Talk:Emperor Jinmu of Japan
|
|
The following sentence was moved from the article:
- In 2000, the Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform (Atarashii Rekishi Kyokasho o Tsukurukai) treated Jimmu's foundation of the kingdom as historical fact in its proposed "New History Textbook" (Tsukuru-kai) for junior high schools [1] (http://wwwsoc.nii.ac.jp/rekiken/english/appeals/appeal_001205.html).
It is a typical trait of critics of Atarashii Rekishi Kyokasho that they don't examine the textbook by themselves. Here I quote from the textbook (p.36):
- 神武天皇の東征伝承
- 一つの政治的まとまりが，大きな力を備えた統一政権になるには，通常，長い時間を必要とする。大和朝廷がいつ，どこで始まったかを記す同時代の記録は，中国にも日本にもない。しかし『古事記』や『日本書紀』には，次のような伝承が残っている。
This is followed by a summary of the legend.
I compared history textbooks.
- The New History Textbook introduces the foundation myth as a legend.
- The other Japanese textbooks completely ignore the foundation myth.
- The South Korean national history textbook explains a medieval myth as a historical fact.
BTW you may wonder why the other Japanese textbooks ignore the foundation myth. It is because they are complied by communists or communist sympathizers. That's why Japanese conservatives feel a sense of crisis about education. --Nanshu 00:16, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- BTW, you may wonder why the other Japanese text books ignore the foundation myth. It is because it is a "history" textbook. It is as ridiculous as teaching the account of Genesis in bible as history. That is why Japanese "conservative" (read right wing nationalist) are considered as nutter.
- As of Korean sailor theory, given that Jimu Emperor himself is a part of foundation myth, how one can claim that he was actually a Korean sailor is totally beyone me. I will delete it until someone can attribute it to archival source. Given that Kojiki and Nihonshoki are the only one at the moment, I doubt anyone can. --(FWBOarticle 5 Aug 2004)