I was interested in the political hegemony that was present in the Yayoi and Yamato periods, particularly how politically united the kingdoms were. One of the areas that scholars point to in the question of political unity in Yayoi period Japan is the key shaped burial mounds that are found throughout the country. These burial mounds indicate some level of rulers, since it would take an enormous amount of labor to build these mounds, meaning that the person whose tomb it is must have enjoyed a high status. The presence of similar mounds across the country begs the question of how centralized the early Yayoi civilization was. However although similar, the mounds are not uniform, and some areas do not begin to build them for some time after the practice had begun elsewhere. Therefore, scholars have come to the general consensus that the early Yayoi was not a centralized state, but that a sense of commonality did exist between the nobles in the various chiefdoms across the country. This state of affairs could be likened to medieval European nobles recognizing their common culture while still being politically divided.
In her paper, “The Emergence of Political Rulership and the State in Early Japan,” Gina Barnes describes the Yayoi as being split into the early period, where grave goods uncover ritualistic materials, and the middle period, when the focus was on military hardware. Research Nakagawa et. al. indicates that the middle Yayoi saw a major increase in violence, particularly in regions of Japan where less centralized control existed. Nakagawa et. al. show that the areas with the most evidence of violence, such as the Mikuni Hills, were also the areas with the least powerful rulers. They come to this conclusion through the lack of major tombs in these areas, suggesting a lack powerful rulers. All of this points to a fragmented time in the Middle Yayoi, where small time chieftains and petty kings faced off against each other, with the more powerful ones able to exert a pacifying influence on their neighbors, while the smaller ones engaged in constant cycles of violence.
The divisions of the Yayoi period began to be replaced in the fourth century, as the new Yamato Kingdom began to take shape. Also at this time, relations with the mainland come into focus, particularly in Korea. During the mid fourth century, the Yamato Kingdom increasingly involved itself in the Korean Peninsula, fighting alongside its allies, the Paekche Kingdom. It is thought that much of the reason for Yamato interest in Korea was access to the iron deposits there. As far as hegemony in Japan goes, the sheer fact that Yamato-Paekche relations were such a focus and that Yamato armies are attested as participating in Korean wars indicates a relatively high level of control for the fourth century Yamato kings; beyond simply commanding lip service fealty from various chieftains, the Yamato kings were able to become players in international politics, even able to marshal and send armies on overseas campaigns.
The other result of turbulence in Korea was the massive immigration to Japan of Koreans fleeing the conflict there. This undoubtedly brought major influences to Yamato Japan, and to Yamato rule in particular. The Nihon Shoki states that a full third of Yamato aristocratic families in the fifth century were of non-Japanese origin, and it is easy to infer that many of these were Koreans who had come to Japan as a result of the warfare in their native land. It is also easy to infer that they brought new ideas about what it meant to be a ruler with them. Namely, it seems that the new immigrants may have had a centralizing effect on the Yamato kingdom, as the fifth century saw more centralization on the Japanese Islands.
As the Yamato kingdom centralized, a succession of clans jostled for rulership. Clans like the Otomo, Mononobe, and Soga replaced each other in a series of conflicts for the throne. At the same time, the Yamato kingdom continued to centralize and grow in power. One of the primary indicators of this is the large tombs that were constructed around modern Osaka. Like the monumental mounds of Yayoi, these tombs projected Yamato power on a level beyond that of the Yayoi. Moreover, the Yamato began to feel strong enough to reach out to the nearby power, China, for validation. In class, we learned about the expedition sent by Queen Himiko, but she was not the only Yamato ruler to reach out to the Chinese. The result of these expeditions was an increase in the prestige of the Yamato king, although it is important to point out that the Yamato kingdom was not the size of modern day Japan, and that much of the archipelago was controlled by chieftains in varying levels of cooperation with the Yamato.
In conclusion, the early Yayoi saw a fragmented series of small chiefdoms, which although connected culturally, were not politically one unit. The Yamato kingdom did introduce a single state, but it was several centuries before that state could be said to be truly centralized. Finally, it must be remembered that even at the height of Yamato power, their kingdom did not cover all of modern Japan.
Barnes, Gina L. “The Emergence of Political Rulership and the State in Early Japan.” In Japan Emerging: Premodern History to 1850, edited by Karl F. Friday. New York, NY: Routledge, 2018. https://muhlenberg.on.worldcat.org/oclc/787849954.
Nakagawa, Tomomi, Kohei Tamura, Yuji Yamaguchi, Naoko Matsumoto, Takehiko Matsugi, and Hisashi Nakao. “Population pressure and prehistoric violence in the Yayoi period of Japan.” Journal of Archaeological Science 132 (2021): 105420.
Leave a Reply