Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Looking for suggestions for Kofun and Yayoi.

Expand Messages
  • daviem01 <ellen.m.davis@att.net>
    (Warning: this is long, and rambling. Anyone sans interest in early period might be advised to skip this one...) As some of you on the list already know, I am
    Message 1 of 19 , Dec 20, 2002
      (Warning: this is long, and rambling. Anyone sans interest in early
      period might be advised to skip this one...)

      As some of you on the list already know, I am in the process
      of "constructing" a late Yayoi persona. I am currently up to my
      eyeballs in books on the subject, both historical and archeological
      (many thanks to Ii-dono for lending me some tomes out of his library)
      but I would REALLY appreciate any suggestions that anyone might have,
      especially on other sources.

      I have not yet pinned down exactly how I would like to do this, but
      here's some of what I've come up with thus far:


      -Time: Middle to Late Yayoi, around the time that the Wei Chronicle
      was written* (239-248 AD). I'm interested in what life was like
      BEFORE the large-scale funerary tumulus cult that marks the Kofun
      period came over from the continent. The Yayoi period saw a huge
      number of changes in Japanese life and culture-- they started
      cultivating rice large-scale, which required more organization, which
      required designated leaders, which led to social stratification, and
      over time the leadership became a lineage thing instead of a talent
      thing, and people in general started being much more concerned with
      family and so on. (This is a ridiculously simplistic description but
      it'll suffice for now.)

      Anyway, it was a time when lots of upheavals in the nature and
      organization of society were happening-- and although there was
      social stratification, it wasn't yet quite as rigid as it would
      become later on when a true ruling family appeared.



      -Place: somewhere within the Kansai area. In particular, there is a
      shrine in Osaka city called Tamatsukuri Inari Jinja which has
      supposedly been there since 20 BCE or so, and gets its name from the
      Tamatsukuribe, or guild of "jewel-makers". These would have been the
      people producing sacred stone objects, such as magatama, from various
      materials such as talc, jasper and jade. I had the idea of attaching
      my persona to that area, not necessarily as one of the
      Tamatsukuribe themselves, but maybe as one of the keepers of a local
      shrine, etc.



      -Job/Family: a member of a priestly organization, lineage or
      corporation. The problem here is that we know about a large number
      of the uji (lineages/clans) and be ("corporations"/guilds) in early
      Japan, but I haven't yet been able to pin down exactly when those
      actually APPEARED, and none of the books I've consulted has been
      precise on that subject.

      For example, I was thinking of becoming one of the Nakatomi, the
      uji that later became the Fujiwara. The problem is that "Nakatomi"
      as a CLAN rather than a job title seems to be defined in terms of a
      relationship to the ruling Yamato dynasty of Japan from the 5th
      century on. The Nakatomi were a family responsible for performing
      various rituals for the good of the Yamato rulers. The Nihongi and
      Kojiki, for example, both mention that the Nakatomi ujigami, Ame-no-
      Koyane-no-Mikoto, was present at the emergence of the Sun Goddess
      from the Heavenly Rock Cave, and was also sent down from heaven as an
      advisor and assistant to the first Emperor. The chronicles were thus
      a convenient way for the Nakatomi to legitimate their own
      relationship to the throne: "we're here because our tutelary god and
      ultimate ancestor did the Exact Same Job!".

      In late Yayoi, however, that single central authority had not yet
      appeared, and so calling myself one of the "Nakatomi" is a little
      ambiguous and could be misleading to those who are familiar with the
      later history of that family. Which clan do I and my family serve?
      If it's not the lineage that will eventually take over in the 5th
      century, then I'm not REALLY a "Nakatomi", am I?

      However, there are several other "guilds" that could be
      appropriate, and who could very well fit into what we know about the
      Yayoi. For example, there are the Urabe, or diviners, who were
      responsible for reading cracks in tortoise shells and other fun
      stuff. There were also the Imbe or Imibe, who like the Nakatomi
      became hereditary sacred advisors and servants to the ruling clan.
      They were "abstainers" whose responsibility was to avoid spiritual
      pollution and thereby ensure the well-being of the rulers and their
      endeavors. (The Wei Chronicle gives an example of this-- whenever
      the rulers would embark on a new project or send out a delegation for
      any purpose, a designated abstainer would go along, and if the effort
      failed they would kill him/her.)

      (Come to think of it, that could be useful: "Why am I sitting in
      the dark, humming to myself, wearing my clothes backwards and eating
      only unpolished rice? I'm ensuring Atlantia's victory at Pennsic,
      silly!")

      In any event, wherever I came from, I was sent by my cousin, the
      head of our lineage, as an envoy to the Laurel Kingdoms of the Known
      World. I am farther from my clan's homeland than I have ever been,
      but I have experienced many amazing opportunities. For example, I
      have seen horses with my own eyes (they are only stories where I come
      from)!


      -Name: Beats the heck outta me, especially when it comes to personal
      names as there's not much record of them from that time. <g>


      Anyway, pray forgive my long-winded rambling, and please feel free to
      correct my mistakes. I welcome any and all suggestions!

      -Aine


      *The "Gishiwajinden" section of the Chinese "Wei Chronicle" is one of
      the best (and only!) historical sources about the Japanese
      archipelago during the Yayoi period (taken with a grain of salt, of
      course). It describes the "kingdom" of Yamatai or Yamaichi, which
      was ruled (at least in spiritual terms, and maybe secularly as well)
      by a "queen" named Himiko or Pimiko. In fact she was probably the
      leader or chief adviser of a federation of tribal chiefs.
    • Barbara Nostrand
      Noble Cousin! Greetings from Solveig! Yayoi culture does not mark large scale rice cultivation it marks rice cultivation period. By the tumulus period we
      Message 2 of 19 , Dec 21, 2002
        Noble Cousin!

        Greetings from Solveig! Yayoi culture does not mark "large scale rice
        cultivation" it marks rice cultivation period. By the tumulus period
        we definitely have priest-kings of some sort. The priest-kings appear
        to extend up to the time when the government was reorganized along
        Chinese lines. Abandoning the misasagi is probably related to the
        introduction of Buddhism among the nobility. Placing yourself in the
        Kansai area places you more toward the tail end of the Yayoi period.

        >-Job/Family: a member of a priestly organization, lineage or
        >corporation. The problem here is that we know about a large number
        >of the uji (lineages/clans) and be ("corporations"/guilds) in early
        >Japan, but I haven't yet been able to pin down exactly when those
        >actually APPEARED, and none of the books I've consulted has been
        >precise on that subject.

        The problem with claiming to be a priest is the generally accepted
        notion of the unity between the priesthood and kingship in pre-imperial
        Japanese Society. The Society for Creative Anachronism does not in
        general support free assumption of princely status.

        > For example, I was thinking of becoming one of the Nakatomi, the
        >uji that later became the Fujiwara.

        You can be a member of the Nakatomi uji. That does not make you
        priestly. Incidentally, only part of the Nakatomi necessarily
        became Fujiwara. As for the Kojiki, the Kojiki was compiled after
        the emergence of imperial government in Japan. The Kojiki is not
        necessarily reflecting a need to legitimize connection with the
        Imperial family, but more a system in which the kuge families are
        organized.

        > However, there are several other "guilds" that could be
        >appropriate,

        Yes. You could belong to a be instead of a uji. Be membership was
        quite common and remained in census records for a considerable time.

        > In any event, wherever I came from, I was sent by my cousin, the
        >head of our lineage, as an envoy to the Laurel Kingdoms of the Known
        >World. I am farther from my clan's homeland than I have ever been,
        >but I have experienced many amazing opportunities. For example, I
        >have seen horses with my own eyes (they are only stories where I come
        >from)!

        I assume therefore that you are from before the tumulus period. This
        is seriously prehistoric. Yes, there is the Wei chronicle, but that
        hardly makes the period historic in Japan.

        Your Humble Servant
        Solveig Throndardottir
        Amateur Scholar
        --

        Your Humble Servant
        Solveig Throndardottir
        Amateur Scholar

        +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
        | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS |
        | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
        | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:bnostran@... |
        +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
        | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
        | the trash by my email filters. |
        +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
      • daviem01 <ellen.m.davis@att.net>
        ... rice ... Depends on how you define large scale , I guess, but I m not getting into this discussion again, at least not right now. ... imperial ...
        Message 3 of 19 , Dec 21, 2002
          --- In sca-jml@yahoogroups.com, Barbara Nostrand <nostrand@a...>
          wrote:
          > Noble Cousin!
          >
          > Greetings from Solveig! Yayoi culture does not mark "large scale
          rice
          > cultivation" it marks rice cultivation period.

          Depends on how you define "large scale", I guess, but I'm not getting
          into this discussion again, at least not right now. <g>

          > The problem with claiming to be a priest is the generally accepted
          > notion of the unity between the priesthood and kingship in pre-
          imperial
          > Japanese Society. The Society for Creative Anachronism does not in
          > general support free assumption of princely status.

          There's a difference between claiming to be THE reigning
          shaman/shamaness/priest-king of a group, and claiming to be A priest
          or of a priestly family. I would of course go for the latter, as a
          distant cousin/servant/assistant to our local leader. As I belong to
          a be that has become known for its skilled divinations (or what have
          you), and as I have shown some meager talent for that practice, I
          have been sent to assist my ruler in the smaller day-to-day
          ceremonies that keep life functioning smoothly.

          (After all, according to the Gishi-wajinden, Himiko of Wa had 1000
          female servants who came to serve her "willingly"! ^.^ )

          Besides, aren't members of the SCA assumed by default to be minor
          nobility? What I am thinking would, in my opinion, be an appropriate
          equivalent.

          > I assume therefore that you are from before the tumulus period. This
          > is seriously prehistoric. Yes, there is the Wei chronicle, but that
          > hardly makes the period historic in Japan.

          Well, where is it defined in the governing documents that one must
          represent a persona from a "historic" (literate) culture? Besides,
          AFAIK writing didn't really take on until late Kofun anyway...most of
          what we know before Asuka is from archeological or non-Japanese
          historical evidence, so Kofun is arguably no more prehistoric than
          Yayoi.

          After all: "The SCA period is defined to be Western civilization
          before 1600 AD, concentrating on the Western European High Middle
          Ages." To reiterate what has been said too many times already--
          going by that rule, very few of us on this list belong in the SCA.

          -Aine
        • Barbara Nostrand
          Noble Cousin! Greetings from Solveig! ... That is unlikely to work. It really doesn t matter that much whether you are claiming to be priest/king of all of
          Message 4 of 19 , Dec 21, 2002
            Noble Cousin!

            Greetings from Solveig!
            >There's a difference between claiming to be THE reigning
            >shaman/shamaness/priest-king of a group, and claiming to be A priest
            >or of a priestly family. I would of course go for the latter, as a
            >distant cousin/servant/assistant to our local leader. As I belong to
            >a be that has become known for its skilled divinations (or what have
            >you), and as I have shown some meager talent for that practice, I
            >have been sent to assist my ruler in the smaller day-to-day
            >ceremonies that keep life functioning smoothly.

            That is unlikely to work. It really doesn't matter that much whether
            you are claiming to be priest/king of all of Japan or priest/king of
            the local valley. This sort of thing is not generally supported by
            the Society. Please consider the amount of flack surrounding the
            few people in the Society who are claiming to be abbots or bishops.
            Why not just claim be to part of one of the interesting uji or the
            inbe or something like that.

            >Besides, aren't members of the SCA assumed by default to be minor
            >nobility? What I am thinking would, in my opinion, be an appropriate
            >equivalent.

            The status of members of the Society in general is that sufficient to
            be at a feast or revel. That is about it. Claiming to be a priest/king
            goes beyond what is generally accepted. Remember, since you will be
            working with anthropological theory, that you really are stuck with
            these notions of the corn king and the priest/king. That makes a
            seperate priesthood difficult.

            > > I assume therefore that you are from before the tumulus period. This
            >> is seriously prehistoric. Yes, there is the Wei chronicle, but that
            >> hardly makes the period historic in Japan.
            >
            >Well, where is it defined in the governing documents that one must
            >represent a persona from a "historic" (literate) culture?

            It doesn't. Being pre-historic just makes it much more challenging for
            you to do things well enough to be taken seriously.
            --

            Your Humble Servant
            Solveig Throndardottir
            Amateur Scholar

            +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
            | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS |
            | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
            | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:bnostran@... |
            +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
            | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
            | the trash by my email filters. |
            +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
          • Anthony J. Bryant
            ... Tough period. The only things we really know about is in the Wajinden, so you re really limiting your sources. Even much of the archaeological evidence is
            Message 5 of 19 , Dec 22, 2002
              "daviem01 " wrote:

              >
              > -Time: Middle to Late Yayoi, around the time that the Wei Chronicle
              > was written* (239-248 AD). I'm interested in what life was like
              > BEFORE the large-scale funerary tumulus cult that marks the Kofun
              > period came over from the continent. The Yayoi period saw a huge
              > number of changes in Japanese life and culture-- they started
              > cultivating rice large-scale, which required more organization, which
              > required designated leaders, which led to social stratification, and
              > over time the leadership became a lineage thing instead of a talent
              > thing, and people in general started being much more concerned with
              > family and so on. (This is a ridiculously simplistic description but
              > it'll suffice for now.)

              Tough period. The only things we really know about is in the Wajinden, so
              you're really limiting your sources. Even much of the archaeological
              evidence is sketchy to this period. Personally, I'm a fan of the middle-late
              Kofun; at least we can recreate a larger percentage of artifacta.

              The text in Wajinden is, unfortunately, formulaic in a way (the Chinese
              tended to portray *all* barbarians in the same light, so we can't really be
              sure how much is hyperbole and how much is true accounting. We also suffer
              from a near total lack of names. We can always look at the Kojiki, but we
              have to wonder how accurate the Kojiki is with the protohistoric naming. The
              Kojiki doesn't mention the the two historical characters we *do* know
              (Himiko and Iyo), so that's another problem.

              >
              > Anyway, it was a time when lots of upheavals in the nature and
              > organization of society were happening-- and although there was
              > social stratification, it wasn't yet quite as rigid as it would
              > become later on when a true ruling family appeared.

              That we know of. We don't even know if the government of Yamatai was a
              unified one, a confederation, or a loose alliance.

              >
              > -Place: somewhere within the Kansai area. In particular, there is a
              > shrine in Osaka city called Tamatsukuri Inari Jinja which has
              > supposedly been there since 20 BCE or so,

              Interesting. I'll have to visit the shrine next time I'm out that way! Have
              you ever been there?

              >
              > -Job/Family: a member of a priestly organization, lineage or
              > corporation. The problem here is that we know about a large number
              > of the uji (lineages/clans) and be ("corporations"/guilds) in early
              > Japan, but I haven't yet been able to pin down exactly when those
              > actually APPEARED, and none of the books I've consulted has been
              > precise on that subject.

              Not surprising. Any that did would be guesstimating at best, I'm afraid.

              >
              > For example, I was thinking of becoming one of the Nakatomi, the
              > uji that later became the Fujiwara. The problem is that "Nakatomi"
              > as a CLAN rather than a job title seems to be defined in terms of a
              > relationship to the ruling Yamato dynasty of Japan from the 5th
              > century on. The Nakatomi were a family responsible for performing
              > various rituals for the good of the Yamato rulers. The Nihongi and
              > Kojiki, for example, both mention that the Nakatomi ujigami, Ame-no-
              > Koyane-no-Mikoto, was present at the emergence of the Sun Goddess
              > from the Heavenly Rock Cave, and was also sent down from heaven as an
              > advisor and assistant to the first Emperor. The chronicles were thus
              > a convenient way for the Nakatomi to legitimate their own
              > relationship to the throne: "we're here because our tutelary god and
              > ultimate ancestor did the Exact Same Job!".

              Interesting choice. I'd think you'd have a conflict deciding between one of
              the big uji and one of the -be. At least with the Nakatomi you're dealing
              with a family that has a deal of written history -- even if most of the
              early parts are arguably propaganda.

              >
              > In late Yayoi, however, that single central authority had not yet
              > appeared, and so calling myself one of the "Nakatomi" is a little
              > ambiguous and could be misleading to those who are familiar with the
              > later history of that family. Which clan do I and my family serve?
              > If it's not the lineage that will eventually take over in the 5th
              > century, then I'm not REALLY a "Nakatomi", am I?

              This is a more interesting question. I'm personally a big fan of the
              Mononobe and the Ôtomo myself (yeah, I know there's that whole rivalry
              thing... <G>). There are quite a few interesting families and a lot
              happening, but you have to move into the later Kofun period to hit anything
              where recorded history as we know it provides enough clues to fully develop
              anything.

              > -Name: Beats the heck outta me, especially when it comes to personal
              > names as there's not much record of them from that time. <g>
              >

              Oh, yeah. That's a tuffie.

              >
              > Anyway, pray forgive my long-winded rambling, and please feel free to
              > correct my mistakes. I welcome any and all suggestions!

              I wish I could come up with some. Have you read Gina Barnes' "Protohistoric
              Yamato"? It's an archaeological book -- not really cultural or historical --
              but its got some interesting things. I'd also recommend William Wayne
              Farris' "Sacred Treasures," although that tends to focus more on
              Asuka/Fujiwara/Nagaokakyô.

              Effingham
            • Anthony J. Bryant
              ... Let s not start this one again. Even the experts are unclear on the timing involved. ... To quote my late Uncle Bob, Pish-tosh! Because the kings
              Message 6 of 19 , Dec 22, 2002
                Barbara Nostrand wrote:

                > Noble Cousin!
                >
                > Greetings from Solveig! Yayoi culture does not mark "large scale rice
                > cultivation" it marks rice cultivation period.

                Let's not start this one again. <G>

                Even the experts are unclear on the timing involved.

                >
                > The problem with claiming to be a priest is the generally accepted
                > notion of the unity between the priesthood and kingship in pre-imperial
                > Japanese Society. The Society for Creative Anachronism does not in
                > general support free assumption of princely status.
                >

                To quote my late Uncle Bob, "Pish-tosh!"

                Because the kings also had sacerdotal roles does not mean all priest have
                royal ones.

                By this logic, every single shrine in Japan was headed by a king, and we
                *know* that wasn't the case.

                The Emperors in Rome were the chief high priests (that whole "rex et
                sacerdos" thing), and there sure as hell were hundreds of other priests
                running around.


                Effingham
              • Anthony J. Bryant
                ... You re arguing a logical fallacy. Priest != king. Priest = priest. ... Again, pish-tosh. This argument depends on the assumption that we re talking about
                Message 7 of 19 , Dec 22, 2002
                  Barbara Nostrand wrote:

                  >
                  > That is unlikely to work. It really doesn't matter that much whether
                  > you are claiming to be priest/king of all of Japan or priest/king of
                  > the local valley.

                  You're arguing a logical fallacy. Priest != king. Priest = priest.

                  > This sort of thing is not generally supported by
                  > the Society. Please consider the amount of flack surrounding the
                  > few people in the Society who are claiming to be abbots or bishops.

                  Again, pish-tosh. This argument depends on the assumption that we're talking
                  about clericalism of substantial rank, and that's nowhere implied in Aine's
                  posts. There's a big difference between a shrine priest, for example, and
                  the head priest of Ise; there's also, it must be noted, a lot of "flunky"
                  priests at Ise in addition to the guji, but even then there's a huge status
                  leap between the head priest of a major shrine and a sovereign of a state
                  (regardless of whether that sovereign is imbued with priestly funtions).

                  > The status of members of the Society in general is that sufficient to
                  > be at a feast or revel. That is about it. Claiming to be a priest/king
                  > goes beyond what is generally accepted.

                  But Solveig, you're the only one who's saying "priest/king." *I* certainly
                  have no problems with anyone wanting to portray an early Shinto or
                  shamanistic cleric.

                  > It doesn't. Being pre-historic just makes it much more challenging for
                  > you to do things well enough to be taken seriously.
                  >

                  That's for darned sure!! <G>

                  Effingham
                • daviem01 <ellen.m.davis@att.net>
                  ... Chinese ... really be ... Very true. Did Himiko really have 1000 maidservants? :) There are some little things, though, that definitely pop out as
                  Message 8 of 19 , Dec 22, 2002
                    > The text in Wajinden is, unfortunately, formulaic in a way (the
                    Chinese
                    > tended to portray *all* barbarians in the same light, so we can't
                    really be
                    > sure how much is hyperbole and how much is true accounting.

                    Very true. Did Himiko really have 1000 maidservants? :)

                    There are some little things, though, that definitely pop out as
                    uniquely Japanese:
                    "In their worship, the high-ranking men simply clap their hands
                    together instead of bowing in the kneeling position."
                    "The lower arm of their bows is shorter, and the upper arm longer."
                    And, of course, "People enjoy liquor." :D
                    Silly barbarians!

                    > >
                    > > -Place: somewhere within the Kansai area. In particular, there
                    is a
                    > > shrine in Osaka city called Tamatsukuri Inari Jinja which has
                    > > supposedly been there since 20 BCE or so,
                    >
                    > Interesting. I'll have to visit the shrine next time I'm out that
                    way! Have
                    > you ever been there?

                    No, I've just heard about it recently (there's an excellent book on
                    past and present Inari worship that mentions it). It's an unusual
                    example of an Inari shrine because the normal wishing jewel imagery
                    is here replaced entirely by magatama, reflecting the age and
                    historical background of the shrine and its surroundings.

                    I'm compiling a list of everywhere I need to go when I return to
                    Japan. Unfortunately, it would probably take me several years.
                    When's the next SCA-JML trip?

                    > > -Job/Family: a member of a priestly organization, lineage or
                    > > corporation. The problem here is that we know about a large
                    number
                    > > of the uji (lineages/clans) and be ("corporations"/guilds) in
                    early
                    > > Japan, but I haven't yet been able to pin down exactly when those
                    > > actually APPEARED, and none of the books I've consulted has been
                    > > precise on that subject.
                    >
                    > Not surprising. Any that did would be guesstimating at best, I'm
                    afraid.

                    Well, I read a little more since that last post and there's one idea
                    that says that the be really didn't appear in their "typical" form
                    until middle or late Kofun, when individual family lineages started
                    to become more important than general clan affiliation. Only then
                    did the "be" came into formal existence as sort of "pseudo-clans",
                    when the same thing (groups of workers related by blood) had really
                    been there all along in a much more informal way.

                    Interesting theory, and it does make a lot of sense from an
                    anthropological viewpoint. (There's also a suggestion that this same
                    decline in the importance of clan affiliation may have contributed to
                    the rise of Buddhism in Japan, but that's an entirely different
                    discussion.)

                    > This is a more interesting question. I'm personally a big fan of the
                    > Mononobe and the Ôtomo myself (yeah, I know there's that whole
                    rivalry
                    > thing... <G>). There are quite a few interesting families and a lot
                    > happening, but you have to move into the later Kofun period to hit
                    anything
                    > where recorded history as we know it provides enough clues to fully
                    develop
                    > anything.

                    It looks like Yayoi-period clans had an elite, ruling lineage
                    segment, and other segments which had some sort of hereditary linkage
                    to certain jobs or functions within society, although it wasn't quite
                    as rigid as the be later on.

                    In that sense, I could portray myself as a member of any clan-- but
                    as a member of a "sub-lineage" that performed a sort of priestly duty
                    such as divination (later the role of the Urabe), the keeping of
                    taboos (Imibe), or similar. Some members of my lineage group do this
                    job, and some do not; those that do perform that function may do it
                    for the general populace, and some do it in the capacity of direct
                    assistants to the elites.

                    (I particularly like the idea of being a diviner...come by my tent at
                    Pennsic and I'll fry up some oracle bones for ya! <G>)

                    It's iffy, but given what I'm reading about the period, it would be a
                    reasonable way to represent the likely structure of the society. Of
                    course, there is still the name issue, and I may never come up with
                    anything I can be remotely confident is accurate.

                    > I wish I could come up with some. Have you read Gina
                    Barnes' "Protohistoric
                    > Yamato"? It's an archaeological book -- not really cultural or
                    historical --
                    > but its got some interesting things. I'd also recommend William
                    Wayne
                    > Farris' "Sacred Treasures," although that tends to focus more on
                    > Asuka/Fujiwara/Nagaokakyô.

                    I have not read Barnes' book yet, but that was next on my Amazon wish
                    list. Archaeological books are absolutely fine with me-- that's my
                    educational background, so I don't get intimidated by most of the
                    jargon. <g>

                    One that I've been reading recently is Koji Mizoguchi's "An
                    Archeological History of Japan: 30,000 BC to AD 700". I can honestly
                    say it's one of the best-written and most interesting archeological
                    texts I've seen in a long time. It focuses on how the physical
                    topography of Jomon, Yayoi and Kofun sites reflect the mental,
                    social, and spiritual "topography" of life in those periods, and
                    presents a lot of interesting ideas about how any individual person
                    might have perceived his or her position within the society and the
                    larger world.

                    -Aine
                  • daviem01 <ellen.m.davis@att.net>
                    ... whether ... of ... Thank you, Effingham-dono; you said it better than I could have. I do understand your concern, Lady Solveig, but the vast majority of
                    Message 9 of 19 , Dec 22, 2002
                      --- In sca-jml@yahoogroups.com, "Anthony J. Bryant" <ajbryant@i...>
                      wrote:
                      > Barbara Nostrand wrote:
                      >
                      > >
                      > > That is unlikely to work. It really doesn't matter that much
                      whether
                      > > you are claiming to be priest/king of all of Japan or priest/king
                      of
                      > > the local valley.
                      >
                      > You're arguing a logical fallacy. Priest != king. Priest = priest.
                      >

                      Thank you, Effingham-dono; you said it better than I could have.

                      I do understand your concern, Lady Solveig, but the vast majority of
                      the time, the concept of a priest-king just means that the ruler
                      performs some priestly functions. In such a society as we are
                      talking about in early Japan, the elites do perform some form of
                      ritual or shamanic mediation, but also have to cope with much more
                      pressing mundane tasks: negotiating with other groups for land and
                      water rights, figuring out how to obtain trade goods (such as bronzes
                      from China) that are symbolically or physically necessary for the
                      good of society, and defending the village against attackers.

                      After all, the Emperor of Japan performs certain ceremonies during
                      his reign for the good of the realm; he is the only one who can
                      perform these rituals. Does this make him a Shinto priest?
                      Arguably. Does this make all Shinto priests royalty? Definitely not.

                      All kings are priests != all priests are kings.

                      -Aine, getting back to watching "Samurai Jack"
                    • Solveig
                      Baron Edward! Greetings from Solveig! ... We are talking about a time largely before historical records. A lot of proto-historical stuff in Japan does unify
                      Message 10 of 19 , Dec 23, 2002
                        Baron Edward!

                        Greetings from Solveig!

                        >Because the kings also had sacerdotal roles does not mean all priest have
                        >royal ones.

                        We are talking about a time largely before historical records. A lot
                        of proto-historical
                        stuff in Japan does unify secular leadership and sectarian
                        leadership. This is also fairly
                        common cross-cultural thinking. Positing a significant division of
                        labour just to
                        justify doing something in the Society appears less than reasonable to me.

                        >The Emperors in Rome were the chief high priests (that whole "rex et
                        >sacerdos" thing), and there sure as hell were hundreds of other priests
                        >running around.

                        The Roman emperors are a bad example and you know it. The Roman emperors are
                        post-republican and a long long time after the sort of
                        social/political organization
                        being discussed.
                        --

                        Your Humble Servant
                        Solveig Throndardottir
                        Amateur Scholar

                        +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                        | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS |
                        | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
                        | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:bnostran@... |
                        +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                        | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
                        | the trash by my email filters. |
                        +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                      • Solveig
                        Baron Edward! ... Maybe in the Byzantine Empire, but not necessarily everywhere else. In this context king = political leader. The question is whether or not
                        Message 11 of 19 , Dec 23, 2002
                          Baron Edward!

                          >You're arguing a logical fallacy. Priest != king. Priest = priest.

                          Maybe in the Byzantine Empire, but not necessarily everywhere else. In this
                          context king = political leader. The question is whether or not the religious
                          leader is also the political leader. The notion that these two jobs are unified
                          is a pretty orthodox position to take with late Japanese pre-history. Besides,
                          in the specific context of the Society, it really doesn't matter
                          whether someone
                          is claiming to be a Baron, a Bishop or an Abbot. All three are considered
                          territorial and are not freely assumable.

                          >Again, pish-tosh. This argument depends on the assumption that we're talking
                          >about clericalism of substantial rank, and that's nowhere implied in Aine's
                          >posts.

                          Actually, it did seem to be pretty strongly implied. If he wants to be part of
                          the inbe, then I don't have a problem as that was an entire guild with the
                          requisite flunkies.

                          >There's a big difference between a shrine priest, for example, and
                          >the head priest of Ise;

                          Doesn't matter. Further, I'm sure that you know that it doesn't matter. I know
                          at least one person who is trying to arogate Arabic titles and is constantly
                          drawing flack over it. It's fundamentally the same problem. If you
                          want to claim
                          rulership over more than your own little residential manor, then you tend to
                          draw flack in the Society. If we were talking about English titles the
                          discussion would probably have ended already.

                          >there's also, it must be noted, a lot of "flunky"
                          >priests at Ise in addition to the guji, but even then there's a huge status
                          >leap between the head priest of a major shrine and a sovereign of a state
                          >(regardless of whether that sovereign is imbued with priestly funtions).

                          Yes. And current Ise practices are a long site removed from what the
                          time period
                          under discussion. We are talking about pre-imperial social
                          organization you know.

                          >But Solveig, you're the only one who's saying "priest/king." *I* certainly
                          >have no problems with anyone wanting to portray an early Shinto or
                          >shamanistic cleric.

                          The devil is in the details. The proposal included lots of extra social
                          relationships which placed this particular bit of recreation a long ways away
                          from the local shaman. Even so, there are people out there who will object to
                          being any sort of village headman.
                          --

                          Your Humble Servant
                          Solveig Throndardottir
                          Amateur Scholar

                          +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                          | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS |
                          | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
                          | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:bnostran@... |
                          +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                          | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
                          | the trash by my email filters. |
                          +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                        • Solveig
                          Noble Cousins! Greetings from Solveig! I urge you not to debate logical fallacies with me. I am quite familiar with the rules of logic and have demonstrated
                          Message 12 of 19 , Dec 23, 2002
                            Noble Cousins!

                            Greetings from Solveig! I urge you not to debate logical fallacies
                            with me. I am quite familiar with the rules of logic and have
                            demonstrated Godel's Incompleteness Theorem. Saying that there are
                            priest's who are not kings in some societies is irrelevant. You
                            can engage in priestly functions, but only if you are doing so in
                            such a way that you are not claiming rank or status. This means
                            that you do not control territory and that you are not an heir to
                            someone who controls territory. Sorry, but that is how the rules work.

                            Thus, you may be able to be an abstainer. You can not, however, run
                            the village. You need to establish who runs the village or whatever
                            and you have to establish that it is NOT YOU. As I mentioned earlier,
                            this rule has general application. Abbots and Bishops are also generally
                            out of bounds.

                            As for the emperor. His big claim to power is that he is the high
                            priest of Amaterasu no Mikoto. The same sort of thing is true for
                            pharoh. This is quite different from the Roman emperors who had
                            themselves declared gods. Shrinking this sort of theocratic
                            relationship to a local level does not solve the problem anymore
                            than calling yourself an abbot instead of a baron solves the problem.
                            --

                            Your Humble Servant
                            Solveig Throndardottir
                            Amateur Scholar

                            +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                            | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS |
                            | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
                            | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:bnostran@... |
                            +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                            | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
                            | the trash by my email filters. |
                            +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                          • daviem01 <ellen.m.davis@att.net>
                            ... we re talking ... in Aine s ... be part of ... She, actually. Darn Hiberno-Norse names! ... And I don t believe I implied any sort of substantial
                            Message 13 of 19 , Dec 30, 2002
                              >
                              > >Again, pish-tosh. This argument depends on the assumption that
                              we're talking
                              > >about clericalism of substantial rank, and that's nowhere implied
                              in Aine's
                              > >posts.
                              >
                              > Actually, it did seem to be pretty strongly implied. If he wants to
                              be part of
                              > the inbe

                              She, actually. <g> Darn Hiberno-Norse names!

                              > then I don't have a problem as that was an entire guild with the
                              > requisite flunkies.

                              And I don't believe I implied any sort of "substantial rank". I am
                              an individual with a YTBD religious occupation-- common, and quite
                              varied in period. I am also related in some sort of kinship sense
                              with the person who is the head of our local group-- again, a very
                              reasonable assumption for Yayoi: since these are clans we're talking
                              about, EVERYONE down to the lowest laborer can claim a similar kind
                              of relationship. It's only later that individual family units
                              overwhelm the old clan system.

                              (In fact, although I belong to a particular "guild" (say, the
                              diviners), I'm not so sure that in this period I could rightfully
                              call it a "Be". It's very possible that the true "Be" concept arose
                              a little later than Yayoi to replace the old lineages which had these
                              traditional functions within a clan. Yet another problem with
                              picking a name...)

                              Anyway, although I have a religious occupation, I (along with my
                              entire lineage) am NOT the one calling the shots. When I do
                              divination, or whatever, I do it entirely within the service of the
                              leader (or anyone else in the clan who may ask me to do it). That's
                              what I was raised to do and what most of my immediate relatives do.
                              For me to say that that gives me the right to also, say, perform
                              rituals before the kami, or lead the warriors of our clan in battle,
                              would be ridiculous. Those have absolutely nothing to do with my job.

                              > >There's a big difference between a shrine priest, for example, and
                              > >the head priest of Ise;
                              >
                              > Doesn't matter. Further, I'm sure that you know that it doesn't
                              matter.

                              Funny, to most of the people I know within the Society, such
                              distinctions DO matter quite a bit. But perhaps I'm lucky in my
                              associations.

                              It's important to choose one's battles, and there are many I won't
                              touch with a ten-foot pole. However, I cannot accept the suggestion
                              that one should not replicate a religious persona because some people
                              might get confused and not recognize the difference between your
                              basic shrine priest (or Benedictine monk, or Zen brother) and a high
                              religious authority who also wields secular power. That's not a
                              matter of SCA politics-- it's a matter of good historical
                              recreation. (It also makes such a persona that much more challenging
                              to do correctly, because one must confront such misunderstandings.)

                              I hate sweeping generalizations, they're all dangerous. (Yes, that
                              statement is itself a sweeping generalization. Bah! :)

                              -Aine
                            • daviem01 <ellen.m.davis@att.net>
                              ... lot ... to me. I don t believe I posited a significant division of labor , just enough to suggest that there were different roles that both priestly and
                              Message 14 of 19 , Dec 30, 2002
                                > We are talking about a time largely before historical records. A
                                lot
                                > of proto-historical
                                > stuff in Japan does unify secular leadership and sectarian
                                > leadership. This is also fairly
                                > common cross-cultural thinking. Positing a significant division of
                                > labour just to
                                > justify doing something in the Society appears less than reasonable
                                to me.

                                I don't believe I posited a "significant division of labor", just
                                enough to suggest that there were different roles that both priestly
                                and secular authorities fell into, sometimes together. I am making
                                what I feel are reasonable guesses considering my knowledge of the
                                period, which is increasing daily.

                                > The Roman emperors are a bad example and you know it. The Roman
                                emperors are
                                > post-republican and a long long time after the sort of
                                > social/political organization
                                > being discussed.

                                Just for clarification...are you saying "a long long time" to suggest
                                some kind of natural progression of forms of government? Because the
                                Roman emperors were contemporaneous with middle to late Yayoi, and
                                Kofun...

                                -Aine
                              • Solveig
                                Noble Cousin! Greetings from Solveig! ... The problem is that you are recreating an era which is generally believed to have been theocratic. Assume the role of
                                Message 15 of 19 , Dec 30, 2002
                                  Noble Cousin!

                                  Greetings from Solveig!

                                  >And I don't believe I implied any sort of "substantial rank". I am
                                  >an individual with a YTBD religious occupation-- common, and quite
                                  >varied in period. I am also related in some sort of kinship sense
                                  >with the person who is the head of our local group-- again, a very
                                  >reasonable assumption for Yayoi: since these are clans we're talking
                                  >about, EVERYONE down to the lowest laborer can claim a similar kind
                                  >of relationship. It's only later that individual family units
                                  >overwhelm the old clan system.

                                  The problem is that you are recreating an era which is generally believed
                                  to have been theocratic. Assume the role of a priest can easily put you
                                  in the position of claiming territory which is a no-no. Today, we look at
                                  being a priest as being a kind of job much like being a janitor or a plumber.
                                  That is not necessarily the case in all places and in all times. If you are
                                  careful, then you can be part of a group which was clearly extensive and
                                  not territorial. This is why the abstainers are really good. However,
                                  being a priest in the Mononobe or something like that does cause problems
                                  because it can easily place you in the authority pecking order of a territory.
                                  As far as I know, most of the Mononobe were not priests. Most of the inbe
                                  appear to have been priests. There is a difference.

                                  >(In fact, although I belong to a particular "guild" (say, the
                                  >diviners), I'm not so sure that in this period I could rightfully
                                  >call it a "Be". It's very possible that the true "Be" concept arose
                                  >a little later than Yayoi to replace the old lineages which had these
                                  >traditional functions within a clan. Yet another problem with
                                  >picking a name...)

                                  Actually, the time period you are dealing with requires you to engage in
                                  a good deal of conjecture. I do think that you should go on what is
                                  generally thought to have been the social order prior to Taika. If you
                                  want to be a priest, then you should pick one of the clans which we know
                                  at one point in its history provided relgious services in a manner which
                                  you are attempting to recreate rather than a clan which is not known to
                                  have done so. Orthodox thinking about prehistoric Japan has a union of
                                  religious and secular authority in the clan chief and his deputies. The
                                  religious authority does not cause problems in the Society, but the
                                  secular authority does. If you pick something like the abstainers, then
                                  you are definitely trying to "play the game" if however you pick a
                                  to recreate a person who could easily be argued to hold secular authority,
                                  then you easily appear to be doing something prehistoric in an attempt
                                  to circumvent Society conventions. That does not look good. And, I will
                                  tell you that there are quite a few people in the Society who are
                                  suspicious of recreating religious vocations.

                                  >Anyway, although I have a religious occupation, I (along with my
                                  >entire lineage) am NOT the one calling the shots. When I do
                                  >divination, or whatever, I do it entirely within the service of the
                                  >leader (or anyone else in the clan who may ask me to do it). That's
                                  >what I was raised to do and what most of my immediate relatives do.
                                  >For me to say that that gives me the right to also, say, perform
                                  >rituals before the kami, or lead the warriors of our clan in battle,
                                  >would be ridiculous. Those have absolutely nothing to do with my job.

                                  As I said, you should pick a group like the abstainers who did at least
                                  evolve into a group which functioned in a way that you are claiming to
                                  be functioning. Claiming to be a priest in a general clan, does not do
                                  this.

                                  > > >There's a big difference between a shrine priest, for example, and
                                  >> >the head priest of Ise;
                                  >>
                                  >> Doesn't matter. Further, I'm sure that you know that it doesn't
                                  >matter.
                                  >
                                  >Funny, to most of the people I know within the Society, such
                                  >distinctions DO matter quite a bit. But perhaps I'm lucky in my
                                  >associations.

                                  I think it's fine that your friends know about Ise. But that misses the
                                  point. In terms of acceptability, it doesn't matter. It really doesn't
                                  matter whether you are claiming to be the bishop of Rome, the bishop of
                                  Antioch or the bishop of York. It doesn't matter. Calling yourself a
                                  bishop is generally considered to be a no-no. Calling yourself a parish
                                  priest attached to a manor house should be acceptable. Calling yourself
                                  an abbot of anyplace is a no-no. Calling yourself a friar is generally
                                  accepted. Finally, who you claim yourself to be will not simply cause
                                  notice amoung your friends. It will cause notice among those who are not
                                  your friends as well. As people are not as well clued in about Japan as
                                  they are about England, you may be able to wander around for a few years
                                  before youre priestly occupation will rise up and bite you.

                                  >It's important to choose one's battles, and there are many I won't
                                  >touch with a ten-foot pole. However, I cannot accept the suggestion
                                  >that one should not replicate a religious persona because some people
                                  >might get confused and not recognize the difference between your
                                  >basic shrine priest (or Benedictine monk, or Zen brother) and a high
                                  >religious authority who also wields secular power.

                                  The thing that you keep insisting on ignoring is that the size of your
                                  territory does not matter a whole lot. If you get to collect taxes,
                                  raise troops, dispense law, &c. then people will go twinge at you.
                                  Things were not nearly as up-tight twenty five years ago. Twenty five
                                  years ago, Bishop Geoffrey (da Bish) was a regular feature at East Kingdom
                                  court. But, things are different now.

                                  > That's not a
                                  >matter of SCA politics-- it's a matter of good historical
                                  >recreation. (It also makes such a persona that much more challenging
                                  >to do correctly, because one must confront such misunderstandings.)

                                  But, SCA politics can rear its head up and bite you. And, it can bite
                                  hard. Japanese recreation is already at a disadvantage. There are also
                                  people who confuse the rules banning religious rituals from official
                                  activities with a general ban on religious recreation. You really
                                  really need to have your ducks in order. That is why I urge you to
                                  recreate the abstainers or some other group which you can demonstrate
                                  were not a territorial authority as far back as we have records. Just
                                  saying, "oh I'm not a territorial authority I'm just the priest with
                                  the beads" simply will not work with some prominent people of my
                                  acquaintance. So, you may well get publicly questioned someday. I have
                                  seen people get really unhappy when questioned in this manner.
                                  --

                                  Your Humble Servant
                                  Solveig Throndardottir
                                  Amateur Scholar

                                  +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                  | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS |
                                  | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
                                  | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:bnostran@... |
                                  +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                  | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
                                  | the trash by my email filters. |
                                  +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                • Solveig
                                  Noble Cousin! Greetings from Solveig! ... Again irrelevant. China was also considerably advanced with respect to Japan and a LOT closer. That doesn t prevent
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Dec 30, 2002
                                    Noble Cousin!

                                    Greetings from Solveig!

                                    >Just for clarification...are you saying "a long long time" to suggest
                                    >some kind of natural progression of forms of government? Because the
                                    >Roman emperors were contemporaneous with middle to late Yayoi, and
                                    >Kofun...

                                    Again irrelevant. China was also considerably advanced with respect to
                                    Japan and a LOT closer. That doesn't prevent Japan from having tribal
                                    government or shamanism or any number of other things. The separation
                                    in time was significant for ROME and its development. Japan also
                                    enjoys distinct periods of development.

                                    Believe it or not, I am trying to help you. You appear to be
                                    falling into "rationalization research" where you are trying to
                                    prop up your desires about how you want things to be. If you start
                                    being surprised and find that you have to change your mind about
                                    things on occasion, then you will have made the leap to true
                                    research. Maybe that is already happening to you. I do hope that it is.

                                    Maybe there was the kind of specialization in religious
                                    occupations which makes your recreation possible. Thus, far you
                                    really haven't offered anything from the period in question to
                                    demonstrate that it did. You have offered up stuff from much later.
                                    That doesn't automatically work. We have good reason to believe
                                    that the religious life of the kuge changed significantly after
                                    the introduction of Buddhism and Chinese government.
                                    --

                                    Your Humble Servant
                                    Solveig Throndardottir
                                    Amateur Scholar

                                    +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                    | Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D. | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM, CoS |
                                    | deMoivre Institute | Carolingia Statis Mentis Est |
                                    | mailto:nostrand@... | mailto:bnostran@... |
                                    +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                    | Note. Many popular "free" email services are automatically routed to |
                                    | the trash by my email filters. |
                                    +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                  • Yama Kaminari no Date Saburou Yukiie <ka
                                    ... acquaintance. So, you may well get publicly questioned someday. I have seen people get really unhappy when questioned in this manner. -- (mock Monty Python
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Dec 31, 2002
                                      >simply will not work with some prominent people of my
                                      acquaintance. So, you may well get publicly questioned someday. I have
                                      seen people get really unhappy when questioned in this manner.
                                      --



                                      (mock Monty Python Voice to follow...)
                                      "...nooooooobody expects a Spanishhhhh Inquizzzzzzzzition!!!!"
                                      ;-)


                                      Happy New Year all
                                      Date
                                    • daviem01 <ellen.m.davis@att.net>
                                      ... Ooh! Ooh! Maybe they ll put me in the Comfy Chair ! Agemashite omedetou gozaimasu, all, Aine
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Dec 31, 2002
                                        >
                                        > (mock Monty Python Voice to follow...)
                                        > "...nooooooobody expects a Spanishhhhh Inquizzzzzzzzition!!!!"
                                        > ;-)
                                        >

                                        Ooh! Ooh! Maybe they'll put me in the "Comfy Chair"! <g>

                                        Agemashite omedetou gozaimasu, all,

                                        Aine
                                      • daviem01 <ellen.m.davis@att.net>
                                        ... is. I do understand and much appreciate your help. However, although I may only have a bachelor s degree, and may not have extensive published research, I
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Jan 6, 2003
                                          >
                                          > Believe it or not, I am trying to help you. You appear to be
                                          > falling into "rationalization research" where you are trying to
                                          > prop up your desires about how you want things to be. If you start
                                          > being surprised and find that you have to change your mind about
                                          > things on occasion, then you will have made the leap to true
                                          > research. Maybe that is already happening to you. I do hope that it
                                          is.

                                          I do understand and much appreciate your help. However, although I
                                          may only have a bachelor's degree, and may not have extensive
                                          published research, I am already very well acquainted with how "true"
                                          research operates, and I'm a bit confused as to why you would suggest
                                          otherwise...

                                          I am in the middle of extensive reading on the period in question,
                                          and my knowledge is very much in flux at the moment. My method for
                                          understanding the period from an SCA perspective is to put myself in
                                          the shoes of my persona as I CURRENTLY understand that person's life
                                          to have been. Any statements I make on the board from my persona's
                                          viewpoint ("I am a diviner in the service on my lord", etc.) should
                                          be understood from that perspective. As one's understanding of the
                                          period changes and grows, so, in good faith, should one's reenactment-
                                          - and I expect to make many changes as I continue to do research.

                                          I would venture to say that that is all that anyone in the SCA can
                                          achieve, in terms of accurately re-enacting an individual life from
                                          any period in question. I just happen to be starting at a bit of a
                                          disadvantage here: I'm reenacting a period where the sources are less
                                          historical than archeological and anthropological, and there is
                                          correspondingly more uncertainty.

                                          > Maybe there was the kind of specialization in religious
                                          > occupations which makes your recreation possible. Thus, far you
                                          > really haven't offered anything from the period in question to
                                          > demonstrate that it did. You have offered up stuff from much later.
                                          > That doesn't automatically work. We have good reason to believe
                                          > that the religious life of the kuge changed significantly after
                                          > the introduction of Buddhism and Chinese government.

                                          I don't believe I'm extrapolating from later periods-- in fact, to be
                                          honest, anything after the Taika reforms and before Heian is woefully
                                          sketchy in my mind! (Muust reead mooore.) I am very wary of using
                                          later sources, precisely for the reasons you mention.

                                          In contrast, my research on the subject has primarily focused on our
                                          archeological understanding of the Jomon, Yayoi and Kofun periods.
                                          In terms of daily life, social organization, and (to a limited
                                          extent) religious beliefs and rituals, the archeological record is
                                          our best source of information on the period. In particular, there
                                          is one archeologist operating out of Kyushu University, Mizoguchi
                                          Koji, who has done quite a bit of theoretical work on Yayoi and Kofun
                                          in order to understand how social structures and worldviews changed
                                          throughout those periods. (For example, the way settlements and
                                          burial grounds were organized from early Yayoi to Kofun reflect an
                                          increasing awareness of, and competition between, different segments
                                          within a lineage or clan, and of those segments becoming specialized
                                          to different occupations.)

                                          I need to write to Dr. Mizoguchi to clarify some of his points on the
                                          matter, but he provides a lot of good suggestions about the period,
                                          supported by archeological and anthropological theory and evidence.

                                          Might I suggest, Lady Solveig, that any further discussion between
                                          the two of us be conducted off-list? I am interested in what you
                                          have to say, but I feel that we have adequately covered this topic
                                          for a public forum.

                                          -Aine
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.