In its original definition, Kyoto means the "place where the emperor is." But in the pre-modern periods, the relation between the two was indivisible as well as inter-definable. Nevertheless, it is well-known that Kyoto in actuality underwent a transformation in the ancient and Middle Ages, from Heiankyo as a capital into Kyoto as a city, and that the imperial court, typologically Kyoto's center, without exception suffered a repeated damage by fire, thus moved from one site to another within Kyoto. At the same time, Kyoto was acknowledged as a source of the public character of the court culture centered on the emperor, an unchanging capital that provided the site of revelation. This essay has attempted to consider, through Kokinchomonju, the differences and identification between the theoretical Kyoto as Non-Existence, and the realistic Kyoto that is present. In that attempt, I have mainly tried to extract split tendencies of Kokinchomonju which, within the framework of an imperially-authorized anthology, sees the "ancient days" and the "present days" as distinct, while indicating some form of continuity between Kokinchomonju and the reign of Emperor Gosaga in which the strong imperial reign was restored.
View full abstract