Preservation of power and authority amongst the upper orders of administration in Tokugawa Japan
This is an average grade (B+) mid-term essay that I did for a modern Japanese history module. I decided to put in here because the Tokugawa-Edo era of Japan has fascinated me for a while, and I just wanted to remind myself of the first month of my study of Japanese history.
Introduction
In Tokugawa Japan, great emphasis was placed on the stratification of social status. Society was divided by a strict four-part class system. In decreasing order of importance, they were: the samurai, the peasants, the artisans and the merchants. Class status was hereditary and movement between classes was prohibited. The samurai, who were the warrior class and the ruling elite, were responsible for maintaining peace and order. They were to look after the commoners who made up the remaining classes of the system. The commoners, in particular the peasants, were obliged to ‘pay’, for the services of the samurai, taxes which were collected in the form of rice.
The Tokugawa dynasty also saw the creation of a centralised feudal system known as the Bakufu-han. In this regime, the central administration was run by the Tokugawa Shogunate, which was headed by the Shogun and his main vassals. As a means to maintain authority, Japan was divided into large territorial estates run by domain lords known as the daimyo. The daimyo were given autonomy over their lands, but had to swear loyalty to the Shogun of which they were subordinates.
Neo-Confucianism and the Justification of Power
After the death of Toyotomi Hideyoshi, the armies of Japan were divided into two political factions, one led by Tokugawa Ieyasu, and the other led by the regents of Toyotomi Hideyori, the son and intended successor of Hideyoshi. The Battle of Sekigahara in 1600 resulted in the victory of Ieyasu, who was appointed Shogun by the Emperor. Ieyasu established his government in Edo, which eventually became the heart of culture in Japan.
Japan had suffered many years of internal strife, so peace was wanted in the new regime. Ieyasu chose to infuse his government with the teachings of Confucianism and Buddhism in what would be known as Neo-Confucianism. Neo-Confucianism advocated the teachings of benevolence, and emphasised on the need to cultivate a person’s character. It was felt that this could help reduce instances of future rebellion. Neo-Confucianism also placed great precedence on the concept of Duty: the duty to one’s lord. It meant that one had to be aware of one’s position and responsibilities, and to place lord and community over self.
Two teachings of Chinese thought were also stressed upon: “The Mandate of Heaven” and “The Way of the King”. The former explained that power was bestowed on a person who had been chosen by heaven, therefore justifying the power of the ruling lords. The Way of the King described the role of the Shogun and justified his position. Although the emperor had been, for many centuries, a mere political figurehead, he was still, according to Shinto belief, the descendant of the Sun Goddess Amaterasu. According to the Way of the King, “the emperor is the true sovereign, but the Shogun is his rightful proxy or deputy” [Emperor & Nation in Japan, pg 16]. This school of thought, with its religious connotations, appeared to acknowledge the sovereignty of the emperor, but in reality legitimised the power of the Shogun and stripped the imperial court of political power.
Maintaining the power of the Shogunate
There were three types of daimyo in Tokugawa Japan. They were the tozama, the fudai and the shimpan. The tozama were the most powerful of the daimyo, owning vast domains and maintaining large armies of retainers and guards. Many of the tozama were (or were successors of) the defeated rivals of Ieyasu in the Battle of Sekigahara. Because of this, the Tokugawa Shogunate guarded against them with much suspicion. While the fudai and shimpan daimyo were given positions of power in the Bakufu administration, the tozama daimyo were officially excluded.
Incidentally, some of the most powerful tozama daimyo were located in Kyushu, which prior to the Tokugawa regime, was relatively open to foreign trade due to its strategic location. One particularly successful form of trade involved the importation of guns that strengthened the armies of the daimyo in Kyushu and gave potential for rebellion. To diminish the power of the Kyushu daimyos, the Tokugawa Shogunate implemented a “closed-country” policy, cutting down and restricting trade to only a small community in Nagasaki that was closely guarded by the Bakufu.
Perhaps the most important means of checking the power of the daimyo and maintaining the power of the Shogunate was the system of alternate residence, which was effectively a hostage system by law. Daimyo were made to reside in Edo every other year, while important members of the families of the daimyo were required to live in the city at all times. The lavish consumptions in the Edo sapped the wealth of the daimyo. The daimyo, who were responsible for the stipends of their retainers and guards, had barely enough to maintain their armies, let alone stir up rebellions.
The Commoners and the Samurai
To reduce the instances of rebellion amongst the peasantry, commoners were disarmed and forbidden to carry swords. The privilege of wearing swords was restricted to only the samurai class who were the rightful maintainers of order. As a means of surveillance, the goningumi system was implemented in which the members of peasantry were put into small groups of five. Each member of a group was responsible of another’s actions. If a member of a group was found guilty of misdemeanour, the leader (or all members) of the group would be punished. The concept of social self and responsibility was further solidified by the teachings of Confucianism taught in schools.
Control of Power within the Samurai class
To further safeguard the administration from problems of mutiny, Ieyasu and his successors took the task of physically separating the samurai class from the commoners by moving the samurai to the castle towns of the daimyo. The concept of separating the samurais and commoners came from Ieyasu’s predecessor Hideyoshi who realised that “only retainers directly dependent on their lords were likely to be truly loyal; therefore the cutting of all links between the warrior class and the land was required” [Peasant Protests and Uprisings in Tokugawa Japan, pg 22]. This in effect, established a system of bureaucratic control: regular samurai were under the charge of daimyo; daimyo were in turn controlled by the Shogunate through the alternate residence system.
The End of the Administration
This system of bureaucratic control did not last however. The Industrial Revolution of the West in the 19th century generated demand for trade. Foreign pressures forced the Bakufu into signing treaties that opened Japan to trade. The hereditary succession of the position of Shogun had brought about a history of weak Shoguns that weakened the influence of the Shogunate. Xenophobia brought followers to the emperor, who became a symbol against foreign influence. Among those who rallied around the emperor were members of the large domains of Choshu and Satsuma. Finally in 1868, the armies of Satsuma and Choshu captured the imperial court in Kyoto. Power was officially returned to the emperor who declared the end of the Shogunate, bringing about the start of the Meiji Restoration.
Bibliography
Beasley, W.G (1985), The Modern History of Japan 3rd Revised Edition, Charles E. Tuttle Company
Duus, Peter (1998), Modern Japan 2nd Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company.
Jansen, Marius B. (1961), Sakamoto Ryoma and the Meiji Restoration, Princeton University Press, 1961.
Vlastos, Stephen (1986), Peasant Protests and Uprisings in Tokugawa Japan, University of California Press, 1986.
Earl, David Magarey (1964), Emperor & Nation in Japan, University of Washinton Press, 1964.
