Alsehemaliger Student der Japanischen Geschichte und auch heute noch teilweise ander japanischen Archäologie noch lebhaft interessiert, habe ich mir heute denWikipedia-Artikel zur „Yayoi-Zeit“ angetan. Ich muss gestehen, es war das ersteMal, dass ich ihn gelesen habe. Ich bin wahrlich kein Yayoi-Spezialist, aberhoffe inständig, dass dieser Artikel von keinem Japanologiestudenten verfasstwurde. In wenigen Absätzen solch einen geballten Unsinn zu schreiben, bringtkaum einer zustande. Ich frage mich wirklich ernsthaft, welches Grundwissenhier überhaupt vorhanden war? Wie kommt man denn dazu, einen Artikel zuverfassen, wenn man überhaupt keine Ahnung hat? Der Artikel zeigt zumindest,dass nicht einmal das grundsätzlichste Verständnis der Gliederung japanischerPerioden der Vorgeschichte vorhanden war.
Der Artikelist erst einmal überhaupt nicht mit Quellenangaben belegt. Dies zeigt schon,dass überhaupt keine Recherche stattgefunden hat. Als Literatur wird lediglichInoue Kiyoshi angegeben, mit seinem Überblickswerk „Geschichte Japans“. Inoueist ein anerkannter Historiker, aber kein Archäologe. Die deutsche Übersetzungerschien zudem Jahrzehnte nach der japanischen Originalausgabe und bringt, zwarein wenig überarbeitet, hauptsächlich einen Forschungsstand der 1960erJahre. Ich gebe zu, deutsche Literaturzur Yayoi-Zeit ist spärlich. Das Beste in deutscher Sprache, und gleichzeitig,aktuellste zur Yayoi-Zeit ist der zweibändige Katalogband zur Ausstellung„Archäologie Japans“ von 2004. In englischer Sprache gibt es schon mehr, aberes sieht auch dort mager aus. Pearson et. Al. mit ihrem Werk „Windows on theJapanese Past“ sind unschlagbar, auch wenn dieses Buch von 1986 auch schon langsamergraut ist. Charles Keally, wohl einer der bedeutendsten nicht-japanischenArchäologen in Japan, hat auf seiner Webseite die Yayoi-Kultur fachgerecht inenglischer Sprache aufbereitet. Da es sich hier um Wikipedia handelt, fordereich mal besser nicht, dass jemand, der einen japanbezogenen Artikel schreibt,vielleicht sogar mal in die japanische Literatur schaut. Hideji Harunaris YayoiJidai no hajimari wäre da zu nennen. Und auch Yayoi Jidai no Kokogaku vonIshino Hironobu et. Al. aus dem Jahre 1998 ist okay. Allem Anschein sind aberviele Wikipedia-Autoren der Meinung, dass im deutschen Wikipedia auch nurdeutsche Fachliteratur angegeben werden sollte.
First, the article does not cite any sources. Thisshows there does not exist any research on this topic. As reference only InoueKiyoshi is given, with his overview “Geschichte Japans” (History of Japan).Inoue is a well versed historian, but not an archaeologist. The German translationwas published decades after the Japanese original and gives, with someoverworked passages, most an overview of the state of the art of the 60ies. Imust confess the German literature on this topic is sparse. The best is thecatalogue of an exhibition of 2004. It is in German and up to date. In Englishwe can read Pearson et. Al.’s “Windows of the Japanese Past”, though from 1986and little “grey” it is still usable. Charles Keally is one of the most popularnon-Japanese archaeologists in Japan and offers a lot of articles on everytopic, including the Yayoi, on his web page. Since we are talking aboutWikipedia, I think it is better not to demand that the authors could speakJapanese by dealing with Japanese matters. Hideji Harunari’s Yayoi Jidai no Hajimariis one example and an introduction for students. And also Yayoi Jidai noKokogaku of Ishino Hironobu (he actually is specialist of the Kofun period) publishedin 1998 is usable. However, I cannot understand why many authors of the GermanWikipedia think only to give German literature as reference.
But now let’s turn to the contents of this article.Besides linguistic and stylistic shortcomings like “Besides the ceramics alsowet-paddy rice was cultivated…” the text is not good in respect of thecontents. Actually, not one sentence can be claimed to be correct. Are thereproofs for such thesis like horses and oxen were introduced in Yayoi culture?Horses were known in the archipelago long ago. “Special ceramics were used aspots” – in regard of cooking. What made these ceramics special? How did theylook like? Maybe their function as cooking pots? Further, the whole descriptionis vague. At least there is given a date: 3rd century BC to 3rdcentury AD. The author does not mention the new discussion of a beginning ofYayoi around 1000 BC, which, I admit, is not accepted by all archaeologists.Since it is an archaeological culture the reader expects to read somethingarchaeological. How did this culture look like? What are the main features,what are the main types? And generally, did there exist some sites? In thewhole article is not even mentioned one site name. At least, Yoshinogari shouldbe mentioned and is easy to google. I am sure you cannot find the name inInoue’s book since it was discovered thirty years later. After this cursorydescription of nonsense facts the texts ends dealing with the Yayoi after halfof the article.Now follows an obscure part with description ofChinese sources. The old Chinese give us a glimpse on the society of thisperiod by a small description in one of the Chinese annals, especially in theWei Zhi and Hou Han Shu. But also, the author deals here on the elementarylevel. Information on Yayoi is not found. Strangely we find then a descriptionof the Japanese society around 500 AD. This description fits into the Kofunperiod, according to accounts of Japanese annals. But why it is given here?Does the author have the opinion, the structure of the Kofun period is the samelike the foregoing Yayoi? Why he does not cite Andre Wedemeyer’s “JapanischeFrühgeschichte”, at least this book is in German though published in 1930. AndI also do not really remember any passages in the Chinese sources, where it isdealt with this uji-kabane-system.Surprisingly, the author mentions Yamatai, but withoutshowing the problems of this specific historic question. Yamatai is not thesame as Yamato. If and where Yamatai did exist is a discussion held for nearly500 years. And in the German speaking area the dissertation of Barbara Seyockgave an important hint for its localization. Besides Yamatai he also mentionsthe ruler, the Queen Himiko. The discussion page reveals that the author firstcalled here “shaman empress”. But someone was merciful and changed thissentence, without making it better. No! Himiko did not invade and conquerKorea. This is said about the similarly mythical empress Jingu Kogo. And sinceladies were scarce on the (at this time yet existing) throne, Japanese and somewestern historians concluded, Himiko and Jingu Kogo be the same. In fact, therehave been Korean invasions. But this was in the Kofun period. And with the mainentry, the Yayoi period, this does not have anything in common. But it isright, also in the Yayoi period existed contacts to Korea, mainly imports ofiron ore and other goods. But why these should be so “expensive”? Probablybecause the speculators of the iron ore stock market in Yoshinogari can beclaimed of that. In this paragraph the data to Yayoi and Kofun period are mixedtogether.
The rest, two paragraphs, deals with the Japaneseannals of the 8th century. Due to them Jimmu Tenno took over the throne overJapan in 660 B.C. (the author first wrote 666 BC). That this is challenged isnot correct, this date is completely ahistoric. An empire with an emperorexisted in Japan not before the 6th century. And unification underthe dominion of Yamato cannot be seen before the Kofun period and here also ina later phase, dating approximately into the 4th and 5thcentury. The last paragraph deals with the shrine of Ise devoted to thesun-goddess Amaterasu. But if this shrine really dates so far back as the Yayoiperiod is not proven. And why should some excavations proof the architecture ofthis period is the same like that of Ise? Maybe the author thinks here of thedepictions on dotaku, big bronze bells, which we must say, really date to theYayoi and should have been mentioned in every text on Yayoi.
Finally it should besaid: Democratization in writing lexical entries is not the best invention ofthe 20th century. Since there is no existing German book on the Yayoiperiod, this Wikipedia entry is really important. Automatically everybody willrely on this. But this German entry should be deleted completely. For good,Wikipedia already learned about the low quality of this entry and made awarning, but only due to the lack of citing. It is really amazing, that anarticle with such a high amount of un-knowingness can exist for such a longtime in the internet. Even the people of the quality offensive could not seethis. And quite more terrifying is the fact that most students only rely onWikipedia as main source (but not only them!). This article is plain wrong andtherefore dangerous and needless.
Reference
Anonym, “Yayoi-Zeit”. Wikipedia: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yayoi-Zeit,abgerufen am 09.12.2011.
André Wedemeyer, Japanische Frühgeschichte. Untersuchungenzur Chronologie und Territorialverfassung von Altjapan bis zum 5. Jahrh. n.Chr. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Natur- und VölkerkundeOstasiens : Supplementband ; 11 (Tokyo 1930) Dt. Ges. für Natur- undVölkerkunde Ostasiens.
Charles Keally, "Yayoi". http://www.t-net.ne.jp/~keally/yayoi.html, abgerufen am 09.12.2011.Richard Pearson et. Al.,Windows on the Japanese Past (Ann Arbor 1986).Alfried Wieczorek, Werner Steinhaus, Forschungsinstitut fürKulturgüter, Nara (Hrsg.) Zeit der Morgenröte - Japans Archäologie und Geschichtebis zu den ersten Kaisern. Katalogband und Handbuch. Publikationen derReiss-Engelhorn-Museen Band 10/11. Barbara Seyock, Auf den Spuren der Ostbarbaren. ZurArchäologie protohistorischer Kulturen in Südkorea und Westjapan. BUNKA -Tübinger interkulturelle und linguistische Japanstudien 8. (Münster-Hamburg-Berlin-Wien-London2004).Harunari Hideji, 春成秀爾 Yayoi Jidai no Hajimari. 弥生時代の始まりUP Koukogaku Senshou 11 UP 考古学UP 考古学選書 11(Toukyou ) Toukyou daigaku shuppankai 東京大学出版会Ishino Hironobu et. Al./Hrsg), 石野博信YayoiJidai no Koukogaku. Shinpojiumu 3 弥生時代の考古学 : シンポジウム 3 (Toukyou1998) Gakuseisha.学生社Inoue Kiyoshi, Geschichte Japans (Frankfurt a. M. 1993).