This book explores the term 'Mikuni' spreading in Japan at the end of the 18th century, centering on Kokugaku Motoori Norinaga. 'Mikuni' has developed beyond the honorific title or euphemism of the name of the country, representing the country with Te ...
This book explores the term 'Mikuni' spreading in Japan at the end of the 18th century, centering on Kokugaku Motoori Norinaga. 'Mikuni' has developed beyond the honorific title or euphemism of the name of the country, representing the country with Tenno as the apex, and the concept of claiming dominance of the country. And it was transformed into an exclusive anti‐alienism of neighboring countries under the rapidly changing international situation of the early and mid 19th century. At the same period, the concept of 'Empire' appeared in the process of translating Dutch 'keijzerrijk' into Chinese characters among modern Japanese West scientists. This book mainly focuses on the fact that in the 19th century Japan, Kokugaku and West science symbiosed with each other, and the concepts representing the marks of 'Mikuni' and 'Empire' coexisted without contradiction under Jonhwangyangyi's banner. The 'Mikuni' consciousness, which was abandoned in Kokugaku at the intersection of 'Empire' theory, appeared as a variant of various Confusion Hwayi ideas at the end of Shogunate. Then, when constructing the modern nation of Japan, the term Mikuni was rediscovered as representing the new Japanese state of Tenno, even though most Kokugaku were alienated from the political scene. This long‐term use of 'Mikuni' is one of the decisive factors that fixed Norinaga's image as a representative of Tenno disciples. Thought discourse surrounding 'Mikuni' was often refuted by Empire Japan as a dominant ideology of the Modern Emperor System, and it was a reaction to postwar Japanese scholarship. Rather than merely bringing the character of early modern Kokugaku to nationalism or simply connecting it to the spiritual foundation of the Mikuni history view, this book concentrates on engaging in searching for what discussion Mikuni was that Norinaga consciously stresses. Furthermore, considering the modern development of 'Mikuni', it is thought that it is possible to set up a new consciousness that does not stay in the dimension of the old simple Norinaga criticism. Despite numerous studies on Norinaga, previous research has yet to provide a clear answer to the meaning of Kojiki‐den. When "Kojiki‐den" is mentioned, it is usually another mentioning of Norinaga's thought with only Mikuni remarks in famous Volume 1 of Naobi‐no‐Mitama. It is true that Naobi‐no‐Mitama is easy to discuss because it is a generalization of Norinaga’s ideas and methodology. However, the policy of the writings revealed in the generalization does not necessarily correspond to the notes in the actual text. It is possible to read deeply when analyzing the whole text by reflecting the difference of personality. Commentary work of Kojiki is accomplished based on text interpretation. In that sense, it was a certain thing beyond the level of individual notes. Therefore, the meaning of the notes work of Kojiki‐den needs to be identified in the context of the whole work, not just individual ancient words. The main feature of this study is that it critically accepts both the Norinaga study or the Kojiki and Kojiki‐den studies, which have been carried out separately in the two fields of Japanese history studies and Japanese literature. In addition to avoiding the ideological discourse research that has been focused on the study of ideological history, this book is also in a different position that Kojiki‐den has been regarded as a reference for deciphering Kojiki in literary studies. In other words, here this book focuses on Kojiki‐den as a mythical text separated from Kojiki and focuses on understanding the structure as a complete text created by the whole context of notes.