Horserider Theory Summary

In the beginning of this article, Edwards reviewed both Egami and Ledyard's argument of the Horserider theory then he pointed some of their ideas. Egami had eight ideas which supports the Horserider theory. His eight ideas are simply assertions of sudden, culture, and circumstances. Egami focused on events in the Horserider theory. On the other hand, Edwards reinterpretated processes rather than each events. He thinks that there wasn't huge differences the early and late kohun period. In addtion, no literatures recorded that events occurred in Japan which could be influenced a political organization. Ojinryo tomb is one of key tombs of archeology studying. Tombs tell us huge manpower controlled political organization. However, Egami's opinion is that middle and late kohun culture were different from the early kohun culture which was discontinuity. The reason was
burial goods has more strong sorcery, peaceful and religious characteristics in the early kohun period. However, Japanese archeologists found that burial goods changed dramatically such as arms and utility goods of the late kohun period. Haniwa is an unique Japanese burial good. It appeared since the late kohun period ,and furthermore horse and human form of haniwa was found. This could be an evidence of widespread horse breeding in Japan. On the other hand, Edwards argued that weapons had already appeared in early kohun period. Lastly a relationship between Japan and Korea is complex and has two long processes. Egami argued that the late kohun period reflected horserider culture. Chinese recorded diplomatic exchanges Japan and Korea from 413 to 502. It says that Japanese political organization as the Yamato court continued during this time. Japan had similar patterns and connections with Korea which reflected cultures each other. For example, Japanese tomb's keyhole form is unique. Some Japanese style tombs were found in east Asia area. Korea introduced their techniques and skills to Japan. Horserider theory is a significant hypothesis because we can't know the origin of Japanese humanity without this theory.
I learned from Edwards' article that focusing processes rather than small each events allow us to find how things changes in long time period. If we focus on processes, we will be able to understand early Japanese history better than before. In addition, we can't explain countries' relationships based on small number of events. Comparing two thesises show us patterns and connections across the time. Egami and Ledyerd's arguments had patterns grave goods and millitaric strategy. Edwards recommend us to see processes rather than events and materials might not be historical evidences. Myth is also helpful for us to see a power of political organization and unification. However, it doesn't always tell us the truth ,and furthermore doesn't have scichological evidences. Historians and archeologists are trying to do experiments based on materials ehich were found in fourth century. On the other hand, a result of experiments could mislead to understand contexts of early Japanese
history.