essay pratice qs Flashcards
How was society structured during the Tokugawa period?
What roles were assigned to each of the various social classes, and what were their relations to one another in terms of status?
What kind of worldview supported such a social order?
What kinds of people did not fit into this order, and why?
During the Tokugawa era, the society was governed by castes, borrowed from China and Confucianism. The Shogun governed the military sections at the top, and the Daimyo and Samurai served as governors and lesser bureaucrats in the government. The lower classes consisted of farmers, samurai known as Samurai without masters named ronin, and near the very bottom merchants who handled exchanging rice for money. At rock bottom were the gravediggers and prostitutes, known as the “Eta.” Outside of the regular order were the Tozama, literally “outside,” who were extremely powerful daimyo that could not consistently be controlled by the shogun
In what ways were the samurai of the decades of almost constant warfare during the 1500’s different from those of the two and one-half centuries of Tokugawa rule that followed? What was the impact on the self-image of the samurai of the changes that came with the shift from the Warring States to the Tokugawa era?
The samurai lost their warrior status and became lesser bureaucrats in the government. Without anyone to fight their status as fighters became irrelevant and most of their training became ceremonial and they dedicated a large portion of their education to writing and poetry, throwing social events and making tea.
What divisions existed among daimyô in the Tokugawa period? What was the rationale and role of the various categories of daimyo in the political structure of the period?
DThe daimyo had more governing power based upon who was allied with Ieyasu. Some Daimyo control regions which were split up among other, lesser Daimyo. The Daimyo were primarily divided up depending on their relationship with the Shogun. (1) Shimpa (collateral) - Mito, Kii, Ouari; (2) Eudai (vassal) - made Daimyo by the Tokugawa family; (3) Tozama (outside) - large domains that did not support Tokugawa early on.
To what extent was Tokugawa Japan a “closed country”? What foreign countries maintained relations with Japan? What kinds of foreigners were prohibited from visiting Japan, and why? From the bakufu’s point of view, what was the usefulness or value of these “international” ties and the people who came to Japan with them?
Tokugawa Japan was really closed but not totally cut off from the outside world. Tokugawa Japan had active trade with the Dutch which was effectively their European contact with the Spanish and Portuguese for their proselytization. And although they were relatively closed their amount of isolation is often overstated as Japan still had contact with China, Korea, and Russia. Foreigners of “dangerous” religions like Christianity were typically barred from entering Japan out of fear of rebellion. The bakufu valued international ties mostly for the technological advancements they could provide, such as the introduction of competent firearms into Japanese combat.
What was the purpose of the system of alternate attendance, as seen from the perspective of the Tokugawa rulers who instituted it? What unexpected consequences did it have for the development of the Japanese economy and society during the Tokugawa centuries?
Alternate attendance forced the Daimyo to spend half their year in Edo and the other half in their domains. While in their own domain their family was forced to remain in Edo. This gave the Shogun greater control over the Daimyo. Economically it greatly weakened the Daimyo as they had to maintain multiple residencies, two or three in Edo and one back on their homefront, not to mention the typical Daimyo spent two-thirds of their tax revenue on staffing their residencies in Edo. This meant that the cash flow into Edo was immense, and many daimyo had to rely on the shogun for economic assistance. This also weakened the daimyo politically by weakening their identification with their home domain and disrupting a hands-on role in ruling the domain as they were frequently absent.
What role did rice play in the Tokugawa economy? Who was charged with converting rice into cash for the daimyô, and what consequences did this arrangement have for the Tokugawa economy? In the Tokugawa social system?
Rice was currency and what was taxed in the Tokugawa economy. The rice was taxed communally rather than individually. The merchants converted rice to cash for the Daimyo and this caused the merchant class, which was the lowest class. This gave the merchant class a ton of power shaking the traditional caste system. These merchants created a rice futures market. In exchange for cash in advance, the Daimyo would issue a promissory note pledging expected tax rice to a merchant banker. As such, many people were able to take out rice loans, often either going bankrupt in the process or making wise investments and prospering.
What economic developments took place in rural Japan during the 17th and 18th centuries? How did the Tokugawa systems of taxation and control of commerce encourage such developments? What were some of the effects of this rural economic progress on urban centers? How did this progress change life and labor in the Japanese countryside?
The rice futures system was just one part of the newly emerging economy. The massive amount of trade going on in Japan was such that there was a common expression that “One thousand horses passed through Iido a day.” Rice traders were the commercial kingpins of their day loaning money such that people could afford the expensive items coming through. Much of this economic and population boom can be attributed to the new methods of farming producing more money. Eventually a shogun by the name of Yoshimune started the Kyoho reforms. These reforms failed to have any staying power but they did provide power to the intellectual thought. In the 1700’s calls for reform led to illiterate merchants and literate Samurai forming ties which were unheard of and upset the caste of the society.
It could be said that the bakufu was caught between a rock and a hard place in attempting to deal with the Western threat from the 1840’s on. What forces do the “rock” and the “hard place” represent in this metaphor? Why was it that the bakufu failed to act in a manner that appeased either to any great extent?
Western powers focused on territorial power in a doctrine described as “Westphalian.” In contrast, for centuries the Tokugawa shogunate did not have an effective means to defend its sovereignty against the West. One illustration of this was the way Tokugawa Japan and Chosŏn Korea avoided confrontation over small island territories by both silently claiming what amounted to sparsely inhabited rocks as their own. By doing this, they avoided the questions of state sovereignty that define modern international politics. But this strategy ill-suited them for when Western powers were introduced. The “rock” and the “hard place” represent the threat of U.S. force if they didn’t respond positively, and the critical domestic opponents who deemed the Tokugawa weak if they conceded to the U.S. ‘s demands. The bakufu had to pass controversial foreign policy to buy time so the government could reform, but this served to help the US while alienating much of the Japanese public.
What aspects of the so-called “unequal treaties” of the late 1850’s did many Japanese of the time find odious? How did the existence of these treaties contribute to the rise and spread of nationalistic sentiment in the late Tokugawa period? What other factors might have encouraged an emerging nationalism? How did the country called “Japan” come to be reconceived in the face of the foreign threat?
The Japanese were forced to try foreigners by foreign laws meaning that Japan had no national authority over foreigners in their land. Additionally Japan could not set its own import or export tariffs. These treaties marked Japan as a subjected nation, and combined with the increasingly western-educated bureaucrats and samurai, a call rose for a common Japanese identity. Kokugaku Learning emphasized Japan’s ‘natural superiority’ to other nations and focused on the supreme authority of the emperor as the symbol of Japan. Finally, the nationalization of Shinto created a common basis for a national identity.
How did the leaders who overthrew the Tokugawa use “cosmopolitan chauvinism” and “radical nostalgia” to establish and secure their new Meiji government? What problems did the continued existence of the samurai pose for the leaders of the new nation?
The samurai stipends cost a lot of money. They were not useful to the nation because they only acted as bureaucrats. The move to hiring based on merit replaced a lot of the samurai. It was a hereditary position, which the new government was trying to move away from. They began removing the special privileges from the samurai, which upset them. They made their stipends taxable, then they offered and eventually forced them to exchange their stipends for government bonds. They reduced the complex hierarchy to just upper and lower samurai classes. A lot of small samurai were stripped of the title entirely. These changes upset the samurai and led to revolts like the Satsuma Rebellion. Conscription also made them less valuable.
(context) Cosmopolitan Chauvinism and Radical nostalgia are two means by which the Meiji leaders used to make reforms but disguised them as maintaining tradition. Cosmopolitan Chauvinism was the process by which Japan would acknowledge Western innovations as improvements but simply call them “universal truths” rather than state the West was getting something right. And “radical nostalgia” was the process by which Japan would encourage reform by framing as a return to an ancient time period.
What compelled these men to disband the class to which they belonged, and what did they stand to gain by doing so? Similarly, what benefits were to be realized through the abolition of the restrictions placed on other classes?
Removal of the Samurai class did enrage many Samurai but it was certainly a necessary move for economic purposes, especially in getting rid of the draining stipends. They had to disband the Samurai slowly in phases. By getting rid of the Samurai stipend they were able to direct money elsewhere where it would be better used. The system of statuses became more merit based as well with all citizens being officially categorized as commoners. All could now travel freely and do their hair as they pleased. The removal of the Daimyo was smoother as all of them were very well financially compensated, but it was also done in steps. The central government could now take taxes directly from domain lands. 280 domains combined to form 72 prefectures. And rather than former Daimyo becoming governors it was middling samurai, showing the increased social mobility in the new society.
How did the Meiji rulers set about the task of centralizing the rule and administration of the country? What specific issues were they mainly concerned with in this drive?
They made the Emperor the basis of authority, The Meiji rulers consolidated their power by making the Emperor the basis of their authority and forcing his will to be in line with theirs. Since their political opponents had appealed to the power and prestige of the Emperor, the new oligarchy used the emperor to enforce their will, which legitimized their actions in the eyes of the people and quashed any dissidence. They also eliminated the classes system in favor of a European style of meritocracy, and searched for more Western reforms that could be used to centralize. Their goal in doing these things was to protect Japan from outside powers by creating a strong central government and a powerful military. They also sought to free Japan from the unequal treaties imposed on them by the West by rapidly modernizing the country. Industrialization took place over roughly a 25 year period; public education became mandatory; foreign trade with the west increased dramatically. This was all done with the hope that Japan could be free from the thumb of the great Western powers.
What measures did the architects of the Meiji state employ to create a loyal body of subjects? How successful were these measures in gaining the wholehearted support of masses of people at the outset? What do the reactions of ordinary Japanese people to these measures tell us about the nature of Japanese views of the new state authority at the time? Were the people of this time “naturally” loyal to the nation or subservient to authority?
The Meiji leaders used education to create the next generation of loyal subjects and instill political values. In 1890, the government instituted The Imperial Rescript on Education, which encouraged social order and social discipline, instilled political values such as obedience to authority, patriotism, loyalty to the emperor, Confucian ideals, and dedication to the state. Education was compulsory for boys and girls through middle school. The 1898 Legal Code reshaped the legal framework for family relations on samurai customs. In the 1890s, the Japanese language was required in all classes except foreign language classes. The goal of these educational reforms was to push national unity. They also nationalized the Shinto folk religion, which was taught in schools. At the time these reforms were instituted, most people did not trust them and were not intrinsically loyal to the idea of Japan; hundreds of schools were burned in protest of education, and rallies formed, but in time the people came to accept these changes.
How did the new tax system instituted by the Meiji government in the 1870’s differ from the tax system in force during the Tokugawa period? What changes did the new system bring about in the way land ownership was conceived? How did the relationship between the individual landowner and the state change?
Land tax and all that jazz? While previously villages would be taxed as a group, based on what the Daimyo needed, now taxes were based on individual land ownership. As such, tax-paying farmers could not rely on others to pick up their slack if their own crop was less than usual. This had a polarizing effect of making taxes especially harsh if harvests were poor but making them more bearable if harvests were good. Many farmers lost their land this way, and smaller farms typically were bought out and consolidated into larger ones.
How significant was the role of the state in launching and encouraging industrial development in Japan? What are the arguments for and against seeing the state’s role as particularly important? Why did the Meiji leaders decide to take the course toward development that they did?
The government provided capital investment for the growing “tech” or “heavy” industry by setting up large firms called “zaibatsu.” The purpose of the zaibatsu was to keep foreign money out of Japan’s industrialization as much as possible, because foreign money meant foreign power interfering with Japan’s government. The government also importantly funded the creation of national railway systems which bolstered the economy and increased travel. Because of state influence, Meiji Japan industrialized much faster than European counterparts. Private companies and investors in Japan were a huge part of this, especially in stimulating the “light” industry (textiles, farming, etc.) However, Meiji business leaders were not committed to free trade economics because free trade meant foreign influence, and they wanted to cement internal control of Japan. They were afraid that they would end up like China did with the East India Company and the Opium Wars.
What reactions did leaders in the early Meiji period have to the West when they first observed it in detail? What did they find most impressive about what they saw, and what features of American and European societies and cultures were they less enthusiastic about? Were they willing to try to incorporate all things Western in their drive to make Japan a strong country, or were there institutions that they found threatening or subversive to their interests?
Early Meiji leaders greatly admired many modernized aspects of the West, and especially admired France and Napoleon’s ability to create an Empire in Europe. They thought of the potential of creating a Japanese empire in Asia. However, after Germany steamrolled France under Napoleon III, the Japanese came to respect German policies more and instituted Prussian structure in the Meiji Constitution- meaning a very strong military and minimal public input. Japan’s biggest fear of the West was the Christian religion in general, which they saw as subversive and dangerous to the Japanese state and tradition. Although they incorporated many Western practices like centralized banking and a military draft, and even eventually opened the country to Christians, they never really embraced Christianity.
In regard to the question of promulgating a constitution, on what issues did the Meiji oligarchs and their critics in the movement for “freedom and people’s rights” disagree? In what ways did their views of constitutions and the nature of the system of government to be established in Japan through such a document coincide? In what ways might some of the people’s rights advocates have been more ardently nationalistic than the Meiji leaders themselves? (80-85, 92-4)
The Meiji oligarchs and the Freedom and People’s Rights Movement disagreed on the pace and scope of constitutional government. The oligarchs sought a controlled transition, maintaining strong central authority, while movement leaders pushed for broader suffrage and civil liberties. The oligarchs favored a constitution centered on imperial sovereignty, whereas reformers wanted a radical Western-style parliamentary system. The oligarchs also imposed restrictions on political freedoms, while the movement demanded greater rights.
What kinds of groups launched uprisings against the Meiji government in the 1870’s and 1880’s, and why? What, if any, common causes can be found among these various uprisings? How did the grievances of these groups relate to the Meiji government’s drive to rebuild Japan as a centralized nation-state interacting with other nation-states on the world economic and political stage?
Meiji business leaders were not committed to free trade There were rebellions in 1876 by the former samurai class opposed to the Westernization of Japan and loss of their class privileges after the Meiji Restoration. However these rebellions were fruitless and there would be no going back, as the Meiji government absolutely needed the funds to push Japan forward, and could not spare any for the re-introduction of Samurai stipends. Other rebellions included the Petition Movement, which saw hundreds of thousands of commoners petition for a National Assembly, and the Popular Rights movement, which called for an increased vote and a national constitution. If Japan was to be successful like the West, the people argued, it needed a constitution and representative government. The Meiji bakufu skirted around this issue by creating a Constitution, but one that did not give any real power to the people or the National Assembly.
Why did the Meiji oligarchs unveil their plans for promulgating a constitution in 1881? To what extent was the system of government dictated by the Meiji constitution a repressive one, and to what extent did it provide avenues for popular participation in government?
They announced plans to write a constitution that would be graciously granted by the emperor in order to diffuse the popular rights movement: The movement had laid claim to the imperial will as justification for a constitution, so by using the emperor as a political actor (the document would be a “gift” from the emperor) the oligarchs used the movement’s appeals against them. If the people refused the constitution that the oligarchs wrote, they would be opposing the emperor. The system maximized the power of the state and minimized the power of the people with power still being concentrated in the hands of the oligarchs. It was based on the German model with a strong monarchy and Cabinet and a weak elected assembly. The system was authoritarian and bureaucratic, as well as militaristic with the military general staff given “supreme command.” Only about 1% of the population met the tax paying requirements to vote, but nevertheless there was representation and the oligarchs were forced to heed wishes of the Diet representatives, which could write and pass laws.
What were the reasons for the massive financial retrenchment policy of the early 1880’s, known as the Matsukata Deflation? How did it affect the economy and society of rural Japan? In what ways did the tensions that resulted influence the politics of the period?
Matsukata, the Finance Minister, wanted to establish financial credit and reliability by balancing the national budget and establishing a national currency backed by metal specie. This resulted in severe depression of the economy. Anti-inflationary policies included the removal of 36% of paper money from circulation; a 5x increase in excise taxes, as well as an increase in local and prefectural taxes; and the selling of government-started enterprises. The decline in the agricultural prices combined with the increase in taxes hurt the small farmers, many of whom had to sell their land and become tenant farmers as they couldn’t pay back the loans they were forced to take out. More affluent farmers were able to prosper and gain prestige, and the lower interest rates encouraged businessmen to invest in private enterprises. As tensions rose, more people joined the ever-expanding Japanese Popular Rights Movements to fight back
How can one explain the rapid growth of the Japanese economy from the 1870’s through the early years of the twentieth century? To what extent were the explanatory factors you note unique to Japan, and to what extent were they factors in the economic development of other nations? In what ways did Japan’s economic development build upon Tokugawa precedents? What new factors encouraged development?
This growth occurred because of the mass education brought to the common people. The factory system sped up production. The government provided capital for the expansion of factories and industrialization.
How did the situation faced by female factory workers differ from that of their male counterparts in the Meiji period? What circumstances led each to join the industrial workforce, and what benefits for themselves, if any, did they see in doing so? What kinds of issues compelled male and female workers to strike? What did they hope to gain through doing so?
Female workers were faced with poorer working conditions than their male counterparts. They also received lower wages. The circumstances that led each to join the industrial workforce were the high land taxes that forced people to move to the cities and work in the factories. There were also brothels which abused the women. Women were naturally cheaper workers and easier to exploit and so they were used. For a long period of time women supplied the base of all textile workers. Along with children of course. Most women had only an elementary education preventing them from writing memoirs. Many women responded to the poor conditions by quitting with annual rates of turnover in excess of 100%. On occasion they would strike but these strikes were not typically long nor effective.
How did the character of the education a student received in the Japanese school system from the 1880’s onward change as one ascended to higher levels within it? What was the function of elementary school education, as the Meiji rulers came to see it? What kinds of ideologies provided the basis for it? What kind of social organization did the architects of this education system hope to realize? What unintended consequences might have resulted from encouraging independent thought and learning at the highest levels of the education system?
Students were taught to love and be loyal to the emperor. They were taught to be imperial subjects with obligation to the state. They stopped the use of foreign language and kicked out all the other guys. The goal was to remove western influence and not become a western country, but rather a better Japan! The legal Code of 1898 reshaped the family to the relations to samurai like conduct of father as head of house. However, especially regarding those citizens who acquired higher education, knowledge of Western culture and politics encouraged free thinking and a desire for freedom and expanded rights under a Western-style Constitution.
How was the religion of Shinto transformed to support the state? In what ways did these changes aid in the invention of an officially sanctioned Japanese identity? What kinds of reactions were there to this program of state religion? How much room was there for
dissent against this state ideology, and what arguments were mobilized against dissenters?
Shinto, as a Japanese folk religion, helped establish the new State through the promotion of nationalism. By reviving and strengthening the popular shinto religion the meiji could create a sense of “Japanese-ness” The office of rights was established and slowly was used to begin centralizing shinto beliefs. The cracking down of Buddhist beliefs led to general outcry as Buddhist priests had begun merging with the Shinto rites. Shingto shrines were no longer autonomous.
How did the Meiji state attempt to redefine women’s roles in society? How did these differ from the roles played by most women in the Tokugawa period? In what ways was this new definition conservative? What was progressive about it?
Many textile workers were women. During the Meiji restoration select women were encouraged to take an active role in support of its programs. Young women from ages eight through sixteen were in a group of students who accompanied the Iwakura mission in the US and received an American education and became model women for constructing a new Japan. Some women even changed their haircut dramatically which would have been outrages in the Tokugawa period. Women in the 1870s-1880s spoke in popular rights rallies. In spite of all this the reformers were very cautious over the involvement of women in the state. Women were viewed as the moral-foundation to Japanese society (similar to the cult of domesticity). The rulers reformism was particularly strong when it came to defining appropriate roles for women in realms as personal hairstyles and as political speaking at public rallies
