Pathway to Japanese Literature

The accounts concerning Himiko, Queen of Wa, found in texts such as the Book of the Later Han, Records of the Three Kingdoms, Book of Jin, and History of the Northern Dynasties had long been subject to numerous scholarly examinations by historians. Some identified her with our Empress Jingū, while others regarded her as a female chieftain in Tsukushi (Kyushu), resulting in a state of unresolved debate that appeared to lack consensus. However, in recent times, it seemed that a majority had come to adopt the latter theory.
Since my current analysis differs from these two theories, I shall attempt to present my views according to the following order.

I. Selection of the Main Text

II. Our Country’s Oldest Interpretations Regarding the Accounts in the Main Text

III. Critique of Previous Theories

IV. Textual Analysis of the Main Text

V. Conclusion

I. Selection of the Main Text

Among Chinese historical texts containing accounts of Himiko, works such as the Book of Jin and History of the Northern Dynasties were undoubtedly based on the Book of the Later Han and Records of the Three Kingdoms—though this required no extended discussion. However, regarding discrepancies existing between the Book of the Later Han and Records of the Three Kingdoms, they had not failed to arouse historians' suspicions.

The Records of the Three Kingdoms was compiled during the Jin Dynasty, while Fan Ye’s present Book of the Later Han constituted a later work produced during the Liu Song Dynasty. Yet when both texts recorded the same events, the sources used in the Book of the Later Han did not extend beyond what was recorded in the Records of the Three Kingdoms—indeed, even within its “Account of the Eastern Barbarians,” such instances were limited to a mere few. It was precisely this that had led historians to harbor doubts as to whether its “Account of Wa” might not similarly lack independent material.

Resolving this doubt constituted the foremost requirement in selecting the main text.

Next came the necessity to examine textual variations among different editions within the main text. Regarding the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, though I had not yet seen the Song edition, I compared Yuan printed/Ming revised editions, Ming Southern Directorate editions, Qianlong Palace editions, and Jiguge editions, then consulted texts such as the *History of the Northern Dynasties*, *Tongdian*, *Taiping Yulan*, and *Cefu Yuangui* that cite this account—only to be struck by their significant textual discrepancies. Resolving these variations constituted the second requirement in selecting the main text.

First, simply due to its status as the earlier text, I shall present below the main text from the thirtieth volume of the Book of Wei in the Records of the Three Kingdoms.

Account of the Wa People

The Wa people are located in the great sea southeast of Daifang Commandery.
They established their state settlements by relying on mountainous islands.
There were formerly over a hundred polities.
During the Han period, there were tributary envoys.
Now, envoys and interpreters have established communication with thirty polities.
The route from the commandery to Wa.
Followed coastal waterways.
Passed through Han polities.
Now heading south, now turning east.
Arrived at its northern shore, Kuyahan Kingdom.
Over 7,000 *li*.
They first crossed a sea over a thousand *li*.
They arrived at Tsushima Province.
Their high official was called Hiko.
The deputy was called Hinamori.
Their dwelling was situated on an isolated island.
The area was over four hundred li square.
The land is mountainous and steep.
It has many deep forests.

The roads resembled the paths of birds and deer.
It had over a thousand households.
It had no good farmland.
They sustained themselves by eating seafood.
They traveled by ship north and south to trade for grain.
They again crossed a sea over a thousand *li* to the south.
This was called Hanhai.
They arrived at Iki Province.
The officials were also called Hiko.
The deputy was called Hinamori.
The area was approximately three hundred *li* square.
It had abundant bamboo, trees, and dense forests.
It had approximately three thousand households.
It had somewhat arable land.
The cultivated land was still insufficient for food.
They also traded north and south for grain.
They again crossed a sea over a thousand *li*.
They arrived at Matsura Province.
There were over four thousand households.
They dwelled along the coast amidst mountains and sea.

The vegetation was lush and thriving.
As they traveled, they could not see those ahead of them.
They were fond of catching fish and abalone.
They would submerge themselves to gather them, regardless of whether the water was deep or shallow.
They traveled five hundred li southeast by land.
They arrived at Ito Province.
The official was called Erzhi.
The deputy was called Xiemogubingqugu.
There were over a thousand households.
Through generations, there was a king.
They were all under the jurisdiction of the queen’s country.
[It] was the regular stopping point for commandery envoys traveling back and forth.
To the southeast, [they traveled] one hundred li to Na Province.
The official was called Shibakuko.
The deputy was called Hinamori.
There were over twenty thousand households.
They traveled east one hundred *li* and arrived at Fumi Province.
The official was called Tamo.
The deputy was called Hinamori.
They arrived south at Tōma Province.

They traveled by water for twenty days.
The official was called Mimi.
The deputy was called Miminari.
It had over fifty thousand households.
They arrived south at Yamatai Province.
The queen’s capital.
They traveled by water for ten days.
They traveled by land for one month.
There were officials called Ikimma.
Next came Mimashō.
Next came Mimakatsuki.
Next came Nukatei.
It had over seventy thousand households.
From the queen’s country northward.
Their household numbers and travel distances could be briefly recorded.
The remaining neighboring countries were distant and cut off.
Their circumstances could not be ascertained in detail.
Next came Shima Province.
Next came Ihyakushi Province.
Next came Iya Province.

Next came Gunshi Province.
Next came Minuma Province.
Next came Kōkoto Province.
Next came Fuhu Province.
Next came Jenu Province.
Next came Taiso Province.
Next came Sonu Province.
Next came Koyū Province.
Next came Kanuso Province.
Next came Kikoku Province.
Next came Igo Province.
Next came Kinu Province.
Next came Yama Province.
Next came Kōshin Province.
Next came Bali Province.
Next came Kishi Province.
Next came Uno Province.
Next came Na Province.
This marked the extent of the queen’s domain.
To the south lay the Dogu Kingdom.

A man served as king.
Their officials included Kukochihiko.
They were not subordinate to the queen.

From the commandery to the queen’s country.
over twelve thousand *li*.
Men made no distinction between adult and child.
All had tattooed faces and marked bodies.
Since ancient times.
Their envoys visited China.
All called themselves Grand Masters.
夏后少康之子。
was enfeoffed at Kuaiji.
They cut their hair and tattooed their bodies.
to avoid harm from water dragons.
Now, the Wa people who lived by the water enjoyed diving to catch fish and shellfish.
They tattooed their bodies.
They also did this to ward off large fish and waterfowl.
Later, they gradually came to use them as decoration.
Their tattoos varied from country to country.
Some on the left, some on the right; some large, some small.
Status distinctions determined [their] differences.
Their travel distances were calculated.
It should be located east of Dongye in Kuaiji.

Their customs were not licentious.
All men wore their hair in exposed topknots.
They tied headbands made of tree cotton.
Their garments were horizontal widths of cloth.
They were fastened and connected together.
They were essentially seamless.
Women wore their hair loose and coiled their topknots.
They made garments like single-layered quilts.
They pierced a hole in the center.
They wore them as pullover garments by threading their heads through [the holes].
They cultivated grains, rice, ramie, and hemp.
They raised silkworms and mulberry trees, spun thread, and wove fabric.
They produced fine ramie, silk fabrics, and silk floss.
Their land had no oxen, horses, tigers, leopards, sheep, or magpies.
Soldiers used spears, shields, and wooden bows.
The wooden bows were shorter at the lower part and longer at the upper part.
Bamboo arrows, some tipped with iron.
Others with bone tips.
They possessed nothing.
[They were] the same as Dan’er and Zhuya.

The land of Wa was warm.
In winter and summer, they ate raw vegetables.
They all went barefoot.
They had houses.
Parents and siblings slept and rested in separate areas.
They painted their bodies with cinnabar.
They did this just as China used powder.
For eating and drinking, they used bamboo vessels and wooden stands. They ate with their hands.
When they died, they had coffins but no outer coffins.
They mounded earth to construct burial mounds.
When a death occurred.
They ceased mourning for over ten days.
At that time, they did not eat meat.
The chief mourner wept and wailed.
Others engaged in singing and dancing and drank alcohol.
After the burial was completed.
The entire family went to the water to bathe.
They bathed in the manner of ritual purification.
They would cross the sea to visit China.
They would always have one person refrain from combing their hair.

They did not remove lice and fleas.
They wore soiled clothing.
They did not eat meat.
They did not approach women.
They were like mourners.
They named this practice *jisai* (mourning abstinence).
If those practicing it conducted themselves properly, good fortune would follow.
They jointly looked after their captives and property.
If there was illness or they suffered sudden calamity.
they would then want to kill them.
They deemed that their observance of jisai had been negligent.
Produced pearls and blue jade.
Their mountains contained cinnabar.
Their trees included oak, daimyo oak, black mulberry, and sweetgum.
Their bamboo included dwarf bamboo, arrow bamboo, and tōshi bamboo.
There were ginger, citrus, pepper, and myoga ginger.
They did not know to use [them] as flavoring.
There were macaques and black pheasants.
Their customs when conducting affairs or traveling.
They had prescribed actions and words.

They would then burn bones and perform divination.
To divine good and ill fortune.
They would first announce [it] at the divination site.
Their pronouncements carried the force of commands.
Using the tortoise shell method, they would examine the cracks formed by fire to divine the omens.
At their gatherings, they would sit and rise [in accordance with protocol].
Fathers and sons, men and women made no distinction.
They were fond of alcohol by nature.

(*Weilüe* states:
Their customs did not recognize the proper calendar of four seasons.
(merely marked the years by spring planting and autumn harvest.) showing respect to their leaders.
However, they clasped their hands together instead of kneeling in prostration.
Their people enjoyed longevity.
Some lived a hundred years.
others eighty or ninety.
In their custom, all high-ranking men had four or five wives.
Commoners had two or three wives.
Women do not commit adultery.
They are not jealous or envious.
They do not steal.
They have few disputes.
Their violations of the laws.
For minor offenses, their wives and children are confiscated.
For serious offenses, they annihilate their household and relatives.
Status distinctions each maintained their own distinct hierarchy.
The hierarchy was sufficient to ensure mutual subordination among them.
They collected taxes and levies.
There were storehouses.

Each province had its market.
They conducted trade to exchange goods they had and lacked.
They had Yamato oversee them.
North of the queen’s realm,
They specially established a grand overseer.
They inspected the provinces.
The provinces stood in awe and fear of them.
They regularly governed Ito Province.
Within the provinces, there was something akin to a provincial governor.
The king dispatched envoys to the Wei capital, Daifang Commandery, and the various Korean states.
And Commandery envoyes were dispatched to Wa.
All arrived at the ports to thoroughly inspect and deliver documents, presenting the bestowed items to the queen.
No discrepancies were permitted.
When commoners and nobles met on the roads,
They would hesitantly step into the grass.
They would convey messages and discuss affairs.
Some would squat, others kneel.
They would press both hands against the ground.
They would show respect in this manner.
They would respond with an answering call and say, "Ah!"

Such as honoring agreements.

Their country had originally also been ruled by a male king.
This lasted seventy or eighty years.
The Wa kingdom fell into chaos.
They attacked each other for years.
They then jointly established a woman as ruler.
They named her Himiko.
She practiced spirit worship.
She could sway the masses. She was already advanced in years.
She had no husband.
She had a younger brother.
He assisted in governing the country.
Since becoming queen,
Few had seen her.
She attended to herself with a thousand female servants.
There was only one man.
He provided food and drink.
He conveyed messages and managed comings and goings.
She resided in palace chambers.
Towers, watchtowers, and castle palisades were strictly erected.
There were always people bearing arms standing guard.

East of the queen’s realm, crossing over a thousand *li* of sea.
Furthermore, there are provinces.
They are all of Wa ethnicity.
There is also a Dwarf Country.
It lies to the south.
The people were three to four shaku tall.
The distance from the queen’s realm was over four thousand *li*.
There are also a Naked Country and a Black-Teeth Country.
They lie further southeast of it.
It could be reached by a year’s voyage by ship.
[They] observed that the land of Wa was isolated upon islands and sandbars in the sea.
Some are severed; others are connected.
The circumference measures approximately over five thousand *li*.

June of the 2nd Year of Jingchu (238 CE).
The Queen of Wa dispatched Grandee Nashimei and others to the commandery.
They sought an audience with the Son of Heaven to present tribute.
Governor Liu Xia dispatched officials and generals.
They escorted them to the capital.

In December of that year.
An imperial edict was issued in response to the Queen of Wa.
[It] proclaims: "By Imperial Decree to the Ruler Allied with Wei, King of Wa, Himiko:
Governor Liu Xia of Daifang dispatched envoys to escort your Grandee Nashimei, followed by the next envoy Toshinori.
We have received the four male captives, six female captives, and two bolts plus two *zhang* of twill cloth that you presented.
Your location is exceedingly far.
You thereupon dispatched envoys to present tribute.
This is your loyalty and filial piety.
I deeply sympathize with you.
I hereby appoint you as Ruler Allied with Wei, King of Wa.
We confer upon you a gold seal with purple cords.
[They] were packaged and sealed, then entrusted to the Governor of Daifang for conferral.
You shall pacify and govern your people.
Strive to be filial and obedient.
Your envoys Nashimei and Toshinori have traversed a great distance.
The journey was arduous.
We hereby appoint Nashimei as Commandant for Pacification and General of the Palace Gentlemen.
We hereby appoint Toshinori as Commandant for Pacification.
We confer upon [them] silver seals with blue-green cords.
[They] were granted an audience, rewarded, and sent back.

We hereby confer: five bolts of crimson-ground intertwined dragon brocade (omitted), ten sheets of crimson-ground crepe-textured woolen fabric, five sheets of woolen fabric, fifty bolts of white silk, eight taels of gold, two five-foot blades, one hundred bronze mirrors, and fifty catties each of pearls and red lead.
All were packaged, sealed, and entrusted to Nashimei and Toshinori.
Upon returning, they recorded and received [the items].
You may fully show these to the people of your country.
Have them know that the state sympathizes with you.
Therefore, We solemnly bestow these fine goods upon you.

1st Year of Zhengshi (240 CE).
Governor Gōng Zūn dispatched Jianzhong Commandant Tī Jùn and others.
They presented the certificate, seal, and cord and proceeded to the country of Wa.
Conferred upon and bestowed [them] to the King of Wa.
and brought the imperial edict to bestow gold, silk, brocade, woolen fabric, swords, mirrors, and decorative goods.
The King of Wa thereupon presented a memorial through envoys.
He expressed gratitude for the imperial grace.
4th Year of Zhengshi (243 CE).
The King of Wa again dispatched eight envoys: Grandees Ishigie, Yaejako, and others.
They presented captives, Wa brocade, crimson-blue twill, cotton-padded clothes, silk cloth, cinnabar, and wooden staffs upon arriving at the authorities.

Himiko, Queen of Wa, and Himikuko, Male King of Dogu Kingdom, had long been at odds.
She dispatched Zaisi Wuyue and others from Wa to the commandery.
They explained the circumstances of their mutual attacks.
[They] dispatched Border Affairs Officer Zhang Zheng and others.
Thereupon, carrying the imperial edict and yellow banners, they conferred [them] upon Nashimei.
They issued a proclamation to instruct them.
Himiko died.
They constructed a grand tomb.
It measured over a hundred paces in diameter.
Those buried with her numbered over a hundred male and female servants.
They again appointed a male king.
The country was discontent.
They engaged in mutual slaughter.
At that time, they killed over a thousand people.
They again installed Himiko’s thirteen-year-old clanswoman Iyo as king.
The country was finally settled.
Zheng and others used a proclamation to instruct Iyo.
Iyo dispatched twenty people, including Yaejako, Commandant for Pacification and General of the Palace Gentlemen of Wa.
She sent Zheng and others back.
Thereupon, they proceeded to the court and presented thirty male and female captives as tribute.

They presented as tribute five thousand white pearls, two large blue beads, and twenty bolts of patterned brocade.

This text from the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* appears to derive from Yu Huan’s *Weilüe*, albeit with some revisions. Indeed, the *Records*, particularly its accounts concerning the northeastern barbarians, largely adopted material from the *Weilüe*, preserving even characters that Yu Huan had recorded in his contemporary language without alteration. Examples include phrases like “The present Goguryeo King Gong is this” and “The present Kochuga Bakui is this” in the *Goguryeo King Chronicles*—the same stylistic approach seen here in “the thirty states currently accessible via interpreters.”

While doubts persist about whether Chen Shou—author of the *Records*—exclusively drew this account from the *Weilüe* rather than other texts, we note that passages from the *Weilüe* quoted in Pei Songzhi’s annotations frequently employ the temporal marker “present” (*今*) in both Xianbei and Western Rong sections. Furthermore, Yan Shigu’s commentary on the *Book of Han’s Geography Treatise* cites this very text: “East of the Queen’s Kingdom, crossing over a thousand *li* by sea... There are also countries.” When confirming that “all are of Wa ethnicity” originates from the *Weilüe*, such doubts dissolve entirely.

Having established that the Account of the Wa People in the *Records* derives from the *Weilüe*, we must next determine whether the Account of Wa in the *Book of the Later Han* similarly stems from this source. Fan Ye—author of the *Later Han* and among China’s most accomplished historians—applied such skillful abridgment techniques that he nearly erased all traces of his citations, frustrating investigative rigor. Yet several passages betray his methods unmistakably.

Wa is located in the great sea southeast of Han.
Relying on mountainous islands, they established dwellings.
In total, over a hundred countries.
Since Emperor Wu destroyed Chosŏn.
those who had established communication with Han through interpreters.
approximately thirty countries.

The text of the *Weilüe* adopted in the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* was based on the passage from the *Book of Han’s Geography Treatise*: “In the sea of Lelang Commandery dwell the Wa people. They were divided into over a hundred countries.” This foundation explains why the term “old ‘hundred-odd countries’” used the character for “old” to indicate the Han period, while “thirty countries currently accessible via interpreters” employed “current” to denote the Wei period. However, Fan Ye’s assertion that “over thirty countries communicated with Han” resulted from his revisions and omissions of the *Weilüe* text. Though his alteration of “Daifang Commandery” to “Han”—since Daifang did not exist during Han times—demonstrated meticulous attention, entries like those below still failed to fully conceal his tracks.

The border of Lelang Commandery was twelve thousand *li* from their country.

While the *Weilüe* recorded the distance from the Queen’s country to Daifang Commandery as over twelve thousand *li*, Fan Ye—unable to use a commandery that did not yet exist during the Han period—had no choice but to calculate instead from the border of Lelang Commandery, which had already been established by Han times.
However, when we consider that Buyeo was said to be a thousand *li* north of Xuantu and Goguryeo a thousand *li* east of Liaodong—both calculated from their respective commandery seats—the calculation of the Queen’s Kingdom from the border of Lelang Commandery deviated from established conventions.
It also states:

Their land was generally located east of Kuaiji and Dongye.
[It] was close to Zhuya and Dan’er.
Therefore, their laws and customs were mostly the same.

The text of the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* states: “所二有無一.”
That is to say, it stated that their customs and products were the same as those of Dan’er and Zhuya, appending a phrase describing the local geography below this; however, in the *Book of the Later Han*, this had been altered into a statement about geographical location.
This was an error that occurred during the process of revision and deletion.

There were palisades and dwellings.
Parents and siblings resided separately.

In the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, the term “palisades” appeared exclusively in passages concerning Himiko’s residence and was not recognized as part of the people’s general customs; yet the *Book of the Later Han*, prioritizing lexical consistency, had superfluously appended the term “palisades” even to commoners’ dwellings.
An even more conspicuous error lay in the following entry.

It states:

"East of the Queen’s Kingdom, crossing over a thousand *li* by sea...
Arrived at Kunu Province.
Though they are all of Wa ethnicity,
they were not subject to the Queen."

This account in the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, as evidenced by Yan Shigu’s earlier citation in his commentary on the *Book of Han*, completely aligned with the *Weilüe*, merely noting that there was another country east of the Queen’s Kingdom without identifying it as Kunu Province. The account of Kunu Province had been appended below Na Province—the limit of the Queen’s domain—and positioned to its south. Thus, while the impropriety of the *Book of the Later Han*’s revisions was evident, some historians conversely regarded the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* as erroneous, believing the *Book of the Later Han* had corrected it by referencing other texts. This oversight likely stemmed from failing to consider Yan Shigu’s citation of the *Weilüe*. Beyond several passages to be discussed next, throughout its entirety, the *Book of the Later Han* divided and condensed passages from the *Weilüe* in this manner—particularly evident in the final section on the left, namely:

There are also Yizhou and Danzhou.
Legends say that Qin Shi Huang dispatched the *fangshi* Xu Fu to lead several thousand boys and girls out to sea (omission); their location was extremely remote.
There was no possibility of travel between them.

As for entries such as these, they are instances where Fan Ye fragmented and appended here an account from the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*’ *Biography of Sun Quan* in the *Wu Chronicles*—specifically, the entry stating that in the second year of Huanglong, Quan dispatched generals to sail the seas and seek Yizhou and Danzhou—though I cannot discern whether this was based on the *Weilüe* or perhaps directly drawn from the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*.
Therefore, as the primary text for this account, that the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* should be relied upon while the *Book of the Later Han* proves insufficient becomes increasingly evident.

However, what must not be left unexamined here is the following entry.
It states:

2nd Year of Jianwu Zhongyuan (57 CE).
The Na Kingdom of Wa presented tribute and paid court respects.
The envoy referred to himself as Grandee.
It was the southernmost boundary of the Wa Kingdom.

Emperor Guangwu bestowed [them] with an imperial seal and ribbon.

1st Year of Yongchu of Emperor An (107 CE).
The King of Wa, Shuai Sheng and others, presented 160 live captives.
They requested an audience.
During the reigns of Emperors Huan and Ling, the Wa Kingdom plunged into great turmoil.
They repeatedly attacked one another.
For years, there was no ruler.
There was a woman.
Her name was Himiko.
as recorded.

These records of tributary missions from the Han period were omitted in the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* and exist solely in the *Book of the Later Han*.
At first glance, one might argue that Fan Ye supplemented omissions in the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* here—yet when examining instead the composition method of the *Weilüe*, where accounts of the Xianbei, Joseon, and Western Rong each elaborate extensively from the Qin-Han period onward—the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* appears to have excised all records prior to the Han, preserving only those from the Three Kingdoms era.
This was proven by Pei Songzhi’s supplementation of the excised *Weilüe* passages when annotating the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, thereby restoring their original form; thus, while this entry in the *Book of the Later Han* may not have relied on the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, it appears beyond doubt to have drawn from the *Weilüe*.

Note: Regarding the mention of “倭國王帥升等” (King Shuai Sheng of Wa and others) in this passage, since the *Tongdian* records this as “倭面土地王師升等” (Master Sheng of the Land of Womian and others), Mr. Suga Masatomo’s analysis can be found in his work *Study of Wa People in Chinese Texts*.
I too had arrived at certain conclusions regarding this matter, but fearing to digress into trivialities, I refrained from discussing them here.
When we comprehensively consider all of the above, it becomes clear that relying on the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*—which adopted nearly verbatim passages from the *Weilüe* for its accounts of Wa—was justified; thus, the primary requirement for text selection was resolved here.

As for the second requirement—textual emendation—many aspects had to be conducted in tandem with verifying the main text’s place names, official titles, and personal names. To merely list discrepancies between individual editions here would yield minimal benefit; thus, I merged this task with later sections and omitted it for now. At present, I confined myself to declaring that the main text already presented was based on Yuan and Ming revised editions, with reference to a few Qianlong Palace editions.

Among the various editions I examined, I generally found the Yuan and Ming revised editions to be the most accurate.

Jiguge’s Seventeen Histories are reputed to be fine editions in the world; however, as far as I could ascertain, works such as the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* and *Book of the Later Han* within them appeared rather inferior—the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* often fell short even compared to the Qianlong Palace editions, while the *Book of the Later Han* was markedly worse than the Kan’ei movable-type edition, which seemed to trace its origins to the Yuan Dade edition.

The Qianlong Palace edition, being derived from the Ming Northern edition, needed not be redundantly cited here. As for the Ming Southern edition of the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, though Feng Mengzhen’s editorial revisions rendered it relatively superior among imperial editions—a point also noted in Gu Tinglin’s *Rizhilu*—its format was no longer archaic, and scribal errors likewise frequently occurred.

These were the reasons I established the criteria for selection.

Furthermore, among the referenced texts, since I had not yet had the opportunity to examine a Song edition of the *Taiping Yulan*, I primarily relied on our imitation Song movable-type edition, consulting the Bao engraved edition only on extremely rare occasions.

The Bao engraved edition was based on Ming editions collated against Song editions; however, the entry on Wa Province in the “Four Barbarians” section was particularly crude in the Ming editions. The Bao engraved edition also showed traces of having been emended using the Jiguge edition of the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, thus offering almost nothing worth adopting as a Song-collated text, being far inferior to our movable-type edition’s faithful reproduction of the Song edition.

For the *Tongdian* and *Cefu Yuangui*, among others, I used commonly circulated editions.

2. The Oldest Japanese Interpretations of the Accounts in the Main Text

When examining the accounts in the main text, one must first ascertain how the authors of the *Nihon Shoki* perceived Himiko, as this constitutes what should be considered the earliest critique by Japanese historians regarding these records.
The Chronicle of Empress Jingū contains the following account:

The 39th Year.
In this year, the Great Year was Jiwei.
(The *Wei Zhi* states:
June of the 3rd Year of Jingchu under Emperor Ming.
The Queen of Wa dispatched Grandee Nandoumi and others to the commandery.
They sought an audience with the Son of Heaven to present tribute at court.
Governor Deng Xia dispatched envoys to escort them to the capital.)

The 40th Year.
(The *Records of Wei* states:
1st Year of Zhengshi (240 CE).
They dispatched Jianzhong Xiaowei Ti Xie and others.
They presented the imperial edict and seal with ribbon.
[they] arrived in the Wa Kingdom.)

The 43rd Year.
(The *Records of Wei* states:
Zhengshi 4th Year.
(The *Records of Wei* states: In the 4th Year of Zhengshi, the Wa King again dispatched envoys—Grandee Isenkiyakuya and approximately eight others—to present tribute.)

The 66th Year.
(In this year.
2nd Year of Taichu under Emperor Wu of Jin.
The Jin Dynasty Court Diaries state:
October of the 2nd Year of Taichu under Emperor Wu of Jin.
The Queen of Wa dispatched [her envoys] through interpreters to present tribute.)

If this account had been written by the compilers of the *Nihon Shoki*, what obstacle could there be to concluding that they believed Himiko to be Empress Jingū? However, among modern scholars of national learning, there existed a theory positing the majority of these annotated accounts as later insertions—a view that held considerable sway.

While their rationale for deeming these annotations insertions was undoubtedly grounded in a pro-imperial theory—which maintained that passages from foreign histories should not mingle with national history—their justification ultimately rested on the claim that no old editions contained them.

This position was significantly weakened when a fragment of the Ōjin Chronicle—believed to be an ancient Nara-period manuscript preserved by Mr. Tanaka Kanbei—came to light. The annotations in the Ōjin Chronicle’s 5th Year entry ("a ship was built and named *Kareno*") and its 22nd Year entry ("*Anahime was the sister of Miyomowake, ancestor of the Kibi no Omi*") were claimed in the *Shoki Shūkai* commentary to be absent from old editions and thus later insertions from private sources. Yet the ancient manuscript contained them. Moreover, given evidence undermining the credibility of old editions cited in *Shoki Shūkai*, there remained no basis to similarly dismiss the Jingū Chronicle’s annotations as insertions.

Particularly compelling was the 66th Year annotation citing the *Jin Dynasty Court Diaries*, a text recorded in Fujiwara no Sukeyo’s *Catalog of Books Currently in Japan* and undeniably transmitted to our nation long ago. That the Jingū Chronicle referenced this text rather than the Tang-compiled *Book of Jin* likely indicated its compilers had not yet encountered the latter work.

Equally noteworthy were correspondences between Korean place names in the *Nihon Shoki* and those in the "Three Han Accounts" of the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*. *Shishin* from the Ōjin Chronicle’s 8th Year annotations and *Nirin* from its 16th Year matched *Shishin* and *Erlin* in the Ma Han section. The term *Kokeishin* in the Jingū Chronicle’s 49th Year likely derived from *Koen Province* through graphical corruption of *kei* (奚) into *en* (爰). Similarly, *Fumikishi* and *Hanko* corresponded to Fumi Province, Shihan Province, Kuso Province, and Shōro Province—errors arising when the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* mistakenly divided Fumikishi Province, Hanko Province, and Soshōro Province into four entries.

Though these place names rarely appeared in Korea’s ancient histories—and variations like *Erlin* becoming *Nirin* suggested no direct textual relationship—the parallels between the *Nihon Shoki* and Chinese records allowed us to infer that the chronicle’s compilers had consulted works like the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* or *Weilüe*. When considering both these toponymic correspondences and the Jingū Chronicle’s annotations, there could be no doubt that the *Nihon Shoki*’s authors presumed Himiko’s identity with Empress Jingū while synchronizing their chronologies.

This could truly be said to mark the inaugural critique by Japanese historians regarding the accounts of Himiko. Naturally, this ancient critique remains something that historians today cannot casually dismiss. However, whether this interpretation was ultimately valid belongs to a different matter entirely.

(The above was published in May of Meiji 43 in *Geibun*
First Year, Second Issue)

3. Objections to Previous Theories

During the Ashikaga clan’s medieval period, there was a monk named Sōchūhō who, during the Bunshō era, authored the *Zenrin Kokuhōki* and became the first to raise doubts about whether Wa was indeed Japan.
That is, the *Treatise on Geography from the Book of Han* states: “In the sea of Lelang Commandery, there are Wa people.”
[They] were divided into over a hundred polities.
[Sōchūhō] argued that if [the Wa people] were to be considered Japan, dividing them into over a hundred polities would be questionable, and further cited the *Records of Wei*’s statement: “located southeast of Daifang Commandery in the sea.”
They established their polities by relying on mountainous islands.
They crossed a thousand *li* over the sea.
Furthermore, there were polities.
They were all of Wa ethnicity.
He argued that if [Wa] were taken as Japan, one would have to ask which country the aforementioned “Wa people in the sea of Lelang Commandery divided into over a hundred polities” referred to. The rhyme books take Wa as the name of the Queen’s Country—presumably because Amaterasu Ōmikami, being chief among earthly deities, ruled this land—hence its designation. If so, he reasoned that all people of this country would merely be their kind or their slaves. However, he stated that the phrase “crossing a thousand *li* over the sea” seemed to differ from [the descriptions of] the Wa in Lelang Commandery’s waters and the Wa ethnic polities, leaving doubts unresolved.
He doubted whether the Wa in the Lelang Sea or the Wa ethnic polities located a thousand *li* east across the sea were truly Japan, and further questioned whether the queen’s name was truly derived from Amaterasu Ōmikami.
(The presence of this doubt in the *Zenrin Kokuhōki* has also been pointed out in Tsuruimine Boshin’s *Shūkoku Gisen Kō*.)

However, when Matsushita Kenrin authored his celebrated work *Ishō Nihonden* during the Genroku era (1688–1704), he appears to have accepted without reservation the conventional theory that Himiko—as mentioned in the *Book of the Later Han* and *Records of the Three Kingdoms*—was none other than Empress Jingū.

It was Motoori Norinaga’s *Gyojo Gaigen* that overturned this long-established theory.
Though Motoori did not doubt that the name Himiko referred to Okinaga-tarashihime no Mikoto—that is, Empress Jingū—as one venerated from regions like the Three Han, he argued that the envoys dispatched to Wei were not official emissaries of the imperial court, but rather Kumaso tribesmen—who held power south of Tsukushi—exploiting the queen’s illustrious reputation to fraudulently send their own agents under false pretenses. He further asserted that while these individuals presented themselves as Himiko to receive Wei envoys, they were in truth men who deceived the Wei delegation through this guise.
At the same time, Murase Kōtei’s *Geien Jisshū* contained a section discussing national titles where he suggested that the queen mentioned in the *Records of Wei* likely referred to Empress Jingū. Yet Motoori’s theory proved truly revolutionary, and it appears all subsequent historians gradually elaborated upon this framework.

Tsuruimine Boshin authored *Shūkoku Gisen Kō* (published in *Yamato Sōshi*), which elaborated on Motoori’s theories and proposed a novel argument: Shūkoku was a Ji-surnamed state descended from Wu Taibo that had long feigned kingship to engage with Han China—submitting tribute in the 2nd Year of Jianwu Zhongyuan under Emperor Guangwu and offering live captives in the 1st Year of Yongchu under Emperor An. After undergoing multiple subjugation campaigns following Emperor Keikō’s personal expedition, it lost its ruler. Then, from the outset of Empress Jingū’s regency, they secretly impersonated the empress by establishing a female figurehead whom they reverently declared as *Hime-no-mikoto*—this, he argued, is how the name *Himiko* came to be transmitted.
This theory too greatly astonished scholars of the time, appearing to possess such persuasive power that they flocked to follow it. While Kurokawa Harumura’s *Examination of National Titles in the History of the Northern Dynasties* still adhered to Motoori’s old theory—identifying Himiko as Empress Jingū and claiming that Tsukushi envoys had fraudulently declared themselves representatives of the imperial court—it could not match the influence Tsuruimine’s theory came to exert among later historians.

Historians since the Meiji era remained largely within the scope of Tsuruimine’s theory. Works such as Mr. Suga Masatomo’s *Examination of Wa People in Chinese Texts*, Mr. Yoshida Tōgo’s *Disputes in Ancient Japanese-Korean History*, Mr. Naka Michiyo’s *Study on Japan’s Ancient Chronology*, and Mr. Kume Kunitake’s *Ancient History of Japan* all uniformly adopted the theory of a Chikushi female chieftain, differing only in minor distinctions—whether she was a Kumaso chieftain or one from regions like Chikugo and Higo. Even works that should have served as standard references—such as *Kokushigan*, believed to have been produced by scholars like Kume and Suga, and Yoshida’s *Nihon Chimei Jisho* (*Dictionary of Japanese Place Names*)—had already included this theory. Scholars like Kume even reached the point of declaring that the era of textual criticism regarding Yamatai had already passed.

Fearing that providing individual critiques of these various scholars' theories would inevitably become overly intricate and verbose, I merely outlined their main arguments to demonstrate the evolution of scholarly discourse and addressed the validity of their claims only as necessary during my textual analysis.

4. Textual Analysis

Since the main text had been presented above, here I primarily listed only those terms requiring textual analysis.
What should also be mentioned in due course was that after the publication of the previous issue, my friend Mr. Inaba Iwakichi had used the Song edition of the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* housed in the Imperial Household Agency’s Archives to collate the main text I transcribed and reported its discrepancies.
That Song edition was formerly owned by Ichinō Meian and also appeared in the *Keiseki Hōkoshi* (Records of Visiting Ancient Texts).
Those discrepancies were listed beneath their respective phrases.

**Daifang**: A commandery established when the Gongsun clan occupied Liaodong during the late Han period; Wei retained it even after destroying the Gongsun clan.
[Daifang] had been created by elevating what were originally county names under Lelang Commandery to form a commandery; it corresponds to the area south of Lelang—present-day Chungcheong and Jeolla Provinces in Korea.
Matsushita Kenrin [erroneously] referred to it as the “Daifang Kuaiji Commandery.”
The assertion that this denoted the present-day Bamin region was baseless.

In ancient times there were over a hundred polities.
During the Han period there were those who paid court visits.
At present envoys and interpreters maintained relations with thirty polities.
The description of old times relied on the Treatise on Geography from the Book of Former Han, while "the present" referred to the time when Yu Huan compiled the *Weilüe*, as I had previously stated.
The *Shitong* notes that Yu Huan of Jingzhao privately compiled the *Weilüe* during the Wei period.
The account concludes with Emperor Ming.
Though [the *Shitong*] states [the *Weilüe*] concluded with Emperor Ming, passages from it quoted in the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* extend into the Zhengshi and Jiaping eras; thus its records clearly encompassed the reign of Prince Fang of Qi.
Therefore, even when [the text] says "now" here, might it refer to the era of Prince Fang of Qi?
Mr. Suga’s assertion that Chen Shou himself indicated this period was an error stemming from his failure to examine examples such as those found in the Goguryeo Account.

Upon reaching its northern shore lay Gaya Korea; the same *Records of Wei*’s *Biography of Byeonjin* contained [the term] “Byeonjin Guya Country.” Mr. Yoshida Tōgo identified this as Gaya (伽耶) or Garak (駕洛) in Korean history—that is, present-day Gimhae.
In the *Nihon Shoki*, it corresponded to Mimana.
Here, “its northern shore” referred to the northern shore of Wa.
The *Book of the Later Han* stated that Lelang Commandery’s border lay twelve thousand *li* away from their country.
Though [the *Book of the Later Han*] noted “over seven thousand *li* from its northwestern boundary to Gaya Korea,” both instances of “its” denoted Wa.
However, Mr. Suga Masatomo mistakenly interpreted this as referring to Korea and questioned the mention of “northern shore.”
This error likely stemmed from his failure to consider that Gaya Korea had already submitted to Wa at that time.
The *Biography of Han* in the *Records of Wei* declared: “Han lies south of Daifang.”
To the east and west, [it] was bounded by the sea.
It recorded, “To the south, [it] adjoins Wa,” while the *Biography of Byeonjin* noted that “the Tohol Country shares a border with Wa.”
Byeonjin Tohol Country: Mr. Yoshida’s identification of it with present-day Hamcheon County was acceptable; however, his explanation—positing “Tohol Port” as a separate entity at Dongnae-bu’s Dataepo to suggest two Tohols—was forced.
Tohol was unequivocally the sole ancient Dairashū Province and corresponded to Tara as recorded in the *Nihon Shoki*.
Had there been no Wa territories within Korea, [Korea] would logically have been bounded by sea to the east, west, and south; moreover, there would have been no reason for Tohol Country in its interior to share a border with Wa.
This sufficed to infer that this account emerged after Mimana was subjugated to our country.

Tsushima Province, Iki Province, Matsura Province, Ito Province, Na Province, Fumi Province—in the Song edition, Tsushima was erroneously written as “Taikai.”
Iki Province: Motoori, drawing upon the *History of the Northern Dynasties*, deemed it appropriate to amend the name to Iki Province; the *Book of Liang* followed suit—that is, Iki.
Identifying Matsura as Hizen’s Matsuura, Ito as Chikuzen’s Ito, Na as Naken County or Natsu Port, and Fumi Province as Umi—the birthplace of Emperor Ōjin—had been uniformly followed since Motoori’s time, as there had been no particularly compelling alternative theories.

South to Tōma Province.
Twenty days by water.
There were several theories regarding this. Motoori noted that Tsuma Shrine existed in Koyu District of Hyūga Province—as recorded in the *Shoku Nihon Kōki*, *Sandai Jitsuroku*, *Engishiki*, and others—and suggested that this might be the location.
Mr. Tsuruimine stated that “Tsuma” likely referred to what was recorded in the *Wamyōshō* as Kamitsuma District and Kamutsuma in Chikugo Province’s Upper Tsuma District, and Shimotsuma District’s Jōshō in Lower Tsuma District.
However, interpreting the twenty-day water journey from Tōma to Yamatai as part of the itinerary was a glaring error.
Kurokawa presented three theories: the first aligned with Tsuruimine’s; the second interpreted *Tō* as a corruption of *Satsu*, identifying it as Satsuma Province; the third cited the *Wamyōshō*’s mention of Tsuma-go in Satsuma Province’s Kijima District—phonetically similar—and further proposed reading *Tō* as a corruption of *Minu*, rendering it *Minuma* and associating it with Mitsuma District. However, he deemed none of these satisfactory.
*Kokushigan* treated “Setuma” as a corruption and identified it as Satsuma; Mr. Yoshida adopted this and further cited Takajō District’s Takuma Village in the *Wamyōshō*, while Mr. Suga followed Motoori’s theory.
In summary, they all stemmed from the preconceived notion of locating Yamatai in Chikushi and had been constrained by the so-called “southward” direction.
However, when ancient Chinese texts spoke of directions, it could be considered their standard practice to conflate east with south and west with north. Moreover, it was not uncommon for directional confusion to arise from the position of the journey’s starting point or notable landmarks along the way.
The *Book of Later Wei*’s “Account of Mohe” recorded an eighteen-day northeastward journey from the Taolu River (present-day Tao’er River) to Mohe (the upper reaches of the present-day Songhua River), where a southeastward course would have been appropriate. If even terrestrial directions were prone to such errors, maritime directions must have been all the more susceptible to inaccuracies.
Therefore, I interpreted this “south” as “east” and intended to identify Tōma Province with Tamanooya Village in Saba District, Suō Province (Tamanooya) as recorded in the *Wamyōshō*.
This land enshrined Tamanooya-no-mikoto—ancestral deity of the Tamanooya Sukune clan, also known as Ameakaru Tama-no-mikoto and Amekushi Akaru Tama-no-mikoto—and was designated as the foremost shrine of Suō Province. Commanding Mitajiri’s present-day harbor, it occupied a strategic position along the Inland Sea.
In ancient times, one could imagine that this area—occupied by a renowned clan whose occupation was jade crafting—formed a settlement of over fifty thousand households.
Unlike remote regions such as Hyūga and Satsuma, nor was it a place like Chikugo where reconciling travel distances proved difficult—this was the reason I had thus determined.

South to Yamatai Province.
Ten days by water.
Land travel: one month.
That Yamai was a corruption of Yamatai went without saying.
The *Book of Liang*, *History of the Northern Dynasties*, and *Book of Sui* all rendered it as "Yamatai."
Though Motoori had not explicitly specified the location, he likely regarded it as the Hyūga-Ōsumi region.
Mr. Tsuruimine argued that "Yamatai" was a self-styled designation by the Hayato people who likened their territory to the imperial capital Yamato; he noted that Ryukyuans still called Satsuma "Yamato," citing a nursery rhyme: "If Ryukyu and Yamato were lands connected..." ("lands connected" being a corruption of "land connection"). He further claimed the phrase "ten days by water" resulted from two missing characters preceding "ten days."
Mr. Suga and Mr. Yoshida's theories largely aligned with this while adding detail; they proposed locations like Hayato Castle in Kōri Township's Ogawa Village and Himeki Castle in Shimizu Township's Himeki Village within Ōsumi Province's Soo District, while Hoshino Hisashi and Kume identified it with Chikushi Province's Yamato District.
The various theories all concurred in emending the text's "one month of land travel" to "one day."
However, the character for "one month of land travel" appeared uniformly across all texts derived from the *Weilüe* and *Records of the Three Kingdoms*—including the *Book of Liang*, *History of the Northern Dynasties*, *Taiping Yulan*, *Cefu Yuangui*, *General Records*, and *Wenxian Tongkao*—with no instances using "one day." Thus, it proved difficult to justify lightly emending ancient texts.
Mr. Tsuruimine's alteration of the ten-day water journey to twenty days lacked any foundation.
As with Motoori's theory—that they falsely received Wei envoys—Mr. Suga dismissed such notions as tantamount to child's play, stating that even if this occurred in a peripheral region, it remained inconceivable.
Mr. Suga stated that when Han China referred to "Wa," it meant the land of the Chikushi Nine Provinces; thus, those ruling this area were called "King of Wa," appearing naturally unaware of an emperor residing in Yamato.
However, this theory insufficiently proved Yamatai's location in Chikushi.
Moreover, according to the *Nihon Shoki*, when Toneri Arasuto—son of the King of Oukara Kingdom—heard of a sage emperor in Japan and defected there, arriving at Anato, a man named Itotsuhiko declared, "I am this land's king; there exists no other ruler besides me." Yet observing his demeanor revealed he was no true king. Even in later eras, when Ming Taizu dispatched monk Sōsosen to Japan—though detained by the Seisei Shogun—they still knew of Emperor Jimei's presence in Kyoto. From this, one inferred Wei envoys personally visiting Chikushi and witnessing its internal conflicts could not have remained ignorant of the Yamato Imperial Court's existence.
Even if Ryukyuans acquired the term "Yamato" after the court's influence reached Kyushu, this provided insufficient grounds.
The *Book of Sui* and *History of the Northern Dynasties* stated that "the capital of Wa was located at Yamatsui," equating it with the *Records of Wei*'s Yamatai.
This evidenced that during Sui times, Yamato was regarded as Yamatai.
Records of tributary missions by Wa Kings Zan, Chin, Sei, Kō, and Bu—spanning Eastern Jin through Liang dynasties—appeared in respective Books of Song and Liang. Though some theorized these were regional commanders' private envoys rather than Yamato Court officials, their memorials clearly engaged in diplomacy under the court's name.
Therefore, during Liang times, the Yamato Imperial Court's existence was naturally known there; the *Book of Liang* unhesitatingly regarded its Wa King as successor to Wei's recorded Wa King.

When viewed through Chinese records in this manner, there could be no room for differing opinions regarding Yamatai Province other than equating it with the location of the Yamato Imperial Court. The distance stated as "ten days by water and one month by land" from Tōma Province did not seem unreasonable when compared to calculating the journey from around Na Province to Tōma as twenty days by water. Moreover, a large country with over seventy thousand households appeared more reasonably sought in Yamato—the royal capital region—rather than in Chikushi on the frontier. This was why I believed Yamatai Province should be restored to the Yamato of earlier theories. However, the boundaries of what could be called Yamatai were likely more extensive than present-day Yamato Province and probably encompassed regions directly administered by the imperial court at that time.

Regarding Shima Province, Motoori posited that it might be either Shima District in Chikuzen Province or Shima Township in Soo District, Ōsumi Province, while Mr. Yoshida also identified it as Sakurajima.
I identified this as Shima Province.
To append an explanation: My methodology for determining place names lay in compiling those from the *Wamyōshō*’s districts and townships that shared phonetic similarities, then selecting appropriate candidates among them based on geographical plausibility—yet here, I merely presented the results of that selection.
All subsequent followed this method.

Regarding Iki Province, Mr. Yoshida read this as “Irofu” and identified it with Iroki Village in Kijima District, Satsuma Province.
I read this as Ishiki.
In Mr. Kurita Hiroshi’s collection of ancient Fudoki fragments, in the section on Ishiki in Ise Province, he cited the Nihon Shoki Private Observations and stated: “The Ise Province Fudoki says...”
Regarding Ise: it was the deity enshrined at Kotoshinushi Shrine in Iga.
Izumo no Kamiko Izumo Takeko no Mikoto.
Also known as Isetsuhiko-no-mikoto and also known as Amekushi Tama-no-mikoto.
This deity in ancient times constructed a stone fortress and resided here.
Hereupon, the deity Abe no Shihiko came to confront them but, being unable to prevail, withdrew.
As it was said, 'Hence, it was named...'—this was that stone fortress.

Mr. Yoshida identified Iza Province as the two districts of Northern and Southern Isa in Satsuma Province.
I identified it as the location of Izawa-no-miya in Tōshi District, Shima Province.
That was what was referred to in the Enryaku Gishiki-chō, Engi-shiki Jinmyōchō, and other texts as the Remote Palace of Amaterasu Ōmikami.
Moreover, in Watarai District of Ise Province, there was also Iso Township; Iso Shrine and Iso Province both appeared in the Yamato-hime no Mikoto Seiki.

The Ming Southern Prisoner edition and Qianlong Palace edition both rendered it as “Toshi,” but one should follow the Song and Yuan editions and write “Gunshi.”
Mr. Yoshida posited that Kushiki corresponded to present-day Kajiki Township in Aira District, Ōsumi Province.
I propose to identify this as the location of Bouhara Shrine in Watarai District, Ise Province.
In the “Kunugi” entry of Tanigawa Shisen’s *Wakun no Shiori*, it states: “The *Engi-shiki Jinmyōchō* records Bouhara Shrine in Watarai District, Ise Province. As the character 棒 [bou] contradicts its dictionary meaning, this results from an error for 欅原 [keyakihara], with the reading ‘nuki’ also mistakenly applied. The shrine’s current location lies in Asakami Village, Tanabe Township. The *Manyōshū*...

By Watarai’s great river—were I to linger long by the young oak, would I yearn for my beloved?

It read:
The *Jinmyōchō Kōshō* also stated that 棒 was a miswriting of the character 欅 (*keyaki*), that 久奴木 (*Kunuki*) was an abbreviation of 奴木原 (*Nukihara*), and that it referred to the Hase Highway.
The *Wamyōshō* also recorded Numaki (Nuki) Township in Watarai District.

Regarding Minu Province, Mr. Yoshida posited that it was the port of Ichiki Township in Hioki District, Satsuma Province.
I identify this as Mino Province.

Regarding Kōkoto Province, Mr. Yoshida posits that this province corresponds to Kōsentō—that is, present-day Kaseda Township in Kawabe District.
Of the various editions I examined, not a single one rendered it as Kōsentō.
Therefore, following the old interpretation, I assign it to Kagami District in Mino Province or Katagata District.
In Bizen Wake District, there exists Kako (Kakato) Township, whose phonetic correspondence is strong; yet how can one reconcile the lack of geographical continuity?

Addendum: Matsushita Kenrin’s *Ishō Nihon Den* omits twenty-one characters spanning from Iza Province to Kōkoto Province.
Seeing that Motoori’s *Gyojū Gaigen* also omits the same number of characters, one must recognize that Motoori formulated his theory based on the *Ishō Nihon Den* without examining the original text of the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*; it is evident that his scholarship did not involve rigorous textual analysis.
Yet the reason his theory so effectively swayed later scholars lies solely in two factors: first, because later scholars were dazzled by his reputation, and second, because it appealed to Japanese scholars’ national pride.

Regarding Fuko Province, Mr. Yoshida identified it as Hioki Township in Hioki District, Satsuma Province.
I identified Ibuki, located near Mount Ibuki, as Iro in Ikeda District, Mino Province from the *Wamyōshō*.
This was likely territory occupied by the Ibu Kibe clan.

**Shenu Province**: Motoori posited Tano Township in Shūfuku District, Iyo Province, while Mr. Yoshida read it phonetically as *Kei* and proposed Keizan District in Satsuma Province.
These interpretations all substitute the character 姐 (jie) with 妲 (da).
However, none of the extant editions actually render it as 妲 (da).
I identify this as Tsunogo Township in Takashima District, Ōmi Province.
Tsuno Shrine exists there, serving as the guardian deity for over twenty villages in Kawakami-go Township and enshrining Kinosumi Sukune—ancestor of the Tsuno-omi clan—as recorded in Mr. Kurita’s *Shingi Shiryō*.

Regarding Taiso Province, Motoori posited that it referred to Tosa, while Mr. Yoshida identified it as Tabuse Township in Ata District, Satsuma Province.
That was Tamizu Township in the *Wamyōshō*.
Though reading it as “Tosa” was phonetically most fitting, given its geographical isolation, I provisionally identified this as Suisa Township in Ika District, Ōmi Province, from the *Wamyōshō*.

Regarding Sono Province, Mr. Yoshida identified it as Soo—that is, present-day Nishi-Soo District in Ōsumi Province.
I posit this as what is called Sana District in the *Enryaku Gishiki-chō* and *Yamato-hime no Mikoto Seiki*.

In Ban Nobutomo’s *Yamato-hime no Mikoto Seiki Kō*, it was stated: “Sana District appears in the first volume of the *Kojiki* as Sana District (‘Ise’); in the Izanagawa Palace section of the middle volume [it mentions] the Sana-no-miyatsuko of Ise; in the register [*Enryaku Gishiki-chō*], it is recorded as Sana Shrine in Taki District, Ise Province. Sanaya [Sana], now in Taki District, is a prominent valley with eight villages, it is said.”

Regarding Koyū Province, Mr. Yoshida identified it as Kanoya Township in Kimotsuki District, Ōsumi Province.
I identify it as Mazu (Oumi) Township in Taki District, Ise Province.
There existed Mazumi Shrine, which enshrined Toyokiiribiko no Mikoto, ancestor of Nakamazumi no Kimi.
The *Yamato-hime no Mikoto Seiki* recorded that Yamatohime-no-mikoto embarked on a royal journey by boat from Kushida, arrived at Kōgoe River, where fish naturally gathered and approached the vessel. At that time, Yamatohime-no-mikoto viewed this with delight and established Uomisha Shrine at that location.
In Ban’s study, Uomisha Shrine was recorded in the *Shinmei Hisho* as Kiden, and in the *Gishikichō* as having three deities: Tsukuyomi-no-mikoto, Toyotamahiko-no-mikoto, and Toyotamahime. It also appeared in the *Engishiki Jinmyōchō* as Uomi Shrine in Taki District. A connection to Mazumi appeared evident.

Kanuso Province: Mr. Yoshida posited that this was a branch town of Soo (perhaps present-day Higashi-Soo District).
I had two proposed locations: one was the site of Rokuon Shrine in Iwata District, Tōtōmi Province.
The second was based on the *Kojiki*'s account of Fuhanomochikunusunu-no-kami, child of Yashimajinumi-no-kami, where *mochi* corresponded to *muchi* in Ōanamuchi-no-kami—signifying nobility and equivalent to the Korean term *matai* (meaning "superior"), thus identifying him as the ruler of Fuwa Province.
The deity name Kunusunu, following the ancient custom of deriving names from place names, should be equated with Kanuso, I concluded.

Motoori identifies Oni Province as Kii District in Hizen Province, while Mr. Yoshida posits it as Takagi District in Satsuma Province.
However, the sound of 鬼 is *kwi*, not *ki*.

Since the ancient pronunciation approximated characters like *Kui*, *Kui*, and *Kai*, it was more plausible to apply the kun reading *kura* [to 桑] and assign the name to locations such as Ōkuwa Township in Niwa District, Owari Province, or Ōkuwa Township in Yamagata District, Mino Province.

As Mr. Matsushita of our country had read it as “Iga,” he likely assigned it to Iga.
Motoori assigned it to Kibu District in Chikugo Province, while Mr. Yoshida identified it as Kae—that is, present-day Takae Township in Satsuma District, Satsuma Province.
However, since the sound at that time would have been *Uwi* or *Uwa*, *Kwa*, I proposed to assign this to Iga Township in Nukata District, Mikawa Province—that is, the present-day Okazaki area—or alternatively to Banga Township in Chita District, Owari Province.

Mr. Matsushita read Kinokoku as "Kino," and thus presumably assigned it to Kii Province.
Mr. Yoshida posited that this corresponded to present-day Akune in Izumi District, Satsuma Province.
I propose to identify this as Kuwana Township in Kuwana District, Ise Province.

Regarding Yamakoku, Motoori posited that there existed a mountainous country in Shimoge District, Buzen Province, and noted that Yame County also appeared in the *Keikōki* (Chronicle of Emperor Keikō). Mr. Yoshida likewise identified Yame as present-day Yamato and the two districts of Kamitsuma and Shimotsuma in Chikugo.
I posit it as Noma (Yasue) in Inabe District, Ise Province.

Regarding Kushimi Province, Mr. Yoshida stated that while its name was difficult to ascertain with precision, he still posited that it corresponded to present-day Mimitsu-Goi. I identify it as Kushida (Kushita) Township in Taki District, Ise Province. The *Yamato-hime no Mikoto Seiki* records that Yamatohime-no-mikoto, after dropping her sacred comb, established Kushida Shrine there; the *Gishikichō* further shows deities dedicated to sacred rice fields at Kushidane-kura being venerated; and the *Jinmyōchō* lists Kushida Shrine, Kushida Tsukimoto Shrine, and Ōkushi Shrine in Taki District among others.

Regarding Hari Province, Mr. Yoshida posits that it is Hara—that is, present-day Mihara District, Chikugo Province. I propose to identify this as Owari Province or Harima Province.

Regarding Kii Province, Mr. Yoshida posited that this corresponded to Kii District in Hizen Province.
In the vicinity of Yamato, one might have viewed this as Kii; however, based on the phonetic reading of “Ui” for 惟, it would have been more appropriate to assign it to Kibi.

Regarding Unu Province, Motoori identified it as Unu Township in Yoshiki District, Suō Province; furthermore, it was said that places named Ōno were found here and there in the western provinces.
Mr. Yoshida identified Ōno as present-day Ōnoyama in Mikasa District, Chikuzen Province.
I propose to identify this as Anno District, Bingo Province.
The *Kuni no Miyatsuko Honji* records the Kibi Ana Kuni no Miyatsuko; Yachitari no Nenushi, grandson of Hiko Kunihuki and descendant of Ametarashihiko Kunioshi Hito no Mikoto, a son of Emperor Kōshō, had been appointed to this position, and the title Anata Kō also appeared in the *Shinsen Shōjiroku*.
The *Keikōki* recorded Anahama (穴海), and the *Ankan-ki* mentioned Ana Province (婀娜國), which referred to a coastal region encompassing both Anno and Fukatsu districts—a fact also seen in Mr. Yoshida’s place name dictionary.

Na Province: That is, it is the same as previously mentioned.

This marked the southern boundary of the queen's territory.
To the south lay the Dogu Kingdom; this directional reference specifically followed from Na Province.
Mr. Suga’s broad interpretation of this passage as indicating “the south of the queen’s entire realm” led him to paradoxically question the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* while accepting as authoritative the *Book of the Later Han*’s arbitrary alteration—which states, “From the queen’s country, cross eastward over the sea for over a thousand *li* to reach Kuna Province”—a failure to read the sources with due care.
The inadequacy of relying on the *Book of the Later Han* had already been demonstrated.
Motoori, following this flawed text, identified Kawanogo Township in Kazahaya District, Iyo Province as the Dogu Kingdom, and Mr. Yoshida perpetuated this error.
I propose instead to locate it at Shirano Township in Kikuchi District, Higo Province.
This corresponds geographically to lands immediately south of Na Province.

Kuaiji Dongye: The “ye” in [Dongye] is a corruption of 冶 (*ye*).
In the *Treatise on Commanderies and States* in the *Book of the Later Han*, there is no Dongye County listed under Kuaiji Commandery; Yang Shoujing argued in his *Supplemented and Corrected Tables of Commanderies and Counties of the Three Kingdoms* that this was an error or omission.
It corresponds to the present-day administrative seat of Fuzhou Prefecture.

The investigation of the above place names has been completed.

(The above was published in June 1910 in *Geibun*, Vol. 1, No. 3)
No. 3)

Next, I shall address official titles. However, among these titles—such as *Hiko* in Hiku (meaning “Prince”) and *Hinamori* in Hinamori (meaning “barbarian guardian”)—those requiring no extensive demonstration will be set aside; my focus shall rest principally on attempting to elucidate those others that have hitherto defied interpretation.

Regarding Niki: In the official titles of our nation recorded in the *Book of Sui* and *History of the Northern Dynasties*, there appears *Iniyi*. Mr. Kurokawa proposed that the character 翼 (*yoku*) represents a corruption of 冀 (*ki*), reading this as *Ineki* and identifying it with the rice steward (*ineki*). I consider this 爾支 (Niki) likewise to constitute a phonetic corruption of the same term.

Shemogū and Simagū appeared to share the reading *Shimako*—that is to say，they seemed likely to correspond to “island child.” However，I had never encountered evidence of such official titles or honorifics existing in our ancient history. Hegogū might perhaps be rendered phonetically as *Hikoko*，akin to “Prince-ko” (彦子). Yet given the absence of corroborating examples in classical texts，this interpretation could not be conclusively verified.

Tama—that is, it should be read as 玉 (*tama*, jewel) and 魂 (*tamashii*, soul). Kushigatama-no-Mikoto, Kushiakari-tama-no-Mikoto, Ame-no-Akari-tama-no-Mikoto, Ame-no-Futotama-no-Mikoto, Toyotamahiko-no-Mikoto, Ukanomitama-no-Mikoto, Utsushikunitama-no-Kami—deity names containing the terms “jewel” or “soul” were exceedingly numerous. In Motoori’s *Kojiki-den*, he had explained the *mitama* (august spirit) of Ukanomitama as *mikoto* (divine authority; also rendered as *shinrei* or *tama*), citing phrases like *Aganoshi no mitamatamahite* from *Man'yōshū* Book 5 (26th sheet) to argue that these names extolled [the deities’] meritorious deeds. He further asserted that the *tama* in Utsushikunitama-no-Kami referred to *mitama* (august spirit), hence [the deity] was called Kunimitama (Land Spirit). This naming convention was not limited to this deity: Yamato Ōkunitama-no-Kami; Yoshino Ōkuni-su Mitama Shrine in Takaichi District; Yamashiro Ōkunitama-no-Mikoto Kami enshrined at Mizunomi in Kuze District, Yamashiro Province; Kunitama Shrine in Hine District, Izumi Province; Ikukunitama Shrine in Higashinari District, Settsu Province; Kawachi Kunimitama Shrine in Uhara District; Ōkunitamahime Shrine in Watarai District, Ise Province; Watarai no Ōkunitamahime Shrine; Owari Ōkunitama Shrine in Nakashima District, Owari Province; Ōmi Kunitama Shrine in Iwata District, Tōtōmi Province; Noto Ikukunitamahiko Shrine in Noto District, Noto Province; and Shimada Ōkunitama Shrine in Kamiagata District, Tsushima—all these deities, who had performed meritorious deeds in their respective regions, were venerated under such names. Beyond these, numerous Kunitama and Ōkunitama shrines existed across the provinces, all following the same principle.
(Commentary Volume 9) While matters had largely been explained here, there remained one more piece of evidence to present: the *Shinsen Kiso-ki* (copied from Dr. Inoue Yorikuni’s manuscript collection by my friend Mr. Tomioka Kenzo; Inoue’s manuscript was said to transcribe secret texts from the Yoshida family) recorded the current enshrinement at Urabe-bō Kushimachi Shrine, with an annotation stating “[also known as] Motokagi Shrine” and alternatively “Kushitama-no-Mikoto.”
Therefore, one may understand that the terms *machi* (間智) and *tama* (玉) were synonymous.
Machi was identical to the *machi* in [the name] Umashimachi no Mikoto. Arakida Moriyoshi, in his *Kakikizasshi* (from Mr. Tomioka’s collection), had cited instances of the term *machi* appearing in ancient texts—beyond Umashimachi no Mikoto—including Kotonomachī Shrine in Sano District, Tōtōmi Province, as recorded in the *Jinmyōchō*; Machi Shrine in Takashima District, Ōmi Province; and the phrase “*machi yowanigi yutsu takedō shōshutsu*” from the *Nakatomi no Yogoto*. However, their interpretations remained unclear.
I posit that this [element]—seen in Ōnamochi, Ōanamuchi, and Ōnamuchi’s *mochi*, *muchi*, and *ki*—was equivalent to the *mochi* in Furamochi, the Silla envoy mentioned in the fifth year of Jingū’s chronicle, all signifying “superior” in Korean. The person corresponding to this Furamochi was identified as Park Jesang in the *Samguk Sagi* and Kim Jesang in the *Samguk Yusa*, both instances sufficiently indicating that *mochi* carried the meaning of “superior.” Moreover, the *Hunmong Jahoe* glossed “upper” as *matai*, which aligned with how our ancient texts read 貴 as *mu chi*. Thus, *tama*—that is, Tama—could also be interpreted as meaning “superior” or “honorable,” serving as an honorific title for local rulers.
Motoori’s interpretation of Futotama-no-Mikoto, particularly his insistence on reading “jewel” (*tama*) as “ritual offering” (*tamuke*), was excessively forced.
(*Kojiki-den*, Volume 8)

Mimi, Miminari: The *mimi* [in these titles] should be considered identical to the *mimi* seen in [names such as] Ame-no-Oshihomimi, Kamuyaimimi, and Tagishimimi. In Volume 7 of *Kojiki-den*, Motoori explained the significance of the name Ame-no-Oshihomimi-no-Mikoto, stating that *mimi* was an honorific (the character 耳 being a phonetic loan). He cited Futodamimi-no-Kami below this and noted that many of Emperor Jimmu’s imperial offspring bore names ending in *mimi*, observing that this pattern extended widely to other personal names—all following the same principle. [...] The meaning of this honorific *mimi* lay in *mi* (“beauty”) corresponding to *hi* (“comparative”), thereby layering the spiritual essence seen in terms like *musuhi* (“generative force”) as “spirit upon spirit.” This was exemplified by Emperor Kōka’s grand appellation Ōbibi-no-Mikoto, which the *Nihon Shoki* recorded as Ōhihihi-no-Mikoto. Given that the “Suinin Chapter” included a personal name written as Ōmimi, one could understand that *hihihi* and *mimi* were equivalent. Furthermore, regarding the name Maetsumi appearing in the “Aki Palace Section,” the *Nihon Shoki* wrote it as Maetsumimi (and Suetsumi in the “Mizugaki Palace Section” was rendered as Suetsumimi in the *Kujiki*, likely with textual basis). From this, it was explained that *mimi* represented a doubling of *mi* (“beauty”), while *mi* alone abbreviated this duplication. Thus, the meaning of *Mimi* was clarified. Miminari did not appear in our ancient texts. In the 12th year of the *Keikōki*, there appeared [a record] of a bandit residing upstream on the Mikigawa River being referred to as Mimisashi. The pronunciation was somewhat similar. However, in the text of the *Ki*, since [Hanatare] appeared alongside [another] bandit called Hanatare, it did not seem to be an honorific title for local rulers. Yet, in ancient records where legends were heavily intermingled, it could not be definitively stated that narratives such as Mimisashi and Hanatare had not arisen from the honorific title Miminari as their seed. Therefore, I tentatively presented this here for reference.

Ishima, Mimashō, Mimakashu, Nukatei: The *Book of Liang* and *History of the Northern Dynasties* did not include Mimashō; this was presumably an omission.

In the Song edition of the Taiping Yulan (I had recently troubled my friend Mr. Inaba to collate the imitation Song movable-type edition against the imperial library’s Song woodblock edition; he reported complete consistency in all sections quoting the Records of the Three Kingdoms within the “Four Barbarians” portion’s Japan entry—henceforth cited as Song editions, with this appended note expressing deep gratitude to Mr. Inaba), “Mimashō” appeared as “Mimasoku.” This “soku” corresponded to “Kushizū Ōkume” in ancient manuscripts, referencing the Ōkume-be clan. The Kojiki recorded Amenokume-no-Mikoto as ancestor to the Kume no Atai lineage; though Motoori had debated their affiliation with the Ōtomo clan, their status as a major official clan in antiquity remained indisputable.

I considered whether what was termed Ikume might be an abbreviation of Ikukume. Given that Iku shared etymological roots with Ika and Iwa—deriving from Mongolian yeke meaning “great”—it followed that Ikume and Ōkume were synonymous. Regarding the “Iri” in Ikumeiribiko being an affectionate honorific per Motoori’s theory, and synthesizing references like the Kodai Nyūbe and Minai Nyūbe clans from Emperor Kōtoku’s chronicle alongside Emperor Suinin’s enthronement at Kume’s Takamiya, I concluded that the Ōkume-be clan must have borne some relationship to this emperor.

Thus, interpreting the official title Ishima as having dual connections to both the Ōkume-be clan and Emperor Suinin’s miyana clans seemed reasonable. Since Mimashō and Mimakashu resembled each other as titles, I found it expedient to discuss them jointly.

The chronicles reverently recorded Emperor Sujin’s name as Mimakiiribiko Inie no Sumeramikoto (while the Kojiki gave Mimakiiribiko Inie no Mikoto). Similarly, Emperor Kōshō’s title Mimatsuhiko Kaeshine no Sumeramikoto (Mimatuhiko Kaeshine no Mikoto in Kojiki) bore the prefix “Mima,” likely a place name. The Kuni no Miyatsuko Honji’s Nagakuni no Miyatsuko entry noted Emperor Shiga Takaana Hotsu’s reign and Mimatsuhiko Irodonomikoto’s ninth-generation descendant Kansoni being appointed Kuni no Miyatsuko.

This chō presumably lay in Naka District of Awa Province—a region containing Mima District—with Mimatsuhiko Shrine in Namekata District enshrining Mimatsuhiko Irodonomikoto per Kurita clan tradition. The Harima Fudoki also identified Ōmima-tsu-hiko as Emperor Kōshō. Though reconciling these varied Mimatsuhiko figures wasn’t urgent, their apparent connections to Emperor Kōshō led me to interpret Mimashō as categories like this emperor’s miyana or minaibei clans, while proposing Mimakashu as analogous to Emperor Sujin’s imperial name-bearing clans.

Among ancient imperial lineages, descendants of Emperor Kōshō’s son Ametarashihiko Kuniohito no Mikoto and Emperor Sujin’s son Toyokiiribiko no Mikoto stood prominent—making this estimation plausible. Regarding Nukatei: the Nakatomi clan’s prominence as a powerful official clan required no exemplification. The Nakato no Atae clan—documented in Kurita’s Study on Provincial Clans as descendants of Amatsukuwadeno Mikoto—originated from Nakato Village (Nakato in Wamyōshō) in Kawagami District, Ise Province, with toponyms like Nakato Manor in Azuma Kagami and Nakato Shrine in Jinmyōshiki. The “Nakatomi” in titles like Nakatomi Ise no Muraji derived from this Nakato origin, while Kuwana District’s Nakatomi Shrine likely served as their clan deity.

Whether Nukatei denoted Nakatomi Muraji descendants of Ame no Koyane no Mikoto or these Nakato no Atae mattered less than recognizing Nakatomi/Nakato as phonetic equivalents. If Yamatai were definitively located in Kyushu, interpreting these four official titles would pose challenges. Their determination nevertheless provided critical evidence for identifying Himiko—the main biography’s central figure—as would become clear hereafter.

Kukochihiko: The Jiguge edition erroneously writes 制 (*Sei*) for 智 (*Chi*). Since both the Song edition of the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* and the Song edition of the *Taiping Yulan* render it as “Chi,” one should properly follow this. Kukochi corresponds to Kikuchi District in Higo Province, and the ancient pronunciation of Kikuchi is Kukuchi. Kikuchihiko was an influential clan in Jōno Village—that is, within Kuna Province—and likely belonged to the Kumaso.

Herewith, I completed the analysis of the official titles.

Next, in examining personal names, the principal one is:

Himiko—it is she.
I hereby posit her as Yamatohime-no-mikoto.
The reason for this is, first, that through the official titles previously enumerated—Ishima and Mimakashu—I knew that they could not be far removed from the two reigns of Sujin and Suinin.
The description of “[Himiko] practicing spirit worship and bewitching the masses” aptly corresponded to this princess’s deeds when synthesizing accounts from the 25th-year entry of the *Suinin-ki* Chronicle, its annotations, the *Enryaku Gishikichō*, and traditions recorded in the *Yamatohime-no-mikoto Seiki*.
Following the teachings of Amaterasu Ōmikami, she journeyed through Yamato, Ōmi, Mino, and Ise provinces (and according to the *Yamatohime Seiki*, extended to Owari, Tanba, Kii, and Kibi as well), requisitioning shrine households, sacred rice fields, and sacred lands from local lords wherever she went to establish divine domains—this being the second reason—it should hardly have been surprising that the Wei people, long removed from the ancient era when Shinto was institutionalized, perceived her as using spirit worship to bewitch the masses.
In determining the names of Yamatai’s neighboring regions, I naturally strove to focus on areas near Yamato, selecting them from the localities through which Yamatohime-no-mikoto journeyed. Yet the fact that the majority of these avoided excessive forced interpretations and could be confined to regions centered on Ise constituted yet another piece of evidence—the third point.
The description of her being “elderly and without a husband” fit Yamatohime-no-mikoto most appropriately—unlike the inconsistencies found in identifying her as Empress Jingū—constituting the fourth point.
The reference to “a male younger brother who assists in governing the country” most likely indicated Emperor Keikō.
According to the national histories, the Emperor was positioned as Yamatohime-no-mikoto’s elder brother; yet such a degree of discrepancy might have existed in foreigners’ accounts.
From this account, it could be understood that state affairs were in the Emperor’s hands, while Yamatohime-no-mikoto managed religious matters; however, due to her excessively blazing influence, she was mistakenly perceived as a queen.
The flourishing authority of Yamatohime-no-mikoto could be discerned from her granting audience to Yamato Takeru during his eastern campaigns and her reception of captives offered to the Grand Shrine upon his return. Particularly significant was her enshrinement of Amaterasu Ōmikami and requisition of divine domains across provinces—a form of religious territorial expansion whose success rivaled even the military conquests of the Four Circuit Generals. Thus, it was no wonder foreigners perceived her as a queen; this constituted the fifth point.
Regarding the statement that “[she] attended upon herself with a thousand female servants,” though one might wonder at the excessiveness of this number, the *Yamatohime Seiki* recorded instances such as Yasakajitobe’s child and Uta no Otonena, a young girl, serving in the retinue of Amemikudari no Mikoto’s grandson. Similarly, the mention of “only one male (though the *Book of Sui* and *History of the Northern Dynasties* record two) providing food and conveying messages” could also be correlated with accounts in the *Yamatohime Seiki*—such as when Owakugo no Mikoto appointed his younger brother Otowakugo no Mikoto, or when Takehikata no Mikoto made his younger brother Irikata no Mikoto a chamberlain—constituting the sixth point.
The remainder would become increasingly clear through the analysis of personal names presented below.
The etymological interpretation of Himiko—while Motoori’s identification of her as *Himeko* (“Princess Child”) was plausible—was incorrect in equating this with the term *himeko* (princess-child) as seen in the Age of the Gods volume (e.g., Hino Tobata Himeko Chichihime-no-Mikoto and Yorozuhata Himeko Tamayorihime-no-Mikoto), for these two instances of *himeko* should instead have been understood as “child of a princess,” per Hirata Atsutane’s explanation.

Examples of reading 彌 as *me* should follow precedents such as those cited in Mr. Kurokawa’s *Study on National Names in the History of the Northern Dynasties*—including *Jōgū Shōtoku Hōō Teisetsu* and the *Embroidered Text*’s Kitasu Himino Mikoto and Tomi Ikasashi Ihino Mikoto—with annotations stating: “The character 彌 may correspond to the sound of 賣 (*me*).”

Nashōmi Magazine “Bun”

In Volume 1, Issue 12 of Tachibana Ryōhei’s *Outline of Japanese Era Studies*, it states: “In the final years of Emperor Suinin’s reign, Tajimamori was dispatched to Tokoyo (a term for distant lands). He returned to court in the first year of Emperor Keikō’s reign. The *Wei Zhi* records this event as follows: ‘In June of the 2nd Year of Jingchu [238 CE], the Wa Queen dispatched Grandee Nashōmi and others to visit the commandery, seeking an audience with the Son of Heaven to present tribute.’” “[The text] states, ‘The Wa Queen is an error for the Wa Nu King, and Nashōmi is a corruption of Tajimamori.’ While identifying the Wa Queen as the Wa Nu King is hardly worth considering, the identification of Tajimamori as Nashōmi should be accepted.” According to the chronicles, Tajimamori arrived from Tokoyo no Kuni in the year following Emperor Suinin’s passing, and the round trip took ten years. According to the *Account of the Wa People* in the *Wei Chronicles*, Nashōmi first departed for Wei in the 3rd Year of Jingchu (the mention of “2nd Year” is an error, as discussed below), but details of his interim return to Japan remain unclear. His confirmed return occurred after the 8th Year of Zhengshi, when he accompanied Wei envoys such as Zhang Zheng—by which time Himiko had already died. It is evident that this round trip took nine to ten years to complete. Although one [envoy] is associated with Emperor Suinin and the other with Yamatohime-no-mikoto, the circumstances of the envoys are roughly similar.

In the *Account of the Wa People*, this personal name [Isenkiyasha Kō] appeared three times: only upon its first occurrence was it written in full as *Isenkiyasha Kō*, while in the latter two instances, it was abbreviated to *Yasha Kō*, omitting the characters *伊聲耆*.
Upon analysis, the phonetic reading of *Isenki* should be *I-San-Ga*, and *Yashako* likewise *I-Sa-Ka*. It appeared that when Wei scribes recorded this same individual using two distinct phonetic transcriptions, one instance redundantly preserved both forms while another retained only a single variant.
The *Jinmyōchō* recorded Asuki Shrine in Izumo District, Izumo Province, along with its associated deity Isago Shrine; furthermore, within the same district were Isawa Shrine and Isaga Shrine. In Kurita’s *Shingi Shiryō*, it was stated that all these shrines enshrined Isao no Mikoto—son of Amenohohi no Mikoto and ancestor of the Izumo no Kuni no Miyatsuko.
If this deity had indeed been a grandson of Amenohohi no Mikoto, there would have been a concern regarding chronological inconsistency; however, considering that all genealogies—the Izumo no Kuni no Miyatsuko lineage, the Nakatomi lineage, the Tenson Honki of the *Kujiki*, and the lineages of the Mononobe and Owari clans—invariably showed far fewer generations compared to the imperial line, Isao no Mikoto’s era need not necessarily have been aligned with Amenohohi no Mikoto as a standard.
Moreover, if one were to interpret this in terms of appellation and territorial domain, one could also view it as the descendants of that Mikoto having adopted the name.
Therefore, I tentatively likened Isenki—that is, Yashako—to this Mikoto.

Regarding the personal name Toshiushiri: one may interpret it as someone connected to Tajimamori, or alternatively, one may interpret it as someone connected to Isao no Mikoto. Therefore, I listed it after the aforementioned two. For those connected to Tajimamori, we posit Toshi as Izushi. The *Wamyōshō* records Toshi (Tsu-no-shi) Village in Tsuna District, Awaji Province; as this island had ties to Amenohipokame no Mikoto, there was a theory that this Toshi also derived its connection to Izushi in Tajima Province, with *Idzushi* likely being an abbreviated form. Ushiri signified “heart.” In the *Tenson Honki* of the *Kujiki*, there appeared Izushi Kokoro no Ōomi no Mikoto. Although this Mikoto naturally shared no connection with Tajimamori, the fact that “Izushi Kokoro” was employed as a personal name could be regarded as an example. Given that *Kokoro* (“Heart”) corresponded to *Ushiri* through examples like Tagorihime in the *Kojiki*’s Age of the Gods volume, even if Izushi Kokoro [from the *Tenson Honki*] was a separate individual, the personal name Toshi Ushiri could plausibly exist. Since Izushi had been the ancestral home of Tajimamori’s family since the time of Amenohipokame, and given that he—as the principal envoy Nashōmi—was connected to Tajimamori, one could reasonably infer that he journeyed to Wei as a secondary envoy. As for those connected to Isao no Mikoto: the *Jinmyōchō* recorded Togari Shrine in Izumo District, Izumo Province; Kurita’s *Shiryō* stated that it enshrined Tsukae no Mikoto—grandson of Hohodori no Mikoto (i.e., Amehohodori no Mikoto). If one treated the *shi* in *Toshiushiri* as an auxiliary particle—common in both Japanese and Korean—the name became phonetically closer to *Togari*. This, too, should not have been entirely dismissed.

If we were to consider *Saishi Uketsu* as a corruption of *Tai* (戴), there existed a theory positing proximity to Takenouchi; however, without altering the characters, I shall attempt an interpretation. The *Jinmyōchō* records Susa Shrine in Iishi District, Izumo Province—now located in Susa Village—and Sase Shrine in Ōhara District—now in Sase Village—both enshrining Susanoo no Mikoto, as seen in Kurita’s research materials. To equate this Susanoo no Mikoto with that Susanoo no Mikoto would approach a forced interpretation, but interpreting it as the name of a prominent clan residing in Susa or Sase should not be impossible.

Himikuko So: In reading this personal name, many had taken the character 素 (*so*) to mean "originally" (*motoyori*) and attached it to the following "disharmony" (*fuwa*). However, I incorporated it into the personal name itself by placing it at the beginning.
The term *Koso* should be read phonetically as "Koso," akin to the "Koso" in Hikokosobori no Mikoto—a provincial governor documented in the *Kuni no Miyatsuko Honki*—the "Koso" in the shrine name from the *Kōtoku-ki*, the "Koso" in Himekoso Shrine of Higashiu District, Settsu Province recorded in the *Jinmyōchō*, and the "Goso" in the two Himegoso Shrines noted in the second-year annotations of the *Suinin-ki* for Naniwa and Toyokuni’s Kunisaki District. Just as *Himegoso* evoked a female figure, *Himiko* might conversely signify a male counterpart.
Could it be that even with deliberate alteration of one character in *Himiko*, it did not carry the meaning of *Himeko*?
In the *Kuni no Miyatsuko Honki*, there was also Sonofurimikoto of the Yamashiro Provincial Chieftainship—a different individual from Hikokosoborimikoto—yet considering how their naming principles resembled one another, I perceived that both *Koso* and *So* shared an identical core meaning, and this *Koso* likely referred to chieftains of Suo Province or similar figures.

Since the original biography mistakenly wrote Yamatai as Yamaichi, this “Iyo” must also be an error for “Toyō.” In the *Book of Liang* and *History of the Northern Dynasties*, [the name] was uniformly written as *Toyo*, while in the *Song edition of the Imperial Readings*, it appeared as *Tojo*—this should serve as conclusive evidence. When referring to Himiko’s “clan princess,” this denotes a female member of the imperial household; in our national histories, this closely corresponds to the use of “Toyō” in reference to Emperor Sujin’s imperial daughter Toyosukiirihime-no-Mikoto (also known as Toyosukihime-no-Mikoto). According to the national histories, Toyosukiirihime-no-Mikoto had first been established as chief priestess of Amaterasu Ōmikami before passing this role to Yamatohime-no-mikoto through institutional succession. However, since the *Account of the Wa People* showed no indication of any chief priestess existing prior to Yamatohime-no-mikoto, it likely erroneously recorded Toyosukiirihime-no-Mikoto as belonging to the second generation. Though Princess Iono of Emperor Keikō was documented in the national histories as having succeeded to Yamatohime-no-mikoto’s position, the phonetic dissimilarity between their names remained too great to permit any plausible identification.

I have hereby completed the examination of personal names.

Next to be discussed are the travel distances.
In his recent research, Dr. Shiratori Kurakichi published his views on travel distances, the gist of which was as follows: while the total distance from Daifang Commandery to the Queen’s realm amounted to over twelve thousand li, the intermediate segments—over seven thousand li by water from Daifang Commandery to Guryeo of Guyahan, over three thousand li by water from Guryeo of Guyahan to Matsura Province, and over seven hundred li by land from Matsura to Fumi Province—already summed to 10,700-odd li when combined, leaving a remainder not exceeding 1,300-odd li.
Since these 10,700-odd li did not exceed our [calculation of] 290-odd li, the remaining 1,300-odd li were insufficient to reach Yamato.
However, whether the travel distances recorded at that time were sufficiently precise to serve as the basis for such calculations was already questionable.
When interpreting “from Daifang Commandery to the Queen’s realm,” one had to first determine whether this referred to Yamatai Province—the Queen’s capital—to Na Province at the furthest reaches of her domain, or to the boundary between Tōma and Yamatai Provinces. If we assumed it denoted reaching the Queen’s capital, Dr. Shiratori’s calculations would hold; however, if it signified arrival at Na Province, the distance would not have exceeded 10,600-odd li. Should we instead standardize it to the Tōma-Yamatai border, the total of 12,000-odd li could not necessarily be considered excessively short.
Moreover, recognizing that these travel distances grossly overestimated sea routes while relatively underestimating land routes—necessitating inevitable adjustments—the distances from Daifang to Fumi and from Daifang to the Queen’s realm, as discussed in the following section, had been recorded by different scribes at different times, making their reconciliation exceedingly difficult.
Furthermore, had the distances south of Na Province and Fumi Province been clearly established at that time, they ought to have recorded their exact figures; yet observing that [the scribes] merely measured the journey in days without providing li distances, attempting to precisely deduct these intermediate routes from the total twelve thousand-odd li risked approaching an overly rigid methodology.
Therefore, one should recognize that establishing the foundation of textual analysis in place names, official titles, personal names, and similar elements was safer than relying on the rather uncertain travel distances.
The error of overlooking place names could already be observed in Dr. Shiratori’s textual analysis.
In determining the location where the Wei envoys traveled from Iki to Matsura, Dr. Shiratori adopted Mr. Suga’s theory, attributing it to Keniregazaki in Chikashima, Matsura District.
Since Chikashima corresponded to the present-day Goto Islands, it appeared that he had failed to take note of the fact that there was no logical basis for traveling overland from here to Ito; this constituted a glaring error.
In my view, the landing point of the Wei envoys was likely in the vicinity of Nagoya in Matsuura District.
In the Chronicle of Emperor Chūai, Kuma-wani, ancestor of the Agata-nushi of Oka, welcomed the Emperor at Saba Bay in Suō (i.e., Saba, an area near Tōma Province as recorded in the main account).
Regarding this Saba [Bay], both the Chronicle of Emperor Keikō and the Bungo Regional Gazetteer recorded that Emperor Keikō passed through it during his Tsukushi campaign, thereby demonstrating its status as a place essential for maritime navigation since ancient times). In the report presented upon welcoming [the emperor], it stated: “The route from Anato to Mukatsuno no Ōse is designated the East Gate, and that to Nagoya no Ōse the West Gate.”
Given that Nagoya existed as a strategic port at the time, and since the sea route from Iki was also the most direct, this conclusion had been reached.
Did “Mukatsuno no Ōse” correspond to Kaminoseki and Murotsu in Suō Province?
Although this area was now Kumage District, in ancient times it had likely been within Kado Province along with Tsuno District.
While some argued that Kumage District might have been the ancient Suō District, observing that Saba Bay belonged to Suō [Province] revealed that Suō District lay west of Tsuno, not east.
This Tsuno [District] should be interpreted as the Tsuno of Mukatsuno; the “Mukatsu” [in Mukatsuno] likely referred to a sea island such as Kaminoseki situated across from Tsuno.
I posited that the landing site for Wei envoys east of Tōma was likely this strategic port near Mukatsuno.

Following my examination of travel distances, I next briefly touched upon this.

Next, I must discuss the materials constituting this account.
As already stated, the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* was based on the *Weilüe*; however, it was not impossible to infer what materials the *Weilüe* itself had adopted.
I intended to classify these into four categories.

1. The section spanning from “The Wa people dwell in the great sea southeast of Daifang Commandery” to “thirty provinces accessible to envoys and interpreters” constituted one category: a general preface compiled based on the *Treatise on Geography* from the *Book of Han*, applied to contemporary matters.

2. The section spanning from June of the 3rd Year of Jingchu [239 CE] to the end constituted another category: those based on official government records of the time.

Third, accounts created when the Wa envoys first visited Daifang Commandery—wherein [officials there] inquired about domestic affairs and supplemented [their findings] by consulting earlier records such as the *Book of Han*—these constituted the third category.
I determined that the following sections within the *Account [of the Wa People]* belonged to this category.

Next comes a section extending from Shima Province to Dan’er and Zhuya.

(i)

the section spanning from their journeys across the sea to visit China up to negligence in ritual abstinence (*chisai*).

(ro)

the section spanning from meetings and gatherings to the people’s proclivity for alcohol.

(ha)

the section spanning from inquiries about the land of Wa to [a distance of] over five thousand *li*.
(ni)

Fourth: Accounts recording what the Wei envoys personally observed and heard upon reaching Wa—these constitute the fourth category.
That is to say, they comprise the following sections:

The passage extending from "From the commandery to Wa, where neighboring lands lie distant and severed" through "particulars could not be ascertained."
(i)

the section spanning from the warmth of the land of Wa to practices such as ritual ablutions.
(ro)

the section spanning from pearls and blue jade to observing fire cracks for divination.
(ハ)

the section spanning from observing the reverence shown to the Great Person to reaching [the point where] a sea voyage would take one year.
(ni)

Categories One and Two required no dialectical examination.
The criteria for analyzing Categories Three and Four arose firstly from the distinction that most entries belonging to Category Three focused on perspectives extending from Wa toward the commandery, while those in Category Four primarily considered viewpoints from the commandery toward Wa.
Second, this distinction arose because the sequence of province names in phrases like “next there is such-and-such province…” began near Yamato’s royal domain—specifically starting from Ise—and proceeded sequentially to the end, whereas the sequence in phrases like “from the commandery to Wa…” followed an entirely reversed order.
Thirdly, there were redundancies in the accounts and incoherent phrasing: specifically, the phrase “customs are not licentious” in Category Three’s (i) section duplicated the phrase “women are neither licentious nor jealous” in Category Four’s (ii) section; further, the products listed in the same Category Three section—ranging from rice, hemp, and ramie down to arrowheads—lacked a coherent connection with the products recorded in Category Four’s (iii) section; likewise, phrases such as “parents and siblings…” in Category Four’s (iii) section and “gatherings and seating arrangements…” in Category Three’s (ha) section exhibited no thematic continuity.

Furthermore,

The son of Xia Hou Shao Kang
was enfeoffed at Kuaiji.
They cut their hair short and tattooed their bodies
to avoid harm from aquatic serpents.
(Category Three, Subsection (i))

The passage stating [...] adopted text from the *Treatise on Geography* in the *Book of Han* that recorded matters of the Yue region.

They made clothes resembling unlined garments,
pierced an opening at the center,
and wore them as pullover attire.
They cultivated grains, rice, ramie, and hemp;
raised silkworms and mulberry trees for spinning and weaving—their land lacking cattle, horses, tigers, leopards, sheep, or magpies.
Soldiers employed spears, shields, and wooden bows—
bamboo arrows, some tipped with bone.
(same section)

The passage stating [...] had largely appropriated accounts of Dan’er and Zhuya from the *Treatise on Geography* in the *Book of Han*.
These accounts—inferred from their conflation of Wei conjectures with ancient textual records—clearly did not stem from firsthand observation.
The final inquiries likewise fell into this category.

Next, I collated minor textual discrepancies and thereby concluded this chapter.

In annotations citing the *Weilüe*, where it states “calendrical corrections for the four seasons,” the Song edition rendered this passage as “preface.”
In the Song edition, the character 記 in “spring plowing and autumn harvest” was written as 計; this should be followed.
Regarding “severe cases result in extermination of households and relatives,” the Song edition wrote 滅 as 沒 and 親 as 宗; this too should be followed.

That country originally also had a man as king.
He reigned for seventy to eighty years.
The country of Wa fell into chaos; they engaged in mutual attacks for years.
Then they jointly established a woman as queen.
Her name was Himiko.
These passages exhibited numerous discrepancies.
As previously cited in the *Book of the Later Han*,

In the 2nd Year of Jianwu Zhongyuan (57 CE).
The Na province of Wa presented tribute and paid court respects.
The envoy self-proclaimed as Grandee.
It was the southernmost boundary of the country of Wa.
Emperor Guangwu bestowed upon them a seal and ribbon.
In the 1st Year of Yongchu of Emperor An (107 CE).
King Shuaishēng of Wa presented 160 living captives.
[He] wished to request an audience.
During the reigns of Emperors Huan and Ling, the country of Wa fell into great turmoil.
they waged war against one another.
For years, there was no ruler.
There was a woman.
Her name was Himiko.

[The *Weilüe*] renders [these events], but the *Book of Sui* and *Tongdian* rely entirely on the *Book of the Later Han*; the *History of the Northern Dynasties* renders the Huan-Ling era as Emperor Ling’s Guanghe era, while the rest follow the *Book of the Later Han*. The *Book of Liang*, in rendering [the events] as occurring during Emperor Ling’s Guanghe era of Han, aligns with the *History of the Northern Dynasties*, and the absence of the two characters 無主 (“without a ruler”) beneath “for years” matches the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*. The Song edition of the *Imperial Readings of the Taiping Era*, citing the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, renders “reigned for seventy to eighty years” as occurring during Emperor Ling’s Guanghe era.
In light of this, I surmise that the original text of the *Weilüe* matched the *Book of the Later Han* from Jianwu Zhongyuan [57 CE] through to “wishing to request an audience,” then, upon reaching “the Guanghe era of Emperor Ling of Han [178–184 CE],” aligned with the *Records of the Three Kingdoms* in its account of Wa’s turmoil—years of mutual attacks—and subsequent passages.
The *Records of the Three Kingdoms*’ statement that “the country originally also had a man as king” likely abbreviates and revises [the account] based on the fact that those who presented tribute during the two missions of the Zhongyuan and Yongchu eras were male kings; further, they presumably calculated the span from Yongchu to Guanghe to craft the phrase “reigned for seventy to eighty years.”
The alteration of “Emperor Ling’s Guanghe era” to “the reigns of Emperors Huan and Ling” clearly stems from Fan Ye’s arbitrary decision—Fan Ye, who favored revisions and deletions—while additions such as the two characters “無主” (“without a ruler”) beneath “for years” appear entirely as outcomes of his reckless alterations.
The fact that the Song edition of the *Imperial Readings of the Taiping Era*, in citing the *Records of the Three Kingdoms*, preserves the phrase “during Emperor Ling’s Guanghe era” suggests that there may have been variant editions at the time that were composed in this manner.

The June of the 2nd Year of Jingchu constitutes an error for the 3rd Year.
In the *Jingūki*, which cites this account as being recorded under the 3rd Year, it should be deemed correct.

The establishment of diplomatic relations between Wa and the various Korean states with Wei was entirely the result of Gongsun Yuan of Liaodong being destroyed by Sima Yi. Yuan perished in August of the 2nd Year of Jingchu, and in June, Wei had not yet appointed a governor to Daifang Commandery.
The *Book of Liang* also renders it as the 3rd Year.

5. Conclusion

In the preceding chapters, regarding the Treatise on the Wa People in the Book of Wei,

Yamatai should be understood as constituting the royal domain of the Yamato Court.
Queen Himiko was none other than Yamatohime-no-mikoto.

I have now broadly exhausted discussion of these matters. However, it remains regrettable that the era in our national history corresponding to the period of diplomatic relations with Wei has yet to be discussed in detail. I shall briefly supplement this and thereby conclude my argument.

I shall conclude that the period when the Queen’s country and the Dogu Kingdom were engaged in mutual attacks corresponded to the early years of Emperor Keikō’s reign and his royal expedition against the Kumaso. Even if the historical facts transmitted by the oral historians of antiquity were incomplete, I cannot believe they would entirely omit major events of their time. Therefore, I find it equally implausible to accept that the historical facts recorded in Wei’s accounts—which our ancient histories lack entirely—pertained solely to the deeds of a female chieftain in Tsukushi, just as one cannot believe that Wei envoys came to Tsukushi yet returned wholly unaware of the Yamato Court’s existence. Therefore, having determined that these attacks—known even to Wei—corresponded to the deeds of Emperor Keikō, and further considering subsequent eras, it followed naturally that the regency period of Empress Jingū, as per Mr. Naka Tōsei’s theory grounded in the *Samguk Sagi*, the sexagenary cycle records of the *Jingūki*, and Sugano Mamichi’s memorial in the *Shoku Nihongi*, aligned with the time of King Geunchogo of Baekje. Given that this spanned approximately one hundred years across the reigns of Keikō, Seimu, Chūai, and Jingū, it could not be dismissed as mere fable. Furthermore, tracing back beyond this period, the internal turmoil during Emperor Ling of Han’s Guanghe era corresponded to the displacement of the common people during the reigns of Emperors Sujin and Suinin. If one were to correlate these events—such as instances of betrayal (as mentioned in the sixth year of Sujin’s chronicle), the reverence for deities, Takehaniyasuhiko’s rebellion, the dispatch of the Four Direction Generals, and Sahohiko’s revolt—the span of fifty to sixty years between them would align rather fittingly in terms of duration. This should also serve as highly valuable material in establishing the chronology of our ancient history.

One further point requiring attention is that all envoys of Wa whom I have identified—apart from Tajimamori—were individuals hailing from Tajima and Izumo. When I consider together [the fact that] they were made to present the divine treasures of Izumo Grand Shrine recorded in the 60th year of Emperor Sujin’s chronicle and [the fact that] they were made to offer the divine treasures of Tajima Izushi recorded in the 88th year of Emperor Suinin’s chronicle, the presentation of divine treasures indeed signified the subjugation of those provinces. The subjugation of these two provinces first facilitated overseas communication for the Yamato Court and further led to the subjugation of Mimana. Given that the *Wei Zhi*’s account must postdate Mimana’s subjugation—as I have already argued—it should be deemed entirely natural under the circumstances that those who undertook diplomatic missions at that time were prominent clans from the two provinces of Tajima and Izumo.

If one were to corroborate the customs of Wa country as seen in the *Treatise on the Wa People* and extend the discussion to its relations with various Korean states, there would indeed be further matters requiring elucidation; however, as this study had already grown overly lengthy, I omitted all such points and awaited another opportunity to draft a supplementary examination.

(The above was published in July 1910 in *Geibun*)
First Year, Fourth Issue)

Postscript

This essay, at the time of its publication, had already attracted considerable attention from specialists. At the same time as I, Dr. Shiratori published the Yamatai Kyushu theory; subsequently, his disciple Mr. Hashimoto Masukichi published a lengthy paper in a historical journal advocating the Kyushu theory—particularly focusing on the Chikugo River basin—in an attempt to overturn my arguments; however, as most of these objections stemmed from differences in perspective between us and did not warrant specific refutation, I refrained from actively contesting them. The sole matter that satisfied me is this: as a result of those brief debates, contemporary scholars departed from their superstitious conviction that the Kyushu theory was settled doctrine and came to reconsider both ends—the Kinai theory and the Kyushu theory—once more. Six or seven years ago, in archaeological journals, many debates were rekindled, reaching a point where prominent scholars again came to advocate for the Kinai theory; among these emerged theories examining sea routes east of Kyushu toward the San’in region. While it goes without saying that further cumulative research will be required before reaching a definitive conclusion on this matter, the mere fact that scholars have ceased trembling at the names of figures like Motoori and Tsurumine from ages past and stopped parroting the words of recent predecessors such as Hoshino and Suga already constitutes a form of progress.

Now, as I present this essay to the world anew and reflect upon the transformations in historical discourse over these twenty years, I cannot help but feel profoundly stirred within; thus do I append these brief remarks at the conclusion.

Shortly after my initial publication of this work, a flaw in my own theory came to light—specifically regarding my analysis of Himiko's name, wherein I had erroneously followed Mr. Motoori's reading of the characters 姫兒 in *Hinotohabimeko* and *Yorozuhatahimeko* from the Divine Age volume of the *Kojiki* as *Himeko*. Having recognized that Mr. Hirata's reading of these as *Himenoko* was correct, I have accordingly amended this in the present edition.

In addition, under the entry for "reaching its northern shore at the Gaya Korean State," I had stated that this was sufficient to infer that the account was produced after Mimana's subjugation to our country. At the end of the essay, I further posited that the subjugation of these two provinces (Tajima and Izumo) first facilitated overseas communication for the Yamato Court and thereby led to Mimana's subjugation, concluding that the *Wei Zhi* account must postdate Mimana's submission.

However, upon later inferring from records in the *Classic of Mountains and Seas* that the Wa people had settled in the southern peninsula from China's Warring States period through the Han Dynasty—and considering how the *Shinsen Shōjiroku* documents Shiojitsuhiko no Mikoto, ancestor of the Yoshida Muraji clan of the Left Capital's imperial lineage, being dispatched to Mimana—I came to regard this as evidence that Wa communities remaining on the peninsula sought aid from their homeland against external pressures. Consequently, I concluded that my earlier theory—which presented Mimana's initial subjugation as occurring during Emperor Sujin's reign—required revision.

Furthermore, regarding the entry for “Taiso Province,” while I had previously equated it with Suzusa Village in Ika District, Ōmi Province, upon considering Mr. Muraoka Ryōsuke’s argument in *Materials on Japanese Geography* that “Suzusa” was likely a corruption of “Tōsa”—which I found persuasive—I now propose to re-identify it as Hitsusa Village in Gamo District of the same province. According to the *Engishiki Jinmyōchō*, there was the Hitsusa Shrine in this district, and this identification also derived from the presence of Torusaka Nagamine in that area.

Regarding Tōma Province, I considered a recent theory equating it with Tomotsu in Bingo worthy of examination. In my previous theory, I had emphasized Suō no Saba as a location known since antiquity as a strategic hub, but whether Tomo might be more suitable required further consideration.

Furthermore, in Volume 30 of Zhang Chu Jin’s *Hankan*—held in the collection of Baron Nishi-Takatsuji—there was an entry on Wa country that quoted the *Weilüe*: “South of the Queen’s [domain] lies the Dogu Kingdom.” While placing Dogu to the south likely stemmed from later interpreters’ misunderstanding of the *Weilüe*’s text, this nonetheless made even clearer the error in the *Book of the Later Han*’s account: “From the Queen’s country, crossing over a thousand *li* eastward across the sea...” The error in stating “[one travels] to the Kuna Kingdom” became increasingly clear.

I hereby list below the abbreviated titles of various papers worthy of reference.

Dr. Shiratori: "A Study of Queen Himiko of Wa" (June and July 1910, *The Light of East Asia* Volume 5, Issues 6 and 7)

Dr. Shiratori: “On Yamatai Province”
(Taishō 11 [July 1922], *Archaeological Journal*, Volume 12, Issue 11)

Mr. Hashimoto Masukichi: “On Yamatai Province and Himiko”
(October, November, December 1910, *Historical Journal* [Shigaku Zasshi], Volume 21, Issues 10, 11, 12)

Dr. Takahashi Kenji: “Yamatai Province Viewed from an Archaeological Perspective” (Taishō 11 [January 1922], *Archaeological Journal*, Volume 12, Issue 5).

Dr. Miyake Yonekichi: “On Yamatai Province”
(Taishō 11 [July 1922], *Archaeological Journal*, Volume 12, Issue 11)

Kasai Shinya’s “Yamatai Province Is Yamato”
(Taishō 11 [March 1922], *Archaeological Journal*, Volume 12, Issue 7)

Kasai Shinya’s “Cultural and Political Relations Between the Kinai Region and Kyushu During the Himiko Era” (March 1923, *Archaeological Journal*, Volume 13, Issue 7).

Kasai Shinya’s “Himiko as Yamatohime-no-mikoto” (April 1924, *Archaeological Journal*, Volume 14, Issue 7).

Mr. Nakayama Tarō’s “An Ethnological Study of the Treatise on the Wa People in the *Records of Wei*” (March, May, August 1922, *Archaeological Journal*, Volume 12, Issues 7, 9, 12).

Mr. Yamada Yoshio’s “Study on the Dogu Kingdom” (April, May, June, July, August 1922, *Archaeological Journal*, Volume 12, Issues 8, 9, 10, 11, 12).
Mr. Shida Fudomaro’s “Yamatai Province: A Study on Its Location” (October 1, 1927, *Historical Journal*, Volume 38, Issue 10).

Among the eight scholars listed above, those advocating the Kyushu theory were Dr. Shiratori and Mr. Hashimoto, while the remaining six scholars subscribed to the Kinai theory.

(Shōwa 3 [December 1928], noted)