Page:Kojiki by Chamberlain.djvu/33

Rh language changed rapidly during the century or two that followed the diffusion of the foreign tongue and civilization. We have only to call to mind the relative facility to most of ourselves of a Latin book and of one written in Early English. Of course, as soon as the principles of the Japanese Renaissance had taken hold of men’s minds in the eighteenth century, the more genuine, more national work assumed its proper place in the estimation of students. But the uncouthness of the style according to modern ideas, and the greater amount of explanation of all sorts that is required in order to make the “Records of Ancient Matters” intelligible, must always prevent them from attaining to the popularity of the sister history. Thus, though published almost simultaneously, the tendencies of the two works were very different, and their fate has differed accordingly.

To the European student the chief value of the “Chronicles of Japan” lies in the fact that their author, in treating of the so-called “Divine Age,” often gives a number of various forms of the same legend, under the heading of “One account says,” suffixed in the form of a note to the main text. No phrase is more commonly met with in later treatises on Japanese history than this,—“One account in the ‘Chronicles of Japan’ says,” and it will be met with occasionally in the Foot-notes to the present translation. There are likewise instances of the author of the “Chronicles” having preserved, either in the text or in “One account,” traditions omitted by the compiler of the “Records.” Such are, for instance, the quaint legend invented to explain the fact that the sun and moon do not shine simultaneously, and the curious