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
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
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 (|HJ5D 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
50
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

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), Jgan (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
Shoku Nihongi
Nihon Koki
Shoku Nihon Koki
Montoku Jitsuroku
Sandai Jitsuroku
Rate of inclusion (%)
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.
Shoku Nihongi
Nihon Koki
Shoku Nihon Koki
Montoku Jitsuroku
Sandai Jitsuroku
Rate
per volume
10
0
.25
5
I
.25
.1
.08
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
19
3
5
2
4
63
8
9
5
18
17
18
29
21
56
34
29
Priests
Criminals
6
4
7
6
8
3
2
1
2
Unknown
Total
Rate
per year
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
2nd 3rd 4th

5th
rank rank rank rank
1
1
10
2
2
118
4
21
Priests
Total
133
7
23
1
10
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Sakamoto, Taro - Six National HistoryJapan

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

THE Six NATIONAL HISTORIES OF JAPAN

The Six National Histories of Japan (Rikkokushi) was written in 1970 by

This page intentionally left blank

TRANSLATED BY JOHN S. BROWNLEE

The Six National Histories of

UBC Press / Vancouver

English translation UBC Press/Univ. Tokyo Press 1991

Translator's Preface / vii

This page intentionally left blank

This translation has been prepared with the aid of a Translation

eliminated in every case but one, where it is central to the discussion

This page intentionally left blank

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

chief compiler was Fujiwara Tsugutada (727-96), who died a few

Indeed, the greater the association of a historical study with a

The origins of the Japanese people may go back tens of thousands

compilation, it became more and more detailed, reflecting the

valuable source of documentary information. The basic format is

Different types of historical writing developed in Japan after the

from the Six National Histories, however, in including biographies,

Great Japan].9 In the course of its development, the project was

Historical scholarship at Tokyo Imperial University in the i88os

the advent of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Yin-Yang thought;

teach disloyalty to Japanese children: a person holding such ideas

Sokichi (1873-1961) of Waseda University. He worked at a private

The year 1940 was the 2,6ooth anniversary of Emperor Jinmu's

National Histories of Japan he strongly criticized Emperor Kanmu

Sakamoto was not damaged by the experience of celebrating an

eventually to publish as a matter of course. Even so, writing did

wide range of evidence. Much credit for this training must go to

condemn him should be prepared to deal with his sophistication;

THE Six NATIONAL HISTORIES OF JAPAN

This page intentionally left blank

THE NAME: six NATIONAL HISTORIES

The Six National Histories of Japan

kokushi in the reign of Emperor Richu, it is almost never used to refer

Veritable Records;6 but in fact they cannot be described as identical.

The Six National Histories of Japan

The Six National Histories of Japan

This distinction between Nihongi and kokushi (National Histories)

Nihongi in the general term 'National Histories.' Kensho's precise

Thus Kensho considered the Six National Histories as a group and

The Six National Histories of Japan

National Histories/ In Motoori Norinaga's Uiyamabumi [First Steps

The Six National Histories have at least four common characteristics.

Chronicles of Japan Office or, later, a National History Office was

The Six National Histories of Japan

The foregoing classifications, as schematized in Table i, are

The Six National Histories of Japan

Shoki. Since Nihon Shoki is full of fabrications and embellishments, it

As already noted, the Six National Histories employ the annalistic

the founders, Gaozu and Guangwu, followed this format, as did

The Six National Histories of Japan

From the similarity in format, it is obvious that the authors of Nihon

Koan, it cites in order the year, season, month, sexagenary cycle of

The Six National Histories of Japan

Since this consists entirely of praise, it may properly be called an

The Six National Histories of Japan

To what extent can we believe in the historical authenticity of the

believed that Nihon Shoki consisted of historical facts, but precisely

The Six National Histories of Japan

Thus we can suspect that a historical fact may be recorded in

Annual rites and ceremonies are recorded in Sandai Jitsuroku but