Indian influence in Japan (was: Shields...)

[Please Delete]

(Breaking this out, since the original thread is about a different topic, really. Original thread is linked at the bottom):

Oct 1, 2010 11:15:08 GMT -5 dannyinjapan said:

While I never said anything about Buddhism, I did say something about Indian religious practices. If you look at a map showing the building of temples in Japan, they do not occur in time from south to north as with everything else. The suddenly appeared in central Japan and then spread both directions. That fact alone tells you that this was not a case of cultural diffusion from the coast, but a punctuated colonization. Add to that the fact that some other concepts were not found in China, but only in the place of origin and the point of destination and there is little to argue about. Specific results can be debated.

I'm interested to hear more on what you claim are not found in China, but only in India and Japan, and what are you trying to point out regarding the temples? Are you claiming that there was an Indian colony in Japan in the early ?? century? I remember you made a claim about the idea of a Vedic colony some time ago, but I can't find the thread to reexamine it at this time.

There were Indians in Japan early on. The monk that opened the eyes of the Daibutsu in Nara was, as I recall, an Indian monk who had traveled there via China. However, Japan was hardly alone here. The kingdom(s) of Gaya on the Korean penninsula claimed their royal lineage included a princess of Ayutthaya, drawing on the perfect Indian kingdom of the Ramayana to promote their own legitimacy. (Bunhwangsa, in Gyeongju, founded in 634, shows definite Indian influence. Later Korean "histories" actually pointed to sacred Indian places being in Korea, in order to, again, legitimize their position as superior to their neighbors.

So what is the contention about Indian influences in Japan that are found nowhere else in between? If you want to go later, btw, there was a Chola period temple in Guangzhou and the Chola and Song dynasties had extensive diplomatic ties, when they weren't being played against each other by Srivijaya. However, claiming that a significant Chola merchant group created a "colony" in Japan seems to be stretching the available facts. There were extensive facilities in modern Fukuoka (Hakata Bay) for foreigners, mostly Chinese merchants, and there was probably some Indian influence there as well. Possibly even Arab and SE Asian, though I don't recall seeing much of either at the time we were there.

To claim that the jingasa comes from the vedic shield, when it was not used that way in iconography (occasional lone warriors, but they are also shown wielding i-go boards, straw hats, and anything they can get their hands on), and I know of no jingasa that has an appropriate handle to imitate a vedic shield. In addition, my study of the statuary in the museums of New Delhi and Mumbai did not in any way indicate the shields used in India conformed to the jingasa: I don't recall a single instance of one in a cone shape, and they were much smaller, strapped to the arm in a typical fashion for a round-shield (the center-grip round as a weapon of war seems to be an exception, not the rule, militarily).

Regarding the idea of a centralized spread of temples being evidence for some kind of Indian colony, I would like to recommend a few books that show how culture began to spread from a point in central Japan vice the south-north creep of the earlier Kofun, Yayoi, and Jomon Periods:

*Imperial Politics and Symbolics in Ancient Japan: The Tenmu Dynasty, 650-800 -- Ooms' work on the Temmu dynasty's deliberate assumption of mainland symbolism to promote their version of a ritualized state and legitimize their hegemony.

*The Four Great Temples:Buddhist Archaeology, Architecture, and Icons of Seventh-Century Japan -- Donald F. McCallum looks at the first temples in Japan--or what remains of them--and puts them together in an historical context. He shows the links between the temples in Korea and the temples in Japan.

Even the Nihon Shoki describes hows and whys of the centralized origin of most Buddhist temples, including the influx of Korean immigrants numerous enough to form their own uji (several of them, in fact).

Regarding Indian influences on Japanese martial arts, I have to again ask again, what evidence? If it is a belief in the historical/legendary teachings of a particular martial art, then I can no more gainsay your opinion any more than a religious belief. However, just as I can't use the Bible as a source of middle eastern history without corroboration, I can't take a school's legends (even my own) as historical fact without historical evidence to back it up.

I tend to give credence to the idea of Indian techniques infiltrating the martial arts of East Asia--whether through Buddhism or other tantric practices--but you see it most widespread on the continent, vice Japan, as you would expect, given Japan's isolation. Thus I would question any story that has all of the martial arts of Japan being seriously influenced by a single vedic source in the 1100s. I could see individual traditions, but it is hard to take seriously any claims that I have so far seen of a ryuha going back that far as anything more than a strict hereditary lineage; not that it couldn't happen, but that I just don't see any evidence that techniques from that era were codified and maintained throughout Japan's history into the modern day, especially considering the drastic changes that warfare and martial arts underwent between the Mongol invasions, the Sengoku period, the Pax Tokugawa, and the even more drastic Meiji period, when many arts were lost because of the death throes of the shogunate and the strict edicts to eliminate the "samurai" caste in the Meiji reformations.

Finally, there are numerous ritual implements found in Japan, such as the vajra, which are drawn directly from Indian iconography, but which are equally (or more) present on the mainland.

So please, what am I missing? You claim that evidence is abundant, but in all of my trips to Japan, in all my training, and in my journeys across Asia, I have yet to encounter the evidence you believe is prolific; I would love to see what I am missing, or perhaps I am just misunderstanding your argument.

-Ii

PS: For those interested in the thread I'm responding to:

* Did the Japanese Use Shields?

PPS: I recall that there was a Vedic colony thread that I tried to get back to, now that I have more experience, but it seems to have dropped off the face of the Net.

[dannyinjapan]

As time passes, my memory fades, but I will do my best. The yumi is probably the best example. The assymetrical longbow, afaik, is only found in India and Japan.

I have seen singauta that are identical to jingasa. (given that both have some variation.) The singauta handle is formed by two loops of rope. It may very well be that Indian soldiers wore it as a hat when not in use.

(See Egerton)

The use of the ankus and chakram are also fairly unique to both areas. Given the absence of elephants in Japan, that tells me alot.

I wish I could give you a citation, but I don't have it now. I looked in some book that showed the spread of buddhism into Japan over time. The earliest concentration of temples was in Central Japan (Nara area) which would be like saying that the earliest large towns in America were in Kansas.

Is it so hard to believe that a group of people headed east and didn't stop until they hit Nara-ken?

[Please Delete]

Okay, I'll have to look this stuff up.

I've never seen asymmetrical bows like yumi in India. Do you have a Hindi name for them.

Singauta. I'll look this up, but can you find examples on the Internet? A picture of what you are talking about?

The angkus and the chakram both appear elsewhere in Asia, I'll have to find them, though. I'm unaware of documented evidence of either being used as a weapon in Japan prior to the Edo period. The angkus is similar to the kusarigama, but the oldest form of kusarigama and kusarigamajutsu that I'm aware of is quite different. You wouldn't have to go to India to find it, either. Southern China and the rest of Southeast Asia had elephants aplenty, and the elephant hook is a common tool, even today. In addition, these are both common items of Hindu statuary, so it would not be surprising to see the Japanese make local copies of them, whether to try as weapons or for ritual purposes.

The earliest Buddhist temples show up in Nara while *Nara is the capital of Japan*. Hence the "Asuka" and "Nara" periods. The earliest temple is attributed to the Soga, while the capital was in the Asuka area (just south of Nara). The Soga are well documented for their use of Buddhism as a political tool, since rulership in Japan at the time relied heavily on the ruler's (usually hereditary) position as a spiritual intermediary. Thus the families in charge of the shrines were the families at the top of the political ladder. The Soga's patronization of a foreign religion from the Korean penninsula threatened the status quo, and was a Big Deal. The next four temples built in Japan all show very clear links to Korea--as do the giant kofun that dot the landscape. This is clearly a self-imposed adoption of foreign trappings, and it was coming to the capital of Japan at the time. It isn't like starting in Kansas--it is like starting in Washington, DC.

Yes, it is difficult, though not impossible, to understand a group of people large enough to form a colony going from India and stopping in Nara in the 4th, 5th, or 6th centuries.

First, why didn't they stop elsewhere? There were plenty of more suitable spots before they got to Japan. There was all of Southeast Asia, which still had huge areas of fertile land similar to what the Indians would have been familiar with. Then there is "civilized" China where they could have enjoyed the benefits of Chinese culture (and probably found people that could speak their language). Instead, they go far north and stop in a relative backwater of a country. They've come all this way, but why don't they just keep going?

Next, where is the evidence from that period? Statuary that we find is clearly of Korean or Japanese copies of Korean forms. Why aren't the Indians creating Indian style statuary instead? Same thing with pottery sherds, rooftiles, and temples. Why do these all mimic Korean styles?

Unless we can put some of this in an historical or archaeological context, I just can't see any evidence for it.

-Ii

[dannyinjapan]

(If DC were in Kansas)

I am busily looking through my books, but they are dusty now. The best book, IMO, is The Illustrated Handbook of Indian Arms by Wilbrahim Egerton.
(see drawings of singauta (dhal)) He also descibes the native bows of India as being somewhat asymmetrical, composite bamboo and sinew longbows, 6 feet or longer.
P72 - drawing of bow
Go east, go west, and all you will find are compact recurve bows.


In Japan, the ankus and chakram (quoit) are called the "kyoketsu-shoge." The use of that weapon is pretty much limited to schools originating in the Nara area. (not related to the kama as it is not a cutting weapon)

Do you not see any evidence of a change in architectural styles during the 12th century in the Nara area? That is a pretty specific question, so I don't expect a quick or easy answer. But, it would be interesting to hear.

I must have at least peaked your interest, yes?

[Please Delete]

Remember, DC was once a backwater swamp

The growth in Nara is not that surprising, and it had many strategic advantages. The mountains made it defensible. It had rich plains for growing plenty of rice. It had water access to Lake Biwa and to the Seto Inland Sea, via the rivers.

You had similar polities in Japan. Take a look at the old Kibi area (current Bizen, Bitchu, Bingo), for one. The Asuka area just happened to be the one that ended up taking control, and therefore had the resources to patronize early Buddhism.

I don't have Egerton, and am unlikely to get it out here, but if you have the illustrations, I'd love to see them.

I've heard the theory that the kyoketsu shoge comes from an elephant goad. It has a definite foreign-sounding name, to me, and I'd be interested to know if that has anything to do with the ankus, as there are definite similarities. I don't see how it isn't a cutting weapon, though, as all the versions I've seen have dagger-like projections. In fact, the ones I've seen all appear more like the head of a kamayari attached to a chain.

As for the chakram at the end--I just can't see it being a chakram. Are there other chakram on chains? *If* it is an ankus/elephant goad, then it is more likely it is a ring to go around the elephant's leg--though that hypothesis seems odd, since I don't see how it would hold up if the elephant decided to go somewhere, and it would be just as easy to carry a sturdy length of chain or rope, separately.

That said, it also resembles:
1) A type of harpoon found in the northern Pacific
2) Boat hooks, used to grapple boats and bring them together or into shore.

I tend to go with the ankus, but not because of an Indian teaching how to use a tool that was occasionally used as a last-ditch weapon. Rather, it strikes me as something that would have been known from Buddhist imagery, like the vajra. Given the links between ninjutsu and mikkyo, I could see how the two could be associated.

Still, can you show evidence of it before the Edo period, as a weapon?

Oh, and I'm curious. You mention "schools"--plural. What schools, besides those taught by Hatsumi?

Even if you did show the weapon was of pre-Edo origin, doesn't really convince me that there was an Indian *colony* in Japan.

The asymmetric bow (and I heard you say "slightly" asymmetric) is something, but even that could be parallel development--I'd have to see the bows. I do know that the asymmetric bow in Japan goes back to at least the 3rd century, as attested to in Chinese sources, and probably before that. As for Japan and India being the only places--just looking online shows that not to be the case. There appears to be one used by the Huns, and I'd be willing to bet you'd find others throughout Eurasia if you look--perhaps not as popular as the symmetric bow, which was also used in both India and Japan (though the latter tended to favor the Yumi, nonetheless). There were also varying amounts of recurve or composite bows, so those features aren't unique. In fact, yumi appear to have been recurved from the beginning.

Here's some more interesting information on asymmetric bows and where they have been found: Bows and Arrows from Miran

Regarding architecture--I don't know what you want me to look for. The architectural changes in Japan are gradual. Continental influences are seen repeatedly, followed, often, by local innovation and adaptation. We flow from the Nara period architecture into the Shinden-zukuri style of the Heian period, which flows into the Shoin-zukuri style of the buke.

The 12th century does see lots of changes, but those are largely because the buke took over. Thus, things that had previously been relegated to the provincial hinterlands became part of high society (e.g. the popularity of hitatare-kamishimo style garments). So I would expect to see change in architecture and other things in the late 12th and early 13th centuries.

I'm intrigued less by the possibility of this Indian colony and more by your belief in it, when it seems that Occam's razor is against it. I'm not saying it couldn't have happened, but I cannot rely on it any more than I can rely on the idea that Japan was founded by the 13th tribe of Israel. There are too many other, easier ways to explain Japanese history, and not enough artifacts to naysay the current understanding.

-Ii

[Yagyu Jubei Takemori]

In doing some reaserch into Mongols I came across these: www.viahistoria.com/SilverHorde/research/MongolShield.html

This is as close as I can figure to what yall are talking about for sheilds. They were first made from wicker and then metal in later times. I am not sure where they picked the practice up, but I do know that they didnt stray far into India in their conquest (too hot and humid, they all started to get dysentary and other nasty stuff).

It also mentions chinese using the sheild and Mongols did invade Japan so it is also likely that they came from there as well, but using it as a hat.... that seems to be stretching it (I am however not educated in japanese history beyond a small amount of reading).

[Please Delete]

The Japanese had straw hats, connical or otherwise, prior to the jingasa. The "kasa" was a hat to keep off the rain, later also used to refer to an umbrella. "Jingasa" refers to the hat worn in a camp, which you would want to make out of something more sturdy than just rice straw. Hence my contention that the jingasa being an Indian shield that the Japanese are wearing on their heads is a needlessly convoluted provenance.

-Ii

[dannyinjapan]

The kyoketsu shoge does not employ a chain. Those chained versions are cheap tourist decorations. They were originally connected with a rope of braided hair. (or silk)

Hatsumi Sensei teaches 9 schools - that's more than enough for me.

I have seen jingasa made from lacquered wood, paper, straw, boiled leather and iron plate. I have also seen kabuto made of similar materials. If wood isn't strong enough for a shield...

[Yamanouchi Eidou]

houses are also made of wood yet were very rarely employed as shields.

You still present very little credible historical evidence to support your claims.

[solveig]

Noble Cousins!

Greetings from Solveig!

Oct 4, 2010 19:16:58 GMT -5 Please Delete said:

Hence my contention that the jingasa being an Indian shield that the Japanese are wearing on their heads is a needlessly convoluted provenance.

Further, there is no particular reason to believe that they weren't independently invented in Japan. The Japanese are far more inventive than Americans are inclined to give credit.

[Please Delete]

Regarding the jingasa being sturdy: every jingasa I've seen has been leather, lacquered, or metal. Wood would also work to be more sturdy than rice-straw kasa, which is what I was comparing it to; I was just commenting on why jingasa are not just the regular straw kasa that you see elsewhere.

Wood is strong enough for a shield (the Japanese used wooden shields since at least the kofun period), but it has nothing to do with whether or not the hat was meant to be used as one in the hands; see Yamauchi-dono's example regarding architecture.

Regarding the rope of braided hair, or silk, still strikes me as odd. Do you have evidence of the same in Indian tradition? I'm still not seeing an ankus attached to a weight (round, like a chakram, or not).

The problem with using Hatsumi-sensei's schools is that it is single-source material, and usually of "hidden" provenance. He teaches nine schools, but what corroboration do we have on the existence of those schools prior to the modern headmaster(s)? How far back can we trace the techniques and even existence of the "school"? How reliable is it that they have remained unchanged for X centuries, when every other school I know of (Tendo Ryu, Mugai Ryu, Shindo Muso Ryu, Muso Shinden Ryu, Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu, Shinkage Ryu, etc.) have all seen drastic changes since just the start of the Edo period (or after, in cases of arts founded in the Edo period)? This is the problem with trying to document martial arts. Most things do not remain, and even the scrolls are usually recopied, changed, updated, consolidated, etc. as they go from master to student.

Thus, we look for different schools. What other schools are there for kyoketsu-shoge? Was everyone so loyal that they really never spread the teachings outside of those nine schools, when most other schools encouraged their students to go out and form new schools of their own? Where are the artifacts that historians have found that date the implements to the appropriate period? What do we have about those schools pre-Edo?


-Ii

[Yamanouchi Eidou]

Oct 3, 2010 8:59:57 GMT -5 dannyinjapan said:

The earliest concentration of temples was in Central Japan (Nara area) which would be like saying that the earliest large towns in America were in Kansas.

Actually, based on the size of Japan, this is more like saying that the first large towns in California were near Sacramento, which we may see is the case, historically speaking.

Oct 3, 2010 8:59:57 GMT -5 dannyinjapan said:

Is it so hard to believe that a group of people headed east and didn't stop until they hit Nara-ken?

When is this expedition supposed to have happened?

[Yamanouchi Eidou]

Oct 3, 2010 8:59:57 GMT -5 dannyinjapan said:

Is it so hard to believe that a group of people headed east and didn't stop until they hit Nara-ken?

Also, yes.

[hiro]

Well at some point some group headed east and didn't stop until they hit Central America!
(South America is thought to be populated by way of boat)

[dannyinjapan]

We used to think Columbus discovered America, then we thought only the Vikings preceded him, now we know the Templars made a visit as well, decades before Columbus.