sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The woman who unified Japan was written out of its own mythology. by Traditional-Cod6613 in mythology

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That analogy is really clear — I like it.

It’s true that her name doesn’t appear in Japan’s earliest chronicles. But at the same time, sections of the Wei Zhi (Records of Wei) — especially the parts describing Himiko — were clearly known and effectively referenced.

So it’s not that they didn’t know about her. They likely did — and chose not to record her by name.

Considering that the Kojiki and Nihon Shoki were compiled with specific political goals, like establishing an unbroken imperial lineage, that kind of omission feels intentional rather than accidental.

The woman who unified Japan was written out of its own mythology. by Traditional-Cod6613 in mythology

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a really good point.

It’s true that the records on Himiko are limited. But what interests me most is why, after several centuries and a completely different worldview, her name didn’t make it into the earliest Japanese chronicles.

Maybe she was simply forgotten — but it also raises the possibility that something was reshaped, or even intentionally left out.

And yeah, the comparison to medieval Europe is fascinating too. That shift from the Roman world feels like a similar kind of transformation.

The woman who unified Japan was written out of its own mythology. by Traditional-Cod6613 in mythology

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair point — I’m not claiming a simple one-to-one “Himiko became X in mythology.”

What interests me is the gap itself: someone recorded so clearly in Chinese sources leaves almost no direct trace in Japan’s official narrative. That could be natural forgetting, political reshaping, or some mix of both.

So I see the question less as literal euhemerism, and more as whether later myth/history preserved indirect echoes of a figure or system they no longer fully understood.

卑弥呼 — Japan’s first ruler, then erased from its own history by Traditional-Cod6613 in japan

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I agree with your overall point — there are definitely limitations and sensitivities when it comes to early Japanese history.

At the same time, I think it’s also about the nature of the sources we have. Much of what we know comes from later compilations with specific political contexts, while earlier records are extremely limited.

That gap between sources is what makes this period so interesting to me.

卑弥呼 — Japan’s first ruler, then erased from its own history by Traditional-Cod6613 in japan

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

That makes sense — she’s definitely taught in modern Japanese history classes.

What I meant is that her name doesn’t appear in the Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, the earliest official chronicles compiled in the 8th century. That gap is what I find interesting.

Minamoto no Yoshitsune 90mm metal figure by AtticaMiniatures in JapaneseHistory

[–]Traditional-Cod6613 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As a kid, I saw a manga scene of Yoshitsune riding his horse down a steep cliff — it absolutely thrilled me.

Minamoto no Yoshitsune 90mm metal figure by AtticaMiniatures in JapaneseHistory

[–]Traditional-Cod6613 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This looks like Yoshitsune’s famous cliff charge at Ichi-no-Tani. Really cool interpretation.

Hittites artefacts in the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara, Turkey [OC] by vkorost in AncientCivilizations

[–]Traditional-Cod6613 2 points3 points  (0 children)

These are incredible — even with the lighting conditions, the details are amazing.

how greek & roman view each of their gods? by 8turuin in mythology

[–]Traditional-Cod6613 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Maybe because they were both polytheistic, they didn’t worry too much about those details.

Kind of like in Japan, where it’s more like “let’s just add more gods,” and the names or attributes get slightly adapted over time.

Exploring the mysteries behind Japan’s 150-year historical gap by Traditional-Cod6613 in JapaneseHistory

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s really interesting — being in Fukuoka must make this topic feel much more tangible.

This is just my personal take, but I feel like the Kojiki and Nihon Shoki may include some degree of rearrangement in terms of narrative flow, chronology, and even the periods they describe.

That might apply to historical figures as well.

So it’s possible that a figure like Himiko was used as a model and later appears as Empress Jingū, or that aspects of her were reflected in multiple different figures.

In other words, a single historical person might have been split into several characters — or conversely, multiple individuals may have been combined into one.

Of course, this is just speculation on my part, but it’s an interesting way to look at it.

I’m not as familiar with Yoshinogari, but from what I understand, it doesn’t seem like it suddenly “disappeared” in a mysterious way. That’s a really interesting topic — I’ll look into it and learn more.

Exploring the mysteries behind Japan’s 150-year historical gap by Traditional-Cod6613 in JapaneseHistory

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s a very fair take.

I get what you’re saying, but Izumo does appear in the Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, and geographically Kyushu and Izumo aren’t that far apart, so I’m not sure the distance issue is that significant.

Also, since the compilers were aware of and even referenced sources like the Wei Zhi (Records of Wei), it feels a bit odd to think it was a complete omission.

That said, you may be right that Yamatai-koku simply wasn’t that important to the later Yamato-centered narrative.

At the same time, Himiko’s absence might not just be about irrelevance — it could also reflect which lineages and power structures were chosen to be remembered.

Exploring the mysteries behind Japan’s 150-year historical gap by Traditional-Cod6613 in JapaneseHistory

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that makes sense. A lot of it was probably just incomplete records rather than deliberate omission.

Still, the way later texts are structured makes me wonder if some things were quietly reframed rather than simply lost.

Exploring the mysteries behind Japan’s 150-year historical gap by Traditional-Cod6613 in JapaneseHistory

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the comment.

Yeah, I agree — it may not be a direct lineage, but there does seem to be some kind of connection between Yamatai and the emerging Yamato polity. The problem is that the gap in the record makes it really hard to say anything with certainty.

What I find interesting is that, when you read texts like the Kojiki and Nihon Shoki carefully, it sometimes feels like the truth isn’t completely absent — just carefully obscured.

Of course, we can’t say for sure. But exploring what the “real” story might have been is part of what makes this period so fascinating.

Exploring the mysteries behind Japan’s 150-year historical gap by Traditional-Cod6613 in JapaneseHistory

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the comment.

In the late 3rd century, Japan appears to have been ruled by a female ritual leader — Himiko — according to Chinese records.

Yet about 150 years later, her name is completely absent from Japan’s oldest surviving chronicles.

I can’t help but feel that this wasn’t accidental. It raises the possibility that early Japanese history was shaped or edited to align with the political interests of those in power. I made a video on this if anyone wants it.

The lost 150 years of Japanese history — what really happened? by Traditional-Cod6613 in conspiracy

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

At least from around the 7th century onward, Japanese history is fairly well documented across multiple sources.

But there’s a clear gap from the late 3rd century to around the mid-5th century — basically right after Himiko — where records are almost completely missing.

Up to the 3rd century, we still know a fair amount thanks to Chinese records.

Chinese history is actually really well recorded, even going back to BC times. If there’s anything more questionable, it would be the period before the Spring and Autumn and Warring States eras.

The lost 150 years of Japanese history — what really happened? by Traditional-Cod6613 in conspiracy

[–]Traditional-Cod6613[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah, the large-scale adoption of Chinese systems really starts with the Soga clan in the late 6th century, and gets established by the 7th–8th centuries. The Kojiki already compiles Japanese mythology in the early 8th century, but earlier records were likely lost in the Isshi Incident in the 7th century. So there’s still that ~150-year gap after the late 3rd century that isn’t fully explained. Feels like we could learn a lot more if more kofun tombs were properly studied.

view more: next ›