12

Migrations in the Mediterranean Area and the Far East: medieval Sicily and Japan

“Migration” could be defined as “a spatial movement of individuals and groups with a permanent relocation of the main place of residence.”¹ It might be a relatively simple concept, but it offers a lot of points for discussion according to its relationship with actual societies. For example, we can focus on movement of migration itself, societies for which migrants are destined or communities from which migrants come. If we focus on the movement itself, we may consider the time, route and distance of the movement, as well as the difference in the scale of migrations, that is, whether they are as individuals, as groups, or en masse. If we focus on migration’s effects on the society for which the migrants are destined, we can discern between settlement in uninhabited areas, migration through conquest and migration as a minority into a society or state, and consider differences in migrants’ relationship with the existing population, changes of their own and others’ identities, their assimilation process and so forth. To identify the reasons and causes of migrations, we can examine the places and communities they come from, as well as the allure of their destinations.

The topic of my lecture, requested by the organizer of this conference, is “Migrations in the Mediterranean Area and the Far East.” Since the two requested geographical areas include various regions with distinct features and are too large and too vague in their extents for my lecture, I focus on two smaller and more clearly defined geographical units: the island of Sicily in the Mediterranean and the islands of Japan in the Far East. Here, I will show some different types of migration in medieval Sicily and Japan and consider their effects on preexisting societies.

I

Sicily was one of the most important strategic points and a crossroads of different cultures in the ancient and medieval Mediterranean. Located at the center of the Mediterranean, only 3 kilometers from the Italian peninsula and 160 kilometers (a day’s journey) from Tunis in North Africa, it long was the focal point of struggles for supremacy in the Mediterranean and was ruled by various peoples and states. Its history was marked by periodic conquests and immigrations of outsiders with various cultural backgrounds. Already in the early ancient period, it was washed by migrant waves of Greeks, Carthaginians and Romans. After the rule of the Roman Empire, Sicily was subject to rule by groups such as Vandals, Ostrogoths, the Byzantine Empire, Muslims, Normans, Germans, Angevins and the kingdom of Aragon.²

Here I focus on two of the most conspicuous conquests of Sicily in the Middle Ages: those of Muslims and Normans, both accompanied by migrations. In the context of the political history of Sicily, these conquests were two of many alterations of the ruling or predominant groups of the island, but in a broader context they have been claimed by historians to mean transfers of the hegemony of the Mediterranean, first from Christians to Muslims and then from Muslims to Christians.

More than a few scholars believe that Muslim conquest of Sicily in the ninth and tenth centuries, followed by mass migrations of Muslims from North Africa, turned it from an island under strong Greek influence in language, administration and religion³ into an Islamic one with prosperous agriculture and commerce.⁴

It is certain that the conquest wars, which continued intermittently for about 130 years from 827⁵ till 965,⁶ brought destruction and disorder to the island. In fact, Palermo, the future capital of Muslims in Sicily, was depopulated after its fall in 831. Ibn al-Athīr (1160–1233), a Muslim chronicler, states – possibly with exaggeration – that the victorious Muslims, on entering the city, found most of its inhabitants (seventy thousand at the beginning of the siege) dead and fewer than three thousand alive.⁷ Syracuse, the Byzantine capital of the island, also lost most of its inhabitants after the fall of the city in 878. Theodosios, a Greek monk, described in his letter how horrible things, including famine and pestilence, happened in the city during the siege and how thoroughly the city was destroyed.⁸ After the fall of Palermo in 831, Messina fell in 843, Butera in 853, Cefalù in 858, Castrogiovanni in 859, Noto in 864, Syracuse in 878 and Taormina in 902. Thus in 909, when Aghlabid rule came to an end, a large part of Sicily was under Muslim rule.⁹ Most war prisoners were killed while some were sold into slavery.¹⁰ Some of the inhabitants of Sicily probably took refuge on the Italian peninsula, although it is difficult to know the scale of this migration.¹¹

However, those areas placed under Muslim rulers seem to have recovered rather quickly. Palermo, the new Muslim capital of the island, soon grew into one of the largest cities in the Islamic world. Its prosperity at the end of the tenth century is well illustrated by Ibn Hawqal, a Muslim geographer and traveler, who visited Sicily in 973.¹² His statement that this city had three hundred mosques might be an exaggeration, but Palermo was certainly one of the most active intellectual centers of the Islamic world in those days.¹³

Some historians believe that the early success of the Muslim conquest of Sicily was followed by mass migrations of Muslims to the island. For example, Denis Mack Smith states:

From North Africa, Spain and the Levant they arrived in great numbers, probably greater numbers than any other conquerors of Sicily before and since. Some estimates went so far as to speak of half a million Muslim settlers. They settled more densely in the western and south-eastern provinces, but elsewhere too there must have been a considerable immigration. They repopulated the Sicilian countryside, too.¹⁴

They brought with them their religion, laws, literature, arts and sciences, as well as Persian hydraulic techniques. They introduced sugar cane, cotton seeds, mulberries, the date palm, the sumac tree for tanning and dying, papyrus, pistachio nuts, melons and silkworms. With the excellent irrigation system and new fruits and vegetables, the landscape of the island may have changed dramatically.¹⁵

Many Christians probably assimilated into Arab-Islamic culture or converted Islam, as stated by Yāqūt (1179–1229), a Muslim geographer.¹⁶ By the end of the tenth century, Sicily seems to have become an essentially Arabic-speaking Muslim island with the exception of the Val Demone, the northeastern region of Sicily, which was filled with Christians speaking dialects of either Greek or Italo-Greek at the time of the Norman conquest.¹⁷

II

On the other hand, the Norman conquest of Sicily led by Roger I in the late eleventh century was quite different from the Muslim conquest in the ninth and tenth centuries. It was a part of the larger Norman conquest of southern Italy, which marked a watershed in Mediterranean history by destroying the old political order in this region and creating a new one under the Normans.¹⁸ Not only Islamic Sicily but also Byzantine Apulia and Calabria, the Lombard principalities of Benevento, Salerno and Capua, and the city-states of Naples, Amalfi and Gaeta, were placed under Norman rulers and eventually unified into the Norman Kingdom of Sicily in the twelfth century. Thus Sicily and Southern Italy ceased to be the border region between the Arab Islamic, Greek Byzantine and Latin European cultural zones and became a part of the political sphere of Latin-Christian Europe.¹⁹ The Norman soldiers from Normandy occupied a vast area in Sicily and the Italian peninsula and became a ruling class as lay aristocrats. From a demographic point of view, the Normans were a minority with respect to their number. The majority of Sicilians were Muslims and Greeks. Many of the inhabitants in Calabria and a part of Apulia were Greeks, while the majority in Apulia and Campania were those with Latin-Christian traditions, often described as “Lombards” in contemporary sources.²⁰

The Norman conquest of Sicily, a significant element of the radical change of the political map in the Mediterranean history, certainly caused destructions of villages and houses, and casualties,²¹ but it does not seem to have significantly changed the landscape or composition of the population of the island. During the conquest of Sicily from 1060²² through 1091, Roger I could dispose of only several hundred knights, according to Gaufredus Malaterra,²³ and thus he strove to avoid battles and to submit Muslims through negotiations. The surrender of Muslims in Palermo in January 1072 was negotiated by their representatives.²⁴ Although no source specifies the content of the negotiations, Roger I and his brother Robert Guiscard must have guaranteed the security of the Muslims’ lives and worship in exchange of tributes and labor service.²⁵ Some historians think that the Muslims of Palermo obtained in these negotiations a degree of autonomy, especially the right to keep their own judges and legal system, as described later by Ibn Jubayr. Ibn Jubayr, who visited Palermo in December 1184, informs us that Muslims in Palermo had their own mosques, their own residential areas excluding Christians, their own markets, and their own judges (qādī).²⁶ This strongly suggests that Muslims in Palermo had a system of self-government. While visiting Trapani, Ibn Jubayr witnessed a procession of Muslims sounding drums and trumpets, and he was surprised by the Christians’ generosity.²⁷ Other Sicilian cities, such as Catania, Mazara, Trapani, Taormina, Syracuse, Castrogiovanni, Butera and Noto,²⁸ probably negotiated similar agreements.

When Roger I completed his conquest of Sicily in 1091, the majority of the population in Sicily was made up of Muslims, although Greek-speaking Christians lived in Eastern Sicily. This composition of the population did not change much. When Roger I’s administrative system was formed, most of his court officials were Greeks with Byzantine titles, and some Byzantine officials continued to exercise influence in the local government. He did not employ Muslims in the central government.²⁹

During or after the conquest, there was no large-scale migration of Normans into Sicily, although many Normans established themselves as landlords in the peninsula. Even after the establishment of the Norman Kingdom of Sicily, Normans remained the minority in number, and many Muslims continued to live in Sicily, where Islamic culture remained as pronounced as ever under the Norman kings.

There were not many Normans in the royal palace in Palermo. Norman kings were surrounded by Muslim pages and court ladies in their daily lives. According to Ibn Jubayr, King William II’s trust of Muslims was so deep that he entrusted all private matters and important affairs to them. His chief cook was a Muslim, and he was guarded by a troop of Muslim black slaves.³⁰

The Norman kings themselves were all Christians and born in South Italy. All the queens were also Christians, but foreign-born: Roger II’s first wife Elvira was a daughter of King Alfonso VI of Castile in Spain; his second wife Sibyl was a daughter of Duke Hugh of Burgundy in France; his third wife Beatrice was a daughter of the count of Rethel in France; William I’s wife Margaret was a daughter of King Garcia of Navarre in Spain; and William II’s wife Joanna was a daughter of King Henry II of England.

It is well known that Greek and ex-Muslim officials served the Norman kings in the royal palace.³¹ It should be noted that the central government of the kingdom was run by migrants as well as Greeks and ex-Muslims. Most head ministers were foreign-born. George, head minister of Roger II, was Greek and born in Antioch in Syria. Peter, head minister during the minority of William II, was a eunuch with an Arab-Islamic background and born in Jerba, although a converted Christian. Falcandus, a chronicler of the twelfth century, described him as “a Christian only in name and dress but a Saracen at heart like all the eunuchs of the palace.”³² His successor and head minister Stephen was French.

Many migrants as well as people with an Arab-Islamic background can be found also in groups of the familiares regis. Familiaris regis was a well-defined title to indicate a member of the royal inner council during the reigns of William I and William II. As the decision makers on policy and other important matters, they were the most powerful people in the kingdom.³³ Among the three familiares regis at the end of the reign of William I, Richard the bishop-elect of Syracuse was English,³⁴ and Peter the master chamberlain of the royal palace was an ex-Muslim eunuch.³⁵ Among the five familiares regis formed after the flight of Peter were the English Bishop-elect Richard of Syracuse, and two ex-Muslim eunuchs, Richard³⁶ and Martin.³⁷ Three migrants, Richard the bishop-elect of Syracuse who was English, Gentile the bishop of Agrigento who was Hungarian, and Henry the count of Montescaglioso who was Spanish, were included in the group of ten familiares regis formed after the flight of Stephen.³⁸ Furthermore, the Hungarian Gentile and the English Richard were both included in the group of three familiares regis established after 1169.³⁹ We also see many foreigners, Greeks and those with Arab-Islamic backgrounds among officials at the royal court.⁴⁰

On the other hand, the Muslim population of Sicily continued to decrease after the Norman conquest. Muslims in Sicily began to migrate to North Africa, especially Tunisia and Egypt, during the conquest, and continued to do so under Norman rule. In particular, the Muslim population decreased rapidly in the latter half of the twelfth and the first half of the thirteenth century. In the 1220s, Frederick II made the Muslims in Sicily, who continued to revolt against the king, migrate to Lucera in the Italian peninsula.⁴¹ Thus, Lucera became a colony of Muslims. Most of them lived peasant lives separated from Christian society outside, while some served the king as soldiers and courtiers. In 1300 the last Muslims in Lucera were sold as slaves, and Muslims were extinguished from the Italian peninsula.⁴²

III

In contrast with Sicily, the islands of Japan, located to the east of the Eurasian continent, did not undergo any conquests or mass immigrations of outsiders in the Middle Ages.⁴³ Chinese sources show that the inhabitants of Japan certainly had contact with China and Korea in the ancient and medieval periods.⁴⁴ Wang Chong’s Lunheng, written at the end of the first century, mentions “woren (wajin in Japanese; inhabitants of the islands of Japan)” who came with tributes to the court of the Zhou Dynasty (eleventh century to 256 BC).⁴⁵ According to the Han Shu, a history of the Former Han Dynasty (202 BC to AD 8) composed by Ban Gu (32–92) in the first century, woren occasionally sent envoys to the continent under the Former Han dynasty.⁴⁶ The Hou Han Shu, a history of the Later Han dynasty (25–220) compiled by Fan Ye (398–445) in the fifth century, also informs us that in AD 57 an envoy of the Na kingdom in the Japanese islands came to the court of Emperor Guangwu (25–57) with tribute.⁴⁷ The Wei Zhi, a history of the Wei kingdom (220–265) written at the end of the third century and one of the San Guo Zhi (Histories of the Three Kingdoms), describes that thirty countries in the Japanese islands had contact with the Wei kingdom through envoys.⁴⁸ It is confirmed from later Chinese sources that inhabitants of the Japanese islands thereafter maintained their tributary relations with the continent.⁴⁹

Thanks to the extensive and collaborative research done by a dozen of scholars with the support of Todaiji in 1988,⁵⁰ we know the names of about 580 migrants or visitors to Japan between 538, the year of the arrival of Buddhism, and 894, the year of the abolishment of Kentōshi, the Imperial Japanese envoy to the Tang dynasty (618–907) in China. Many of those coming to Japan in the sixth and seventh centuries were from the Korean peninsula, while more and more came from mainland China in the eighth and ninth centuries. Many of those coming to Japan settled and played important roles in the early development of Japanese culture.⁵¹ Those coming from the Korean peninsula to the Japanese islands in the sixth century brought with them knowledge of how to read and write Chinese characters, technique to produce iron, a large-scale irrigation system and so forth.⁵²

It is known that migrants from the Korean peninsula increased in number at the end of the fourth century,⁵³ in the latter half of the fifth century,⁵⁴ and the latter half of the seventh century,⁵⁵ which are regarded as the periods of political turmoil and wars in the Korean peninsula or the continent. Many of the migrants of these periods were prisoners presented to Japanese rulers or refugees driven away by political turmoil and wars. In the periods of political stability, it was not easy for people to migrate beyond borders of states because of legal restraints.⁵⁶ Many of the migrants to Japan were monks. There were very few migrants from Tang China, although there were active cultural contacts between China and Japan.⁵⁷

Japanese chronicles show that many groups immigrated to Japan around the falls of Baekje and Goguryeo in the latter half of the seventh century, and after the mid-eighth century.⁵⁸ According to Nihon Shoki, more than four hundred men and women of Baekje settled in Ōmikoku in 665, and more than two thousand people of Baekje settled in Tōgoku in 666.⁵⁹ According to Shoku Nihongi, 351 people of Silla were placed in Musashikoku in 760. In some cases, migrants had to return to their homeland.⁶⁰ Shoku Nihongi informs us that more than 1,100 people of Balhae and Tetsuri were placed in Dewakoku in 746, and 359 people of Balhae and Tetsuri in Dewakoku in 779, but all of them were later ordered to return to their homeland.⁶¹

Between 600 and 840, cross-cultural contact was promoted by the Imperial Japanese envoys, Kenzuishi to Sui China and Kentōshi to Tang China, who brought back new knowledge, skills, goods and migrants.⁶² After the relationship between Japan and Silla deteriorated in the mid-eighth century, Kentōshi abandoned the north route crossing the Tsushima Strait (200 kilometers) to the Korean peninsula, and took the south route crossing the East China Sea from Kyushu to mainland China (about 700 kilometers, seven days), which was a dangerous route and led to much loss of life.⁶³ After this official mission was abolished in 894, contact with the continent was carried out mainly by merchants.⁶⁴

There were constant visits by merchants to Hakata in Kyushu from Northern Song China (960–1127), and merchant ships came and went more frequently between the Japanese islands and the continent after the mid-eleventh century. Japan’s trade with China became more active under the Southern Song dynasty (1127–1276).

At the end of the thirteenth century, the Yuan Mongol dynasty of China attempted a full-scale invasion of Japan (Genkō) twice.⁶⁵ The first expedition in 1274 (Battle of Bun’ei) consisted of more than thirty thousand soldiers,⁶⁶ and the second in 1281 (Battle of Kōan) consisted of 140,000 soldiers with 4,400 ships.⁶⁷ Both failed, caught in severe storms. Thirteen thousand soldiers were killed in the first expedition,⁶⁸ while fewer than forty thousand soldiers survived and returned home in the second expedition.⁶⁹

These were the only two attempted invasions Japan had experienced before the Second World War and the only two opportunities when the samurai, united under the shogunate, fought a defensive war against outsiders rather than amongst themselves. The storms which did fatal damage to the Mongols were called kamikaze (“Divine Wind”), and they created a belief that Japan was protected by the gods. This belief was held by many Japanese until their defeat in 1945.

After Genkō there was constant and active trade between the Japanese islands and China during the Yuan dynasty and the Ming dynasty (1368–1644). After all, Japan seems to have been kept under a moderate influence of China and Korea without their strong intervention or mass migrations in the Middle Ages.

* * *

Thus we have seen some different types of migrations in medieval Sicily and Japan. There is no doubt that the geographical locations and relationships with outside powers or states affected the migrations there. Sicily, located at the center of the Mediterranean, was so important strategically and commercially that many outsiders tried to take control of this island. Successful conquests were usually accompanied and followed by migrations of compatriots of the conquerors. Various peoples ruled this island and various migrants formed up its population. Some historians think that the Muslim conquest of Sicily caused mass migrations of Muslims into the island and changed it into an Islamic island. On the other hand, the Norman conquest of Sicily did not significantly change the existing order and system. Instead, the Normans seem to have tried to rule the population based on the existing systems. As a result, we see groups with different religions and cultures coexist under the Norman rulers.

Japan did not experience conquests by outsiders in the ancient and medieval periods. One of the main reasons for this may be that Japan’s geographical location in the Far East did not make it so vital strategically or commercially as Sicily was in the Mediterranean. People on the continent did not seem to have had strong incentives to conquer Japan, while the Japanese had strong motivation to go to China even at great cost. Therefore, migrations into Japan were small in number and did not cause radical changes in the political or social order. Migrants, who settled as minorities, had no choice but to assimilate themselves into the society, although their knowledge and skills were highly appreciated.

In conclusion, I point out two problems I faced in this research. The first one is concerned with sources. There are few contemporary sources on Muslim Sicily, and most information about the Muslim conquest comes from Arabic sources written outside Sicily in a later period, or sources written in the Norman period. Accordingly, our information is limited to political aspects which later Muslim historians were interested in or able to obtain, and those which chroniclers and writers in the Norman period were concerned with. On the other hand, the Japanese chronicles, which give us information on group migrations to Japan, were written in a later period on the order of emperors, and there is the possibility that their political intent might affect the description of migrants from the Korean peninsula.

The second problem is concerned with the framework related to “migration,” that is, the framework of the land or society into which migrants go. It may not be so difficult to geographically define a host location of migration, as I fixed the island of Sicily and the islands of Japan as the areas concerned at the beginning. However, a host society or group, into which migrants go, does not necessarily correspond to a geographical unit, and it is not easy to define or find a group pertinent as a host society of migrants in the Middle Ages. The framework of Sicily works as a geographical unit, and it did work as an administrative unit in the Norman Kingdom. But it does not work well as a host society of migrations after the establishment of the Norman Kingdom of Sicily. The framework of the kingdom or a smaller community within the kingdom would work better as a host society. The framework of Japan shows a different aspect of this problem. Many historians consciously know that there was no sole ruler of Japan in the ancient and early medieval periods, and that there were different states inside the islands of Japan. They do not seem to believe that there was one group of human beings which could be called “Japanese society.” Nonetheless, they seem to be using Japan as a host society when they discuss migration or cross-cultural contact.

Appendix

n. 45 Wang Chong, Lunheng, vol. 8, chapter “ruzeng,” article 26: “周時天 下太平越裳獻白雉倭人貢鬯草.” Wang Chong, Lunheng, vol. 19, chapter “huiguo,” article 58: “成王之時越常獻雉倭人貢暢.” Shan Hai Jing, vol. 12 “hainei bei jing”: “蓋國在鉅燕南倭北 倭屬燕.”

n. 46 Han Shu, section of “dilizhi”: “樂浪海中有倭人, 分為百餘國, 以 歲 時 來獻.”

n. 47 Hou Han Shu, vol. 85 “dongyi liezhuan,” article 75: “建武中元二年倭奴國奉貢朝賀使人自稱大夫倭國之極南界也光武賜以印 綬安帝永初元年倭國王帥升等獻生口百六十人願請見.”

n. 48 Wei Zhi, vol. 30, section of “dongyi zhuan,” article of “woren”: “倭人 在帶方東南大海之中 依山島爲國邑 舊百餘國 漢時有朝見者 今使譯所通三十國.”

Notes

1 Michael Borgolte, “Migrationen als transkulturelle Verflechtungen im mittelalerlichen Europa. Ein neuer Pflug für alte Forschungsfelder,” Historische Zeitschrift, vol. 289 (2009), p. 270.

2 Moses I. Finley, Ancient Sicily, 2nd ed. (London, 1979), pp. xiii–xv; Denis Mack Smith, Medieval Sicily 800–1713 (London, 1968).

3 Hugh N Kennedy, “The Muslims in Europe,” The New Cambridge Medieval History, ed. Rosamond McKitterick, vol. 2 (Cambridge, 1995), p. 249. Most of the population of Sicily seems to have spoken dialects of either Greek or Italo-Greek just before the Muslim invasion. See Alex Metcalfe, Muslims and Christians in Norman Sicily (London, 2003), pp. xv, 7–8.

4 Hugh N. Kennedy, “Sicily and al-Andalus under Muslim rule,” The New Cambridge Medieval History, ed. Timothy Reuter, vol. 3 (Cambridge, 1999), pp. 663–669; Metcalfe, Muslims and Christians, pp. 22–24.

5 In 827 the Aghlabid commander Asad Ibn al-Furāt was ordered to make an expedition to Sicily by the Aghlabid amīr Ziyāda Allāh (817–838), who had received an appeal for help from Euphemios, a rebellious Byzantine naval commander in Sicily. See Hiroshi Takayama, “The Aghlabid Governors in Sicily: 827–909 – Islamic Sicily I,” Annals of the Japan Association for Middle East Studies, vol. 7 (1992), pp. 430–431. The Muslim forces included Arabs, Berbers, Spanish Muslims, and Persians. See Michele Amari, Storia dei Musulmani di Sicilia, 2nd ed. Carlo A. Nallino, 3 vols. (Catania, 1933–1939 [1st ed., 3 vols., Florence 1854–1872]), vol. 1, p. 394; Mack Smith, Medieval Sicily, pp. 3–4; Aziz Ahmad, A History of Islamic Sicily (Edinburgh, 1975), p. 7.

6 Rometta (Rametta), the last remaining base of Christian opposition, fell in May 965. See Amari, Storia dei Musulmani, vol. 2, pp. 307–308, note 2. Cf. Metcalfe, Muslims and Christians, p. 12.

7 Ibn al-Athīr, Al-Kāmil fī al-Tārīkh, in Michele Amari, ed., Biblioteca arabo-sicula ossia Raccolta di testi arabici che toccano la geografia, la storia, le biografie e la bibliografia della Sicilia (Leipzig, 1857) [hereinafter Amari, Biblioteca, testo arabo], pp. 224–225 (Italian translation: Michele Amari, ed. and trans., Biblioteca arabosicula, versione italiana, 2 vols. [Rome/Turin, 1880–1881] [hereinafter Amari, Biblioteca, versione italiana], vol. 1, p. 369); Metcalfe, Muslims and Christians, p. 19.

8 Carlo O. Zuretti, “La espuganzione di Siracusa nell’880. Testo greco della lettera del monaco Teodosio,” Centenario di Michele Amari, vol. 1 (Palermo, 1910), pp. 164–173, includes an introductory part of the Greek letter. A Latin translation by Ottavio Gaetani was published in Carlo O. Zuretti, ed., Vitae Sanctorum Siculorum, 2 vols. (Palermo, 1657), vol. 2, appendix, pp. 102–107; and in Rocco Pirro, Sicilia sacra disquisitionibus et notitiis illustrata, ed. Antonio Mongitore, 3rd ed., 2 vols. (Palermo, 1733), vol. 1, pp. 613–617. Francis M. Crawford, The Rulers of the South: Sicily, Calabria, Malta, 2 vols. (London, 1900), pp. 79–98, has an English translation of the letter. Available online: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gazetteer/Places/Europe/Italy/Texts/CRAROS/home.html (accessed 13 November 2011). See also Bruno Lavagnini, “Siracusa occupata dagli Arabi e l’epistola di Teodosio Monaco,” Byzantion, vol. 29–30 (1959–1960), pp. 267–279; Amari, Storia dei Musulmani, vol. 1, pp. 541–551; Ahmad, A History of Islamic Sicily, p. 15; Mack Smith, Medieval Sicily, pp. 4–5; Alex Metcalfe, The Muslims of Medieval Italy (Edinburgh, 2009), pp. 27, 41 note 8.

9 For the Aghlabid, Fāṭimid, and Kalbid (Kalbite) rules of Sicily, see Takayama, “The Aghlabid Governors in Sicily: 827–909 – Islamic Sicily I”; Hiroshi Takayama, “The Fāṭimid and Kalbite Governors in Sicily: 909–1044 – Islamic Sicily II,” Mediterranean World, vol. 13 (1992), pp. 21–30; Metcalfe, The Muslims of Medieval Italy, pp. 25–87.

10 Mack Smith, Medieval Sicily, p. 4.

11 Metcalfe, Muslims and Christians, p. 13. Léon-Robert Ménager (“La ‘Byzantinisation’ religieuse de l’Italie méridionale [IXe–XIIe siècle] et la politique monastique des Normands d’Italie,” Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique, vol. 53 [1958], pp. 747–774) thinks that the Muslim conquest caused a mass migration of Greek inhabitants into Calabria, although André Guillou (Les actes grecs de S. Maria di Messina, [Palermo, 1963], pp. 28–29) is doubtful of this idea.

12 Amari, Storia dei Musulmani, vol. 2, pp. 336–354.

13 Mack Smith, Medieval Sicily, p. 7; Umberto Rizzitano, “La cultura araba nella Sicilia normanna,” Atti del Congresso internazionale di studi sulla Sicilia normanna (Palermo, 1973), pp. 279–297; Umberto Rizzitano, Storia e cultura nella Sicilia saracena (Palermo, 1975); Adalgisa De Simone, “I luoghi della cultura arabo-islamica,” Centri di produzione della cultura nel Mezzogiorno normanno-svevo (Bari, 1997), pp. 55–87; Metcalfe, Muslims and Christians, p. 19.

14 Mack Smith, Medieval Sicily, p. 11.

15 Amari, Storia dei Musulmani, vol. 2, pp. 508–515; Mack Smith, Medieval Sicily, pp. 7–8; Ahmad, A History of Islamic Sicily, p. 38.

16 Yāqūt, Mu‘jam al-Buldān, in: Amari, Biblioteca, testo arabo, p. 117 (Amari, Biblioteca, versione italiana, vol. 1, pp. 202–203).

17 Amatus Casinensis, Storia de’ Normanni di Amato di Montecassino, ed. Vincenzo de Bartholomaeis (Rome, 1935) [hereinafter Amatus], Lib. V, Cap. XII, XXI, XXV; Gaufredus Malaterra, De rebus gestis Rogerii Calabriae et Siciliae comitis et Roberti Guiscardi ducis fratris eius, ed. Ernesto Pontieri (Bologna, 1928) [hereinafter Malaterra], Lib. II, Cap. XIV; Amari, Storia dei Musulmani, vol. 2, pp. 456–457, 499; Metcalfe, Muslims and Christians, pp. xv, 12–19.

18 For the impact of the Norman conquest in Southern Italy, see Einar Joranson, “The Inception of the Career of the Normans in Italy,” Speculum, vol. 23 (1948), pp. 353–396; Hartmut Hoffmann, “Die Anfänge der Normannen in Süditalien,” Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, vol. 49 (1969), pp. 95–144; Léon-Robert Ménager, “Pesanteur et étiologie de la colonisation normande de l’Italie,” Roberto il Guiscardo e il suo tempo (Rome, 1975), pp. 189–215; Norbert Kamp, “Vescovi e diocesi nell’Italia meridionale nel passaggio dalla dominazione bizantina allo stato normanno,” Forma di potere e struttura sociale in Italia nel medioevo, ed. Ga briella Rossetti (Bologna, 1977), pp. 379–397; Graham A. Loud, “How ‘Norman’ Was the Norman Conquest of Southern Italy?,” Nottingham Medieval Studies, vol. 25 (1981), pp. 13–34; Graham A. Loud, “Continuity and Change in Norman Italy,” Journal of Medieval History, vol. 22 (1996), pp. 313–343; Wolfgang Jahn, Untersuchungen zur normannischen Herrschaft in Süditalien (1040–1100) (Frankfurt am Main, 1989); John France, “The Occasion of the Coming of the Normans to Southern Italy,” Journal of Medieval History, vol. 17 (1991), pp. 185–205.

19 Hiroshi Takayama, “Confrontation of Powers in the Norman Kingdom of Sicily: Kings, Nobles, Bureaucrats and Cities,” in Città e vita cittadina nei paesi dell’area mediterranea: secoli XI–XV, ed. Biagio Saitta (Rome, 2006), p. 541; Hiroshi Takayama, “Law and Monarchy in the South,” Italy in the Central Middle Ages, ed. David Abulafia (Oxford, 2004), p. 58.

20 Concerning the survival of Lombard aristocrats after the conquest in Campania, see Loud, “Continuity and Change,” pp. 324–336.

21 Malaterra, Lib. II, Cap. IV–VI, X, XVII, XXIX–XXX, XXXIII, XXXV; Mack Smith, Medieval Sicily, pp. 15–16.

22 Roger I’s first expedition to Sicily in 1060 took place after Ibn al-Thumna, heavily defeated by another Muslim ruler, Ibn al-Hawwās, invited Roger I as ally from the Italian peninsula and offered him lands in Sicily as reward.

23 Malaterra, Lib. II, Cap. XVII–XVIII; Ferdinand Chalandon, Histoire de la domination normande en Italie et en Sicile, 2 vols. (Paris, 1907; rep. New York, 1960), vol. 1, p. 328.

24 Amatus, Lib. VI, Cap. XVIII. Cf. Amari, Storia dei Musulmani, vol. 3, pp. 130–131.

25 Malaterra, Lib. II, Cap. XLV; Guillaume de Pouille, La geste de Robert Guiscard, ed. Marguerite Mathieu (Palermo, 1961), Lib. III. Cf. Amari, Storia dei Musulmani, vol. 3, pp. 130–131, 277; Chalandon, Histoire de la domination, vol. 1, p. 208; Graham A. Loud, The Age of Robert Guiscard: Southern Italy and the Norman Conquest (Harlow, 2000), pp. 161–162.

26 Ibn Jubayr, Riḥla (The Travels of Ibn Jubayr), ed. William Wright, 2nd ed. by Michael J. De Goeje (Leiden, 1907), p. 332. Cf. Amari, Storia dei Musulmani, vol. 3, p. 132; Chalandon, Histoire de la domination, vol. 1, p. 208; Francesco Gabrieli, “La politique arabe des Normands de Sicile,” Studia Islamica, vol. 9 (1958), p. 93.

27 Ibn Jubayr, Riḥla, pp. 334–336. Cf. Gabrieli, “La politique arabe,” p. 89.

28 Amari, Storia dei Musulmani, vol. 3, p. 277.

29 Hiroshi Takayama, “The Administration of Roger I,” in Ruggero I Gran Conte di Sicilia, 1101–2001, ed. Guglielmo De’ Giovanni-Centelles (Rome, 2007), pp. 124–140; Hiroshi Takayama, “Religious Tolerance in Norman Sicily? The Case of Muslims,” in Puer Apuliae. Mélanges offerts à Jean-Marie Martin, ed. Errico Cuozzo, et al. (Paris, 2008), pp. 629–630.

30 Ibn Jubayr, Riḥla, p. 324.

31 Hiroshi Takayama, “The Great Administrative Officials of the Norman Kingdom of Sicily,” Papers of the British School at Rome, vol. 58 (1990), pp. 317–335; Hiroshi Takayama, The Administration of the Norman Kingdom of Sicily (Leiden/New York/Cologne, 1993); Hiroshi Takayama, “Central Power and Multi-Cultural Elements at the Norman Court of Sicily,” Mediterranean Studies, vol. 12 (2003), pp. 1–15; Alex Metcalfe, “The Muslims of Sicily under Christian Rule,” in The Society of Norman Italy, ed. Graham A. Loud and Alex Metcalfe (Leiden/Boston/Cologne, 2002), pp. 289–317; Jeremy Johns, Arabic Administration in Norman Sicily: The Royal Dīwān (Cambridge, 2002), pp. 212–256.

32 Hugo Falcandus, Liber de Regno Sicilie, in Giovanni B. Siragusa, ed., La historia o Liber de Regno Sicilie e la epistola ad Petrum Panormitane ecclesie thesaurarium (Rome, 1897), p. 25: “sicut et omnes eunuchi palatii, nomine tantum habituque chris-tianus erat, animo saracenus.” (English translation: Graham A. Loud and Thomas Wiedemann, eds. and trans., The History of the Tyrants of Sicily by ‘Hugo Falcandus’ 1154–69 [Manchester/New York, 1998], p. 78).

33 Hiroshi Takayama, “Familiares Regis and the Royal Inner Council in Twelfth-Century Sicily,” English Historical Review, vol. 104 (1989), pp. 357–372; Takayama, “Central Power and Multi-Cultural Elements,” pp. 11–12.

34 Norbert Kamp, Kirche und Monarchie im Staufischen Königreich Sizilien I: Prosopographische Grundlegung: Bistümer und Bischöfe des Königreichs 1194–1266, 4 vols. (Munich, 1973–1982), vol. 3, pp. 1013–1018.

35 Falcandus, Liber de Regno, p. 83 (Loud and Wiedemann, The History of Tyrants, p. 133).

36 Although Falcandus does not call Richard a eunuch, the following description implies that he was also a eunuch: “Gaytus quoque Richardus illi cum ceteris eunuchis infestissimus erat, eo quod Robertum Calataboianensem contra voluntatem eius dampnaverat” (Falcandus, Liber de Regno, p. 119 [Loud and Wiedemann, The History of Tyrants, p. 170]). See also Falcandus, Liber de Regno, pp. 161–162 (Loud and Wiedemann, The History of Tyrants, p. 214); Takayama, “The Great Administrative Officials,” pp. 323–324; Johns, Arabic Administration, pp. 228–234.

37 Falcandus, Liber de Regno, p. 79 note 1 and pp. 108–109 (Loud and Wiedemann, The History of Tyrants, pp. 129, 158); Carlo A. Garufi, I documenti inediti del’epoca normanna in Sicilia (Palermo, 1899), p. 111; Takayama, “The Great Administrative Officials,” p. 323; Johns, Arabic Administration, pp. 219–222.

38 Falcandus, Liber de Regno, pp. 161–162 (Loud and Wiedemann, The History of Tyrants, p. 214).

39 Falcandus, Liber de Regno, pp. 163–164 (Loud and Wiedemann, The History of Tyrants, p. 216); Takayama, “Familiares Regis,” pp. 365–368.

40 Takayama, “The Great Administrative Officials,” pp. 317–335; Takayama, “Central Power and Multi-Cultural Elements,” pp. 1–15.

41 Gabrieli, “La politique arabe,” p. 86; David Abulafia, “The End of Muslim Sicily,” Muslims under Latin Rule, 1100–1300, ed. James M. Powell (Princeton, 1990), pp. 103–133. Date palms and sugar cane were abandoned in Sicily. Muslims were the only ones able to grow them. See Jean-Marie Martin, “Settlement and the Agrarian Economy,” Graham A. Loud and Alex Metcalfe, eds., The Society of Norman Italy (Leiden, 2002), pp. 19–21.

42 For the Muslims in Lucera, see David Abulafia, “Monarchs and Minorities in the Christian Western Mediterranean around 1300: Lucera and Its Analogues,” Christendom and Its Discontents: Exclusion, Persecution, and Rebellion, 1000–1500, ed. Scott L. Waugh and Peter D. Diehl (Cambridge, 1996), pp. 234–263; Julie Taylor, Muslims in Medieval Italy: The Colony at Lucera (Oxford, 2003).

43 For the relationship between Japan and the continent (China and Korea) in the ancient and medieval periods, see Kiyoaki Kitō, Nihon Kodaikokka no Keisei to Higashiajia (Tokyo, 1976); Yasutami Suzuki, Kodai Taigaikankeishi no Kenkyū (Tokyo, 1985); Kō’ichi Tamura and Yasutami Suzuki, eds., Ajia kara Mita Kodai Nihon (Tokyo, 1992); Shūichi Kaneko, Zui Tō no Kokusai Chitsujo to Higashiajia (Tokyo, 2001); Makoto Satō, Nihon no Kodai (Tokyo, 2005); Shōsuke Murai, Higashiajia no Naka no Nihon Bunka (Tokyo, 2005); Shōsuke Murai, “Wakō to ‘Nihon Kokuō’,” Wakō to ‘Nihon Kokuō’, ed. Yasunori Arano, et al. (Tokyo, 2010), pp. 1–27; Kimiyuki Mori, Higashiajia no Dōran to Wakoku (Tokyo, 2006).

44 Masako Nakagawa, “The Shan-hai ching and Wo: A Japanese Connection,” Sino- Japanese Studies, vol. 15 (2003), pp. 45–55. Online: http://chinajapan.org/articles/15/nakagawa15.45-55.pdf (accessed 13 November 2011).

45 Wang Chong, Lunheng, vol. 8, chapter “ruzeng,” article 26 (Ōjū, Ronkō, ed. and Japanese trans. Katsumi Yamada, 3 vols. [Tokyo, 1976–1984; Shinshaku Kambun Taikei, vols. 68, 69, 94]). For the Chinese text, see Chapter 12 Appendix, n. 45. Wang Chong, Lunheng, vol. 19, chapter “huiguo,” article 58. For the Chinese text, see Chapter 12 Appendix, n. 45. The earliest mention of “wo” is found in vol. 12 “hainei bei jing” of Shan Hai Jing, a collection of geographic and mythological legends between 300 BC and AD 250 (Sengaikyō. Ressenden, ed. and trans. Naoaki Maeno [Tokyo, 1975; Zenshaku Kambun Taikei, vol. 33]). For the Chinese text, see Chapter 12 Appendix, n. 45.

46 Han Shu, section of “dili zhi” (Michihiro Ishihara, ed. and trans., Shintei Gishi Wajinden, Gokanjo Waden, Sōjo Wakokuden, Zuisho Wakokuden [Tokyo, 1985], p. 135). For the Chinese text, see Chapter 12 Appendix, n. 46.

47 Hou Han Shu, vol. 85 “dongyi liezhuan,” article 75 (Ishihara, Shintei Gishi Wajinden, p. 120). For the Chinese text, see Chapter 12 Appendix, n. 47.

48 Wei Zhi, vol. 30, section of “dongyi zhuan”, article of “woren” (Ishihara, Shintei Gishi Wajinden, p. 105). For the Chinese text, see Chapter 12 Appendix, n. 48.

49 For example, see the section of “yiman zhuan” of Song Shu, a history of the Song dynasty (420–479) written at the end of the fifth century; the section of “dongyi zhuan” of Liang Shu, a history of the Liang dynasty (502–557) written in the seventh century; the section of “dongyi zhuan” of Sui Shu, a history of the Sui dynasty (581–618); and the section of “dongyi zhuan” of Tang Shu, a history of the Tang dynasty (618–907) written in the tenth century.

50 Shimpan Silkroad Ōrai Jimbutsu Jiten, ed. Tōdaiji Kyōgakubu (Kyoto, 2002 [1st ed., Kyoto, 1988]).

51 Shimpan Silkroad Ōrai Jimbutsu Jiten, p. 161.

52 Satō, Nihon no Kodai, p. 50.

53 In the latter half of the fourth century, fierce battles continued between Goguryeo and Baekje in the Korean peninsula. Yukio Takeda, ed., Chōsenshi (Tokyo, 2000), pp. 54, 64–65.

54 In 475, Goguryeo occupied the capital of Baekje. See Satō, Nihon no Kodai, pp. 50–51.

55 In the latter half of the seventh century, the Tang dynasty attacked Goguryeo and Baekje. Baekje fell in 663, and Goguryeo in 668. See Satō, Nihon no Kodai, p. 73.

56 Shimpan Silkroad Ōrai Jimbutsu Jiten, p. 161.

57 Shimpan Silkroad Ōrai Jimbutsu Jiten, p. 162.

58 Satō, Nihon no Kodai, pp. 73, 75.

59 Nihon Shoki (ed. Tarō Sakamoto, et al., 2 vols., Tokyo, 1965–1967 [Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei, vols. 67–68]), Tenji 4th year (665), 2nd month; Shimpan Silkroad Ōrai Jimbutsu Jiten, p. 161.

60 Shoku Nihongi (ed. Kazuo Aoki, et al., 5 vols., Tokyo, 1989–1998 [Shin Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei, vols. 12–16]), Tempyō Hōji 4th year (760), 4th month; Shimpan Silkroad Ōrai Jimbutsu Jiten, p. 161.

61 Shoku Nihongi, Tempyō 18th year (746); Hōki 10th year (779), 9th month; Shimpan Silkroad Ōrai Jimbutsu Jiten, p. 161.

62 For Kenzuishi and Kentōshi, see Torao Mozai, et al., eds., Kentōshi Kenkyū to Shiryō (Tokyo, 1987); Haruyuki Tōno, Kentōshi to Shōsō’in (Tokyo, 1992); Takeshi Ueda, Kentōshi Zenkōkai (Tokyo, 2006); Haruyuki Tōno, Kentōshi (Tokyo, 2007); Kimiaki Mori, Kentōshi to Kodai Nihon no Taigaiseisaku (Tokyo, 2008); Kimiaki Mori, Kentōshi no Kōbō (Tokyo, 2010).

63 Satō, Nihon no Kodai, pp. 116–118.

64 Satō, Nihon no Kodai, pp. 190–193. Shōsuke Murai, Higashiajia no Naka no Nihon Bunka, pp. 54–55, 87–105.

65 For the Mongol invasions of Japan, see Shōsuke Murai, Chūsei Nihon no Uchi to Soto (Tokyo, 1999), pp. 98–123; Shōsuke Murai, Hōjō Tokimune to Mōko Shūrai (Tokyo, 2001); Judith Frölich, “Effekte von Migrationen auf Fremd- und Selbstbilder: die Mongoleneinfälle aus japanischer Sicht,” Michael Borgolte, et al., eds., Europa im Geflecht der Welt: mittelalterliche Migrationen in globalen Bezügen (Berlin, 2012), pp. 231–246.

66 Murai, Chūsei Nihon, p. 115; Murai, Hōjō Tokimune, p. 112.

67 Murai, Chūsei Nihon, p. 117; Murai, Hōjō Tokimune, p. 127.

68 Murai, Hōjō Tokimune, p. 112.

69 Murai, Chūsei Nihon, pp. 117–118.