Fudoki is a general title given to a set of documents compiled in the Nara period according to a specific form and composition—a gazetteer composed of publicly reported documents. The title was likely modeled after Chinese works like Zhou chu feng tu ji or Ji zhou feng tu ji, but the title fudoki does not appear in any work until Iken fūji (914) by Miyoshi Kiyotsura in the Heian period. Originally it had been believed, according to the first page of the extant manuscript of Hitachi fudoki, that these gazetteers were like official report documents (which is addressed later), and had no specific title. Also, like their predecessors in China, the majority of Japanese Fudoki have been lost, and what we do know about these comes from a few surviving manuscripts, and scattered quotes in poetic treatises and commentaries from the medieval era. Of the five surviving Fudoki, only Izumo fudoki is a complete manuscript, because the other four, Harima, Hitachi, Bungo, and Hizen survive down to the present in incomplete, abbreviated, or disorganized manuscripts. Furthermore, the only manuscript that dates from the Heian period is the Sanjōnishike manuscript of Harima fudoki.

Origin of Fudoki
       Proof that Fudoki originated in the Nara period is found in the imperial order that these gazetteers be compiled, as contained in the entry in Shoku Nihongi, dated second day of the fifth month of 713. This entry notes that the following were commanded to be reported: 1) Write the names of the districts and villages in the various provinces in the capital area and the seven circuits with auspicious graphs; 2) record the various kinds of minerals, animals, and vegetation found in each district; 3) record the areas that are good for crop production as well as those that are not; 4) record the origins of the names of mountains, rivers, plains, and moors; 5) record old stories and strange events as remembered by the elderly in the area, and report these as a historical account. Concern number 1, the first book of procedures of Popular Affairs in Engishiki notes, "The names of all districts and villages in the various provinces will be written with two characters, and these shall be auspicious names." This is linked to the above order, and it is believed that this measure was based on the policy of the state at the time. Numbers 2 through 5 have the characteristic of an official report document based upon the actual state of affairs in the various provinces. There is a possibility that numbers 4 and 5 contain oral traditions specific to certain locations.
       Next we will look at the creation of each of these five fudoki. Of these five, the one that appears to have originated closest in time to 713 is Harima fudoki. As noted earlier, there is only one manuscript, the Sanjōnishike, so it preserves the characteristics of the original fudoki. In other words, it lacks the general section and the following report on the district of Akashi. There are two fragments from the record of Akashi District quoted in Shaku nihongi (Book Eight, entry under "fast bird," and Book Ten, entry under "Nihotsuhime"), so we are safe in assuming that these sections existed in the original manuscript. Judging from the way some sections have been augmented, there are some who argue that the original was a draft, but when the manuscript was compiled, all the administrative units from the district level down are sato 里 "small village or hamlet," which shows that the information predates the year 715, so it is safe to assume that the compilation was carried out relatively quickly after the order in 713.
       Hitachi fudoki starts with the words, "Governor of Hitachi, Report: a work of old things heard and related by the elderly." In other words, this fudoki takes the form of an official report document, and we know that this document mainly takes the form of (5). Other than the general section and the Namekata District, the records of the other districts contain comments like "The rest has been abbreviated" or "The beginning has been dropped," showing that the manuscript has been transmitted as in an abridged form, so the date of origin or the name of the compiler is not recorded anywhere. From internal evidence, many of the geographical units from the district level are recorded as sato, as well as the line "Province of Mutsu, District of Iwaki (later it is Iwaki Province)," makes us believe the manuscript originated before 718.
       Izumo fudoki has the following at the end of the manuscript, "On the thirtieth day of the second month of the fifth year of Tenpyō [733], we collated and created (the text). Miyake Omi Matatari, a person from the district of Aika. Izumo Omi Hiroshima of the Extra-code Upper Sixth rank, having received the twelfth grade award, governor of Izumo and concurrently Overseer of the Ou District." Thus it is clear that the text originated in 733, the collator was Miyake Omi Matatari, and the overseer was Izumo Omi Hiroshima. The compilation also records the post and surname (but not the given name) of everyone in the district governments from the post of secretary down, so it is fair to say that the provincial office abridged into one document various records compiled at the district (gun) level. Regarding 733, it had been twenty years since the first edict in 713, the Izumo fudoki is worthy of note because it contains anecdotes about military bases not seen in the sections (1) through (5), as well as this record contains some characteristics that differ from both Harima and Hitachi fudoki. This is also true of Bungo fudoki and Hizen fudoki.
       The manuscripts of both fudoki have records pertaining to the general record and the individual districts, but the contents of these individual district records are incomplete, so there is the problem of whether these two are abbreviated versions. Regarding the "different characteristics" of these two fudoki, both contain accounts of military defenses such as castles and beacon fires, and the basic unit below the district is "village" (gō 郷) and not sato "hamlet." This suggests that these two originated before the abolishment of the "village-hamlet" system around 739—740. Also these two fudoki have an overall unified form in both style and content, so there is the theory that these two were compiled by order of the Dazaifu in 732 after Fujiwara Umakai arrived as a special envoy for the Western Circuit. That is the reason these are called the Western Circuit Fudoki, and one thing that cannot be ignored when considering when these two fudoki originated is that there is a strong resemblance to parts of Nihon shoki in both written style and content. Regarding the relation of these two fudoki and the resemblance with parts of Nihon shoki, it is clear that there are differences in the style of recording and characters, where there are parallels (type one), and where no parallels exist (type two), but there are still many unresolved problems regarding whether Nihon shoki existed prior to or after these two texts. Based on the origins of these five fudoki, scholars call Hitachi and Harima the Wadō fudoki, and Izumo, Bungo, and Hizen the Tenpyō fudoki.


The Characteristics of Fudoki
       Below we will take a concrete look at the contents of fudoki, focusing on the legends of the various kami. When we do this, one thing that must be kept in mind is the relation with the mythology in Kojiki and Nihon shoki. Frankly speaking compared with the myths in Kojiki and Nihon shoki, which have been systematized into a central mythology, the legends in fudoki are regional myths strongly tied to the local traditions. But while we call these regional myths that does not mean they are devoid of any influence from the central culture of Japan. This influence is clear when we consider the origins of these works within the organization constructed within the ritsuryō system that had the emperor as its pinnacle. Rather, as we have already argued, these legends are divided into local traditions and legends that are centered upon the emperor who journeys to a certain locale, so it is important to note that there is some overlap. One of the fascinating points of the fudoki is the diversity of quality of these legends. Some of the representative kami found in Harima fudoki are Ashiharanoshiko'o, Amanohihoko, Iwaōkami, Ōnamuchi and others. The legend of procuring (and opening) the land makes these kami distinctive. In the district of Iibo there are two examples of Iwaōkami procuring the land (in the hamlets of Kaguyama and Hayashida). There also is the story of the fight between Amanohihoko, who came from Kara (the mainland), with Ashiharanoshiko'o, the landowner (in the Ihibo'oka section). In the Shisaho District record, Amanohihoko and Ashiharanoshiko'o fight over who will procure the land (in the Inakagawa, the hamlet of Mikata), and there is the story where Amanohihoko leads the vanguard against Iwaōkami (Haka Village). Of especial interest is the Mikata village legend where the three strands of black club moss of Ashiharanoshikoo lands in the Tajima districts of Keta and Yabu and the Harima hamlet of Mikata, but the black club moss of Amanohihoko lands only in Tajima, and thus he becomes the procurer of the area of Izushi. Also the legend of enshrinement of Iwaōkami in Shisaho District (Iwa village) can be looked upon as an important origin story of the various local deities. Regarding this local flavor, it is also interesting that Ōnamochi (大穴持命) who has a deep connection with Izumo is also found in the legends of Harima. The Harima legends spell his name 大汝命 (there are eleven examples of this), but most of the differences between Harima and Izumo deal with the story where Sukunahikone appears. In Izumo, there is only one example where these two kami (Ōnamuchi and Sukunahikone) are noted together, that being the record of the rice seed (in Iishi District, Tane Village [gō ]), and it is interesting that the same legend appears in the entry about Mount Inadane of Iibo District. It is believed that Harima and Izumo both have a deep correlation regarding the belief in the various kami.


Izumo fudoki
       A greater variety of kami appear in Izumo fudoki than in any other gazetteer. Among those deities, kami that are labeled "great kami" include Nogiōkami, Kumano'ōkami, Sadaōkami, and the great deity who created everything under the heavens (Amenoshitatsukurashishi Ōkami) are deities that represent specific locales. From a legendary point of view the deity with the greatest amount of power is the great deity who created everything under the heavens (or Ōnamuchi). This great kami is the hero of the "land-pulling" myth, and he is equivalent to Yatsukamizuomitsu (Ou District) who is the hero of the "land creating" story, and is called "Ōnamuchi who took the five hundred spades and created everything under heaven" (Ou District, Izumo no Kamube). In that same legend he marries the daughter of Kamumusubi (two examples) and the daughter of Susanoo (two examples), and the story tells of the enshrinement of the divine offspring (mikogami) such as Yamashirohiko, Ajisukitakahiko, Wakafutatsunushi, Adakayanushitakikihime. The story of the marriage with the daughter of Kamumusubi and Susanoo provides evidence for the lineage through the deities of Izumo, and shows the process where a powerful local deity is grafted into the mikogami legend. Like other legends of enshrining other divine offspring of Susanoo (Aohatasakusahiko, Tsurugihiko, Kunioshiwake, Iwasakahiko, Tsukihokoto'oyoruhiko), the story of Kamumusubi does not record his own events, but only the legend of his own offspring (seven examples). This is an arrangement worthy of note, because the story tells of the deities of Izumo as being grafted into the genealogy of influential deities in the myths of the Kojiki and Nihon shoki.


Other fudoki
       In Hitachi fudoki great kami called Kashimaōkami and Futsuōkami appear. The former is related to the Nakatomi clan, and the latter is related to the Mononobe clan, and these have contact with the central myths by way of kami festivals. This characteristic is also seen in the utagaki no kai (meeting of men and women who compose poetry) legend where the deity Tsubagami is the hero, and the legend of the snake deity where Yatogami appears. The legend of Yamatotakeru is seen throughout all districts, but the most peculiar aspect of Hitachi fudoki is perhaps that is the only record to call Yamatotakeru an emperor. The naming of many places is connected to his journeys about the land, suggesting the strength of the fundamental beliefs upon which these legends are based. The legend of Yamatotakeru journeying about is also seen in Hizen fudoki, but what separates these two Kyūshū gazetteers (Hizen and bungo fudoki ) from the others is the appearance of Emperor Keikō (known as the Emperor who ruled from the Makimuku Hishiro Palace). In these legends there are many events not found in Nihon shoki. In Bungo fudoki a deity of the area is known as Tsuchigumo (dirt spider) and is the object of subjugation by Emperor Keikō. On the other hand, in Hizen fudoki the story takes the form of Keikō journeying about the land either hunting or observing, and he praises the shape of the land (kunimi legend) and the names of various locales are connected here. The kami seen in the five fudoki are either local deities, or deities dispatched from the central provinces (such as emperors) that become rooted in those provinces, and this gives us a glimpse into the varied local beliefs.