be not that important if there is some same
uncertainty as to their mother.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62s ... o8Wcj9tAcJ
so there's a bone for ya!