【简译】古代日本的骑马者理论

The 'horse-rider theory' is a controversial proposal that Japan was conquered around the 4th or 5th century CE by a culture from northern Asia to whom the horse was especially important. Although archaeological evidence and genetics point to a close relationship between Japan and East Asia, especially Korea, during that period, the idea that a full military takeover ever occurred is deemed unlikely by most historians. The exact relations between the young states of the region remain unclear, and the issue is further clouded by nationalist agendas and a persistent projection of modern concepts of statehood and nationality on geographical areas which at that time would not have existed.

          “骑马者理论”是一个有争议的理念，即日本在公元4或5世纪左右被一种来自亚洲北部的民族所征服，马对他们来说特别重要。尽管考古证据和遗传学表明，在那个时期，日本和东亚，特别是朝鲜之间有着密切的关系，但大多数历史学家认为，曾经在日本发生过全面军事接管的想法是不可能的。该地区早期国家之间的确切关系仍然不清楚，而民族主义议程和对现代国家和民族概念的持续投射在当时不存在的地理区域上，使这个问题更加模糊。

骑马者理论

The 'horse-rider theory' (kiba minzoku setsu) was proposed by the historian Egami Namio in 1948 CE to explain the cultural and political development of Japan in the 4th and 5th century CE. Namio suggested that 'horse-riders', or more accurately, members of a culture originally from North Asia and then present in mainland Asia and the Korean peninsula for whom the horse was especially important, had travelled to Japan and spread their ideas and culture. The resulting conquest of the indigenous tribes in Japan led to a more unified country and what would become known as the Yamato state. Namio pointed to the archaeological evidence of large numbers of horse trappings discovered within Japanese tombs of the later Kofun Period (c. 250-538 CE) and their absence in the earlier part of the period as support for his theory.

          “骑马者理论”（kiba minzoku setsu）是由历史学家江上波夫（Egami Namio）在1948年提出的，用来解释公元4、5世纪日本的文化和政治发展。江上波夫认为，“骑马者”，或者更准确地说，最初来自北亚、后来出现在亚洲大陆和朝鲜半岛的一种民族，对他们来说马特别重要。他们来到日本并传播他们的思想与文化，由此产生的对日本本土部落的征服导致了一个更加统一的国家和后来被称为大和国的地区。江上波夫指出，考古学证据表明，在古坟时代后期（约公元250-538年）的日本墓葬中发现了大量的马具，而在该时期的早期则没有这些马具，他以这条论据来支持其理论。

东亚的文化联系

A significant Korean influence on Japanese culture is attested by both archaeological and genetic evidence, which points to a migration of both people and ideas in the period in question. The Japanese Imperial family did mix with a Korean bloodline prior to the 7th century CE and the presence of an influential clan with Korean heritage, the Soga, is noted in the historical record. In addition, from the 4th century CE, friendly relations were established with the Korean state of Baekje (Paekche), which was firmly established by the late 3rd century CE and lasted until the conquest by its neighbour the Silla Kingdom in the mid-7th century CE. Baekje culture was exported abroad, especially via teachers, scholars, and artists travelling to Japan, and with them went Chinese culture such as classic Confucian texts but also elements of Korean-wide culture, for example, the court titles which closely resembled the bone rank system of the Silla kingdom or the wooden buildings constructed there by Korean architects and the large burial mounds of the period which are similar to those in Korea.

          考古学和遗传学证据都证明了韩国对日本文化的重大影响，这表明在这一时期存在着人员和思想的迁移。在公元7世纪之前，日本皇室确实与韩国血统混杂在一起，历史记录中提到了一个有影响力的韩国血统的氏族——曾我族的存在。此外，从公元4世纪开始，日本与韩国的百济国（Paekche）建立了友好关系，百济国在公元3世纪末成立，一直持续到公元7世纪中期，被其邻国新罗王国征服。百济文化被输出到国外，特别是通过教师、学者和艺术家前往日本，并与他们一起带来了中国文化，如经典的儒家典籍，但也带来了韩国范围内的文化元素，例如，与新罗王国的贵族等级制度非常相似的宫廷头衔和韩国建筑师建造木制建筑的技术，以及当时与韩国类似的大型墓冢。

The Japanese state, then known as Wa, also sent a 30,000-man army to aid the deposed Baekje rulers, but this was wiped out by a joint Silla-Tang naval force on the Paekchon (modern Kum) River c. 660 CE. In addition to these activities, the 4th and 5th century CE saw diplomatic missions and trading between Japan and China, further highlighting that the presence of continental cultural practices and goods in Japan does not necessarily mean they came via conquering invaders.

           当时被称为“倭”的日本国还派出了一支3万人的军队来援助被废黜的百济统治者，但这支军队在公元660年左右被新罗和唐朝在白川（今锦江）的一支联合海军部队消灭。除了这些活动之外，在公元4世纪和5世纪，日本和中国之间还有外交使团和贸易往来，这进一步强调了大陆文化习俗和货物在日本的存在并不一定意味着它们是通过征服者而来。

军事解释中的难题

That a Korean force actually invaded and conquered Japan so that it became no more than a vassal state is quite a different matter, then, from a cultural interaction between neighbouring states. It seems unlikely a conquest did actually occur, and some sources, including the Japanese c. 720 CE Nihon Shoki (Chronicle of Japan), controversially suggest the reverse and that Japan had established a colony in southern Korea in part of the Gaya (Kaya) confederation. This is now largely considered a tall tale by the Yamato court in order to increase its prestige as the reality is it lacked both the political and military where-with-all to carry out such a conquest.

          一支来自韩国军队实际入侵并征服了日本，使其成为一个附庸国，这与邻国之间的文化互动是完全不同的，似乎不太可能真的发生征服。一些资料，包括日本的《日本书纪》（约公元720年），有争议地认为情况正好相反，日本在韩国南部建立了一个殖民地，作为伽倻（Kaya）联盟的一部分。这在很大程度上被认为是大和朝廷为了提高其威望而编造的谎言，因为现实是它缺乏进行这种征服的政治和军事手段。

There was certainly an influx of Korean manufactured goods, weapons, and raw materials such as iron from Gaya but there is a notable absence of any new and distinct culture which one might expect to see following a military conquest. The historian M. J. Seth offers this plausible alternative explanation to a military invasion:

          More likely, the peoples on both sides of the Korean Straits were related and interacted with each other. Evidence suggests that between 300 BCE and 300 CE large numbers of people migrated from the Korean peninsula to the Japanese archipelago, where they introduced rice culture, bronze and iron working, and other technologies. Thus rather than the existence of Korean and Japanese peoples there was a continuum of peoples and cultures. The Wa of western Japan, for example, may have lived on both sides of the Korean Straits, and they appeared to have close links with Kaya. It is even possible that the Wa and Kaya were the same ethnic group. The fact that Japanese and Korean political evolution followed similar patterns is too striking to be coincidental. (31-32)

          当然，有大量的韩国制成品、武器和原材料（如铁）从伽耶涌入，但明显缺乏任何新的和独特的文化，而这正是人们期望在军事征服后看到的。历史学家M.J.Seth对军事入侵提供了这种合理的替代解释：

          更有可能的是，朝鲜海峡两岸的人民是有关系的，并相互交流。证据表明，在公元前300年和公元前300年之间，大量的人从朝鲜半岛迁移到日本群岛，在那里他们引进了稻米文化、青铜和铁器加工以及其他技术。因此，与其说存在着朝鲜族和日本族，不如说存在着民族和文化的连续性。例如，日本西部的倭族可能生活在朝鲜海峡的两岸，他们似乎与伽耶有着密切的联系。甚至有可能，倭族和伽耶人是同一个民族。日本和韩国的政治演变遵循类似的模式，这一事实太引人注目了，不可能是巧合。(31-32)

Japanese historians have traditionally sought to counter the 'horse-rider theory', and it has never been widely accepted in that country. Indeed, when Japan invaded Korea at the end of the 19th century CE, the government claimed that it was merely retaking possession of its former colony mentioned in the Nihon Shoki. More serious arguments against Namio's theory have since developed and these include problems with and manipulation of the chronology to match an invasion with the dating of tombs and relevant artefacts, an incomplete consideration of all the archaeological evidence, the false assumption that tombs show a clear and distinct break between the period with or without horse paraphernalia and other continental goods in them, and an assumption that an agricultural society and/or ruling elite would not adopt the cultural practices and luxury goods of foreign peoples without military conquest.

          日本历史学家历来试图反驳“骑马者理论”，而这一理论在该国从未被广泛接受。事实上，当日本在公元19世纪末入侵朝鲜时，政府声称它只是在重新占有《日本书纪》中提到的其前殖民地。此后，反对江上波夫理论的更严重的论点已经形成，这些论点包括：为了使入侵与墓葬和相关文物的年代相匹配而对年表进行的处理存在问题，对所有考古证据的考虑不全面，错误地认为墓葬中是否有马具和其他大陆物品显示出明显的断代，以及认为农业社会和/或统治精英在没有军事征服的情况下不会采用外国人民的文化习俗和奢侈品的假设。

Korean historians and others have countered these arguments, insisting that a sudden cultural change is possible to identify in the archaeological and historical records and that the gradual nature of the change in tomb finds, tomb architecture, and political elites is greatly exaggerated. Some argue that linguistics and mythology both point to a mixing of the two cultures of Korea and Japan. Still others point to significant climate change which eventually resulted in a period of extended droughts around 400 CE and which motivated peoples to seek conditions more favourable to agriculture in the Japanese archipelago. No one, though, has as yet been able to provide direct evidence of how this transferral of culture occurred if not by peaceful means.

          韩国历史学家和其他一些人反驳了这些论点，坚持认为在考古和历史记录中可以识别出突然的文化变化，而墓葬发现、墓葬建筑和政治精英的变化的渐进性质被大大夸大了。一些人认为，语言学和神话学都指出了韩国和日本两种文化的混合。还有人指出，重大的气候变化最终导致了公元400年左右的长期干旱，并促使人们在日本群岛寻求更有利于农业的条件。不过，到目前为止，还没有人能够提供直接的证据，说明如果不是通过和平手段，这种文化的转移是如何发生的。

总      结

In conclusion, the merits and weaknesses of the theory are well summarised here by the historian K. Henshall:

          Like most theories, it has some plausible elements and some weaknesses. It is not impossible that horse-riders from Korea or Manchuria or northern China did establish a presence in early Japan - possibly even a ruling presence, and possibly by force - but if so they would surely have realized there was nowhere further to go and either settled in Japan or returned whence they came. (158)

          总之，历史学家K.Henshall在这里很好地总结了该理论的优点和缺点：

          像大多数理论一样，它有一些合理的因素和一些弱点。来自朝鲜、满洲或中国北部的骑马者确实在早期日本建立了一个存在——甚至可能是一个统治者的存在，而且可能是通过武力来管理。但如果是这样，他们肯定会意识到没有地方可去了，于是要么在日本定居，要么返回原居住地。(158)

The controversial 'horse-rider theory' not only lacks concrete and persuasive evidence to support it but even its very emphasis on one dramatic moment of history being responsible for significant cultural and political changes in Japan seems rather dated and simplistic in terms of modern studies in history where the complexities, subtleties, and multidirectional nature of cultural exchange over long periods of time are now much more appreciated by historians, archaeologists, and the public alike.

          有争议的“骑马者理论”不仅缺乏具体和有说服力的证据支持，甚至它强调一个戏剧性的历史时刻对日本的重大文化和政治变化负有责任，这在现代历史研究中显得相当过时和简单，因为现在历史学家、考古学家和公众都更重视长期文化交流的复杂性、微妙性和多向性。

参考书目：

Ebrey, P.B. Pre-Modern East Asia. Wadsworth Publishing, 2013.

Edwards, W. "Event and Process in the Founding of Japan: The Horserider Theory in Archeological Perspective." The Journal of Japanese Studies, Vol. 9, No. 2 (Summer, 1983), pp. 265-295.

Farris, W.W. "Ancient Japan's Korean Connection
." Korean Studies, Vol. 20 (1996), pp. 1-22.

Henshall, K. Historical Dictionary of Japan to 1945. Scarecrow Press, 2013.

Hong, W. "Yayoi Wave, Kofun Wave, and Timing: The Formation of the Japanese People and Japanese." Korean Studies, Vol. 29 (2005), pp. 1-29.

Mason, R.H.P. A History of Japan. Tuttle Publishing, 1997.

Seth, M.J. A History of Korea. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2010.

SONG-NAI RHEE, C. MELVIN AIKENS, SUNG-RAK CHOI and HYUK-JIN RO,. "Korean Contributions to Agriculture, Technology, and State Formation in Japan: Archaeology and History of an Epochal Thousand Years, 400 B.C.–A.D. 600." Asian Perspectives, Vol. 46, No. 2 (Fall 2007), pp. 404-459.

作者：Mark Cartwright

          驻意大利的历史作家。他的主要兴趣包括陶瓷、建筑、世界神话和发现所有文明的共同思想。他拥有政治哲学硕士学位，是《世界历史百科全书》的出版总监。

原文网址：https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1105/the-horse-rider-theory-in-ancient-japan/