Talk:Nihon Ōdai Ichiran

message: What is the actual title of this book? If it was written by the daimyo of Wakasa (misidentified as a Prince in the Western translations), then it would have a name like 日本を大一覧 or the like, which would be properly romanized as Nippon wo Daiichiran. This misrepresentation of the title of the book, and of the daimyo as a "Prince" is precisely the kind of error that appears when one uses a contemporary Dutch primary source and fails to account for historical and linguistic errors.
When reading these sources, one must account for the fact that the "King" of Japan is the Shogun, "Meaco" is Kyoto, Nagasacque is Nagasaki, Faifo is Hoi An, etc. If you take these things straight out of your primary source and represent them directly as is, you are effectively ignoring, and nullifying, all the scholastic progress that has come since, and reflecting pre-modern or early modern Japan not as it was, but as the Dutch and other Westerners saw it at the time - a valuable exercise in its own right, but one must be cognizant of that bias. 17th century Dutch sources are just as inaccurate about Japanese events and conditions as 17th century Japanese sources are about Dutch history. LordAmeth 17:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The current romanization of this book’s title is Nihon odai ichiran ("Table of the rulers of Japan"); but the Google Books search engine uses the title on the book itself – and so did I.  I presume that the Google Books Library Project uses a similar catalog protocol.  Mine may not have been the best choice, but it was at least an informed choice to harmonize with a changing Internet milieu. With your help, I can make better choices in the future (or at least I can learn to defend those choices more tactfully). Ooperhoofd 20:33, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. I do apologize if I come across as too harsh, or confrontational. I simply want to work together with others to help the project improve. Is it alright with you if we move the page to Nihon odai ichiran? LordAmeth 20:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes -- sure. And I'll adopt one of your sentences: "I simply want to work together with others to help the project improve."  If I had used these very same words as an introductory comment, maybe the rest of what I was trying to say would have been construed differently? Ooperhoofd 00:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's so hard working from just text to get one's emotion across, and to read other's properly. I'm sure I'm just as guilty as anyone else of not trying hard enough to Assume good faith. LordAmeth 01:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

text: As far as I'm concerned, anyone should feel free to edit this text in any way. Ooperhoofd 02:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I wanted to make sure since a discussion just concluded on the topic. LordAmeth, do you have a problem if I move the page to Nihon Ōdai Ichiran? Bendono 02:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem at all. I guessed wrong on the kanji, and thus ended up with the wrong romanization. gomen,ne. LordAmeth 08:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The title is 本朝通鑑/ほんちょうつがん/Honchoutsugan in Japanese. 林羅山/Hayashi Razan and 林鵞峰/Hayashi Gahou. They are father and son.Oda Mari 15:40, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 『本朝通鑑』 is a different book. Same author (林鵞峰) but was 310 volumes in length and was written in 1670, almost 20 years later. 『日本王代一覧』 was written in 1653 and was much shorter at only 7 volumes. He wrote other stuff too. Go look it up in Iwanami's 『日本古典文学大辞典』. 日本古典籍総合目録 is another resource. Bendono 19:56, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops. Sorry. Please forgive me.Oda Mari 04:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title