Name: Sajal

Course: BA (history honours)

Year: 3rd year, 6th semester
Roll no: 210450
Subject: History of Modern Japan (c. 1868-1950s)
Assignment-1
Question: what were the factors that led to the Meji restoration?
INTRODUCTION
The Western countries, starting with the US, the UK, and Russia, tried to establish diplomatic
relations with Tokugawa Japan. The Tokugawa administration first resisted these attempts,
but in the end, they were forced to concede and started discussing diplomatic and commercial
relations with the US, the UK, and other European countries. Imperialist incursions spurred
conversations about possible alternative systems of government, and in 1868 the Satsuma and
Choshu united to overthrow the Tokugawa bakufu and establish the Meiji Restoration.
Though scholars may differ in their interpretations of this period and the Meiji "restoration,"
they all concur that it marked the beginning of modern Japan. Despite its vibrancy, Tokugawa
society was mainly cut off from changes in Europe. Japan had a significant issue when
foreign ships started to show up and demand access to its ports. Japanese military prowess
was on par with that of the Portuguese and English in the seventeenth century, but by the
nineteenth century, Japan could not have kept up with the unfathomable advances made by
the European powers. During the Tokugawa era, Europe mostly consisted of Portugal and
Holland. They didn't start learning about the United States, colonization of India, or Great
Britain and her empire until the very end of the time. The Tokugawa dynasty faced novel
challenges following its nineteenth-century interaction with the West, which it was ill-
prepared to handle. Between the late seventeenth and mid-nineteenth centuries, Japan, like
other nations in the area, struggled to deal with the danger of Western imperialism and to
adapt its government and society to the demands of the modern world. Commodore Matthew
Perry made an appearance in 1853 with a flotilla. Because coal tar was used to fill the spaces
between the ship's boards, his ships were known as "black ships." A treaty of amity and
friendship was signed the next year. This was the final step in a process that had started much
earlier. Since the seventeenth century, the British and Russians have been putting pressure on
the Japanese shore. After establishing their presence on the Sea of Okhotsk, the Russians
embarked on exploration expeditions. Russian adventurer Martin Spangberg had found a path
to Japan in 1738. Thereafter, significant attempts were undertaken to build contacts and open
Japan. Lieutenant Adam Laxman (1766–1806) reached Ezo (modern-day Hokkaido) in 1792,
but he was refused admittance and was unable to get any concessions to begin trading. The
next Russian envoy arrived at Nagasaki, the sole port open to outsiders, but the Japanese had
no interest in trading with other countries. Tensions and conflicts between the two nations
resulted from Russian raids on Japanese installations in Sakhalin and the Kurile Islands in
1806 and 1807. As early as the sixteenth century, the British had been making attempts to
investigate this region. When Captain Cook passed away in 1793, he had plans to visit Japan.
Even though Earl George Macartney (1737–1806) delivered letters to the Japanese emperor,
his 1793 embassy to China was unsuccessful in reaching Japan. Later, he served as governor
of Madras and resisted the opium trade in East India. An English ship visited Hokkaido in
1797, while the frigate Phaeton arrived at Nagasaki in 1808.
WHALING AND THE OPENING OF JAPAN
During the Bakufu period, Japan sought to minimize foreign demands for open ports, arguing
that the real threat was fear of social disorder rather than trade. The imperial capital Edo and
Kyoto were threatened by foreign invasions, leading to the bakufu arguing for Yokohama to
be opened to keep foreigners away from the imperial palace, shrine grounds, and private
districts. Bakufu official Hotta Masyoshi proposed the idea of kaikoku, or open land, to
preserve natural order and revise its policy of isolation. He argued that military power comes
from national wealth, and the resources of enrichment lie mainly in trade.
Hotta's proposal was tied to the old dream of keeping strangers away, but it did not grant
foreigners the right to live in Japan. In 1858, the Bakufu signed treaties allowing trading in
Yokohama and allowing foreigners to live in Edo from 1859. These movements gave impetus
to opposition movements, such as the "Honor the emperor to drive out the barbarians"
movement.
THE BAKUFU AND DAIMYO REACTIONS TO WESTERN DEMANDS
The pressure on Japan to conclude diplomatic and commercial relations, with the Western
powers placed the Bakufu in a difficult situation. The initial reaction since the Russian ships
appeared was to firmly reject trade and the opening of ports. In 1806 a decree ordered local
officials to keep foreigners out and in 1825 the officials were told to destroy any ships which
came near the coast. This was not just based on a xenophobic anti-foreignism. It was a
reaction to a complex problem. On the one hand the Japanese clearly lacked the military
capability to keep the Western nations out but on the other hand most groups were adamant
that there should be no concessions to these demands. However, in 1842, when the Japanese
learned from the Dutch of the Qing defeat in the opium war, they softened their policy and
allowed the entry of foreign ships in need of aid. Subsequently British and French ships
visited ports to negotiate trade deals but failed. They were, however, not fired upon reflecting
a softening stand. The Bakufu now began to work on building coastal defence and adopted a
conciliatory policy of dealing with foreign powers.
THE COMING OF PERRY
In 1853, Commodore Matthew Perry arrived in Japan with a squadron of steam frigates and
sloops to demand the opening of ports and coal supply. Perry presented a letter from the US
President, highlighting the Tokugawa Bakufu's inability to deal effectively with Western
power. In 1854, the Bakufu signed a treaty of friendship and commerce, opening two ports,
Shimoda and Hakodate, for American ships to refuel and supply. The US was allowed to send
an adviser to Shimoda, a significant departure from the earlier Bakufu policy of isolation.
Russians were also on the move, with attempts to settle the border north of Hokkaido failing.
In October, Bakufu concluded agreements with the British and Russia, opening Nagasaki. In
1855, the Dutch also signed agreements with the Japanese. Townsend Harris, an adviser to
the Bakufu, convinced them to sign a treaty with the US, as it would be more profitable for
them to avoid burdensome treaties with other western countries.
The Treaty of Hams, signed on July 29, 1858, opened the ports of Kanagawa, Nagasaki,
Niigata, and Hyogo, allowing foreigners to live in Osaka and Edo and have extraterritorial
privileges. Similar agreements have been concluded with other nations. The biggest
concession of the Japanese was low import and customs duties.
STEPS TO THE MEIJI RESTORATION
The period from 1853 onwards, when Commodore Perry landed in Japan can be divided into
three sub-periods:
1853-1858: During the Bakufu period, Japan sought to minimize foreign demands for open
ports, but rejected Perry's demands, fearing social disorder and invasions of Edo and Kyoto.
Bakufu official Abe Masahiro argued that Yokohama should be opened to keep foreigners
away from the imperial palace, shrine grounds, and private districts, preserving natural order.
Bakufu official Hotta Masyoshi proposed the idea of kaikoku, or open land, to revise Japan's
policy of isolation. He argued that military power comes from national wealth, and the
resources of enrichment lie mainly in trade. proposal was tied to the old dream of keeping
strangers away, but it did not grant foreigners the right to live in Japan. In 1858, the Bakufu
signed treaties allowing trading in Yokohama and allowing foreigners to live in Edo from
1859. These movements sparked opposition movements, such as the "Honor the emperor to
drive out the barbarians" movement, which gained momentum after the murder of Bakufu
official Ii Naosuke.
1860-1864: In 1860 and 1863, the Great Daimyo attempted to restore the emperor but failed.
The Great Daimyo sought to exploit the Bakufu's weakness to increase his power, leading to
the alliance between the court and the shogun (kobugattai). This movement aimed to unite
high nobles and samurai for national unity, but failed. Fear of foreigners taking advantage of
internal discord persisted among political actors. Foreigners were excluded from the Kinai
area of Kyoto, and measures were taken to protect it. In 1864, the bakufu agreed to
compensate foreigners but did not allow them to stay in the area. In 1865, the court accepted
treaties but refused to admit foreigners to Hyogo, leading to disastrous tariffs. The Satsuma
and Choshu Hanie bombings demonstrated the futility of forced expulsion and limited
concessions. By 1865, it was clear that Sakoku, or a closed country, could not survive. The
term "Sakoku" was not used until 1801 in a German book on Japan from the 17th century.
1865-1868: This period marks the triumph of the open country policy and the adoption of a
new order. The Bakufu sent official embassies to London and Paris in 1867, and even before
that, the official Ikeda Nagasaki wrote after a tour of Europe that "in order to lay the
foundation for national independence, it is imperative that national unity be achieved in
Japan." He advised, that the Japanese must sign treaties and travel, gather information and
study western countries. In this changed situation, Shogun Yoshinobu could write: "If we
alone at such a time cling to obsolete customs and refrain from such international relations,
which are common to all nations, our actions are contrary to the natural order of things."
These statements could not have been made earlier and undoubtedly indicate that their ideas
changed due to circumstances, but the choices made were a creative response to the new
situation.
BRITISH AND FRENCH RIVALRY IN JAPAN
Anglo-French rivalry in Japan escalated in 1864, with France supporting the Bakufu and
Britain supporting Satsuma and Choshu. Leon Roches, a Bakufu official, engaged in
independent French politics and recommended harsh responses to Japanese attacks on
foreigners. The British also supported the goose, with Ernest Satow translating articles urging
foreigners not to view Japan as a single entity. Japan became embroiled in Anglo-French
rivalry, and the threat of imperialist intervention became dangerous. The annexation of
Bakufu by France and Satsuma-Choshu by Great Britain had internal consequences, and the
daimyo became stronger against the bakufu. Mutual suspicion grew, and mediation became
more difficult. Both daimyo and bakufu became increasingly dependent on Western military
technology and training. The war against Choshu allowed foreign powers to increase,
especially in supplying weapons to various factions. Foreign domestic travel and missionary
work also caused problems, with the opening of Hyogo and Osaka leading to violence and
increased demands for compensation. Christianity was allowed to be practiced in treaty ports,
but Japanese officials complained about missionaries' disturbing activities. These problems
created tension between the bakufu and foreigners, as well as between local people and
foreigners and the bakufu.

ECONOMIC PROBLEMS AND ANTIFOREIGN SENTIMENTS

By 1867, Japan was in a dangerous position due to the involvement of foreign powers in
internal rivalries, which could have led to colonization. The economic impact of treaties and
foreign trade was disturbing, with cheap industrial products like cotton cloth destroying
traditional cottage industries. Foreign merchants profited from favourable gold and silver
exchanges, disrupting the economy and causing hardship for the people. The Bakufu period
was a period of ideological debates, with policy makers seeking to realize social ideals.
Tokugawa Japan was not truly "closed," but trade and diplomatic relations were crucial to
government policy. In the 19th century, imperialist powers pressured rulers to open trade,
leading to anti-foreignism and discussions on how to respond to the external threat. Initiatives
included better coastal defences, weaponry, modern military training, and local weapon
manufacturing. The need for a different political organization, stimulation of industry and
science, and religious reforms were also recognized. This led to a new state at the centre of
the imperial house, with the emperor representing common cultural and ethical values.

THE MEIJI RESTORATION

The return of power from the bakufu to the emperor in 1868 marks the Meiji Restoration.
This was brought about by a coalition of daimyo led by Satsuma and Choshu, two of the
major ‘outside lords. The abdication of Tokugawa Yoshinobu (original name Keiki, ruled
from 1866-67) was announced by an Imperial Edict on January 1868. This marked the formal
end of the long rule of the Tokugawa. In April the Court announced the Charter Oath which
laid down the policies the new government would follow and in October, 1868 the Emperor
selected the Chinese characters meaning “enlightened rule” or Meiji by which his reign,
1868-1912, would be known. The restoration or ishin (the word means renewal) as the event
is known was carried out by some sections of the nobility and particularly the Hans of
Satsuma, Choshu, Hizen and Tosa. It was supported by sections of the samurai and rural rich
who found the constraints of the Tokugawa system increasingly restrictive. These groups
wished to share power with the Bakufu and when foreign pressure made it difficult for the
Bakufu to maintain its position these groups asserted themselves. Foreign demand to open the
treaty ports and the Bakufu’s vacillation allowed these groups to rally around the Imperial
Court and demand that the Tokugawa hand back power to the emperor. In this demand they
were supported by the loyalists who genuinely wished to have an active Imperial Court. The
Han, particularly Satsuma and Choshu had initially been at loggerheads, each leading their
groups but they came together and used the court to topple the Tokugawa Bakufu. In 1854 the
Treaty of Kanagawa was signed and by 1859 Japan’s foreign relations were established on
the basis of the unequal treaties as in China. The pressure to open treaty ports, (Kanagawa,
Nagasaki, Hyogo, Niigata) created a sense of crisis in which various critics of the Tokugawa
came together. For instance, even conservatives within the Tokugawa camp who disapproved
of the treaties allied with the Kyoto nobility and they tried to reform the Bakufu. Satsuma and
Choshu played a dominant role because they were “outside lords” who had considerable land
and revenues. even though they were excluded from decision making. Their domains were far
from the Tokugawa areas and their territories integrated. Many of the daimyo had begun to
reform their domains to meet the new challenges they faced.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF 1868

The political change of 1868 was one step, albeit a major step, in a process. The new
government did not start with a clear agenda but through debates and experiments they
created a modern constitutional monarchy by 1890. There were various movements that
reflected a search for an alternative form of government. One major model available was to
build the daimyo ruled Han. Many Hans had begun reforms to strengthen their finances,
restructure their administration and even build an army trained in modern methods. In the
Hans of Choshu and Kii, for instance, they hired foreigners to train their soldiers. In Kii a
militia that was composed of peasants and monks was raised thus breaking the monopoly of
the samurai on the right to bear arms. The second model was to look back at the ‘ritsuryo’
system of imperial rule in the Heian period. This was supported by the growing strength
intellectual movements placing the emperor at the centre of Japanese culture. The third was
the models provided by Western countries. Japanese had been studying these countries, and
the bakufu had begun to send embassies to study the West. These embassies came back with
ideas that were used to design new policies. Scholars have come to see that many of what
were considered traditional institutions were actually created during this period. The imperial
house, no doubt an old institution was re-shaped along Western lines. Even the way the
emperor dressed came to resemble the uniform of a European monarch.
SCHOLARLY APPROACHES TO THE MEIJI RESTORATION
Whether the events of 1868 represent restoration or revolution are questions that scholars
continue to debate. For example, Tetsuo Najita writes that "the Japanese emperor had no
special power structure to restore, and all the magnificent images associated with him after
the "restoration" (ishi) were the result of the ideological structure of the emperor. The modern
state, not a. legacy of recent history." The events of 1867 and 1868 were not catastrophic in
nature, and if only this period is considered, the transition from Tokugawa to Meiji seems
simple and insignificant. Looking at the beginning of the 19th century, however, it can be
seen that the changes that took place fundamentally changed Japan and created a modern
nation state. The view of the nature of this transition was influenced by the concerns of the
authors and their era.
Tokutomi Soho, a Meiji intellectual, believed that the circumstances contributed to the
creation of modern Japan, rather than Meiji leaders. He saw feudal Japan weakening with the
rise of rural leaders who had a productive economy but were denied political power. The 15th
and last Tokugawa shogun Yoshinobu, after retiring, argued that Imperial loyalism was
responsible for the restoration. Marxists in the 1920s re-examined the modern Japanese state,
producing detailed and scholarly works divided into two groups: the Labour-Farmer group
(rone-ha) saw the Meiji Restoration as a bourgeois revolution that ended feudalism and laid
the foundation for capitalist development, and the "koza" group, which argued that the Meiji
Restoration was not a successful capitalist revolution but ushered in an absolutist rule based
on the "Emperor System," which rested on feudal relations in the countryside.
Kita Ikki, an influential Japanese ideologue, saw the Meiji Restoration as a restoration-
revolution, acknowledging both forward-looking elements and constraints of the past. He
identified the new thinking and elements that led to the declaration of a modern constitution.
The Marxist arguments were closely tied to their political programs, with the emperor system
being countered if feudalism remained important.

SCHOLARSHIP AFTER WORLD WAR-II

In the post-World War II period in Japan, the debate surrounding the Restoration shifted. E.H.
Norman's interpretation of the Restoration as an alliance of "low samurai" and "merchants"
was influential, leading to the creation of the Meiji state and its characteristics of foreign
expansion and internal centralization. However, other researchers have found this framework
difficult to confirm through detailed studies. Albert Craig argued that the "lower samurai"
was irrelevant, as the "upper samurai" formed a small proportion. Thomas Huber defined
lower samurai by their income and concluded that they included ordinary village
administrators. Shibahara Takauji saw popular anti-feudal sentiments as the driving force
behind the restoration movement. Conrad Totman argued that ordinary people participated
everywhere, and that feudalism and Bakufu opposition cannot be equated. The role of popular
discontent is difficult to analyse, as many movements took place in wealthier Tokugawa
areas. Marius Jansen questioned the threat of foreign intervention, acknowledging that the
Japanese perception of foreign threats was an important force in the creation of the nation.
Further study is needed to refine our understanding of the actual processes.
However, it can be said that there are three major areas around which the debates centre:
i) The first is that the Meiji ishin arose as a protective reaction against Western
imperialist threat.
ii) Secondly, the real conflict lay between the forces of feudalism and the emerging
capitalist forces and the Meiji state which emerged was a mix of these two elements.

The Meiji Restoration was primarily caused by the internal collapse of the Tokugawa
Bakufu, which was a result of a prolonged decline and failure to respond to new
forces. Movements in the early 1860s, such as "sonno-joi" and the unification of the
hovi and bakufu (kobugattai), were voluntary but did not unite the country. Harold
Bolitho, who studied the Tokugawa fudai daimyo of Japan, argued that weak shoguns
increased the power and authority of the Han, leading to national interests becoming
the decisive force in the last years of Bakufu. This Hanseatic alliance challenged the
Bakufu and demanded political change, with the Kobugattai movement being the
main attempt to replace Bakufu. The Sono-joi movement united lower and mid-level
samurai against the Bakufu. Thomas Huber, who studied Choshu, emphasized the
classical nature of the movement that helped restore the Meiji and disagreed with
Bolitho and Totman in arguing that both dominant consciousness and national
consciousness were not decisive in the anti-Bakufu movements. Huber's study of
Heaven's Revenge in Choshu showed that class consciousness and a desire for social
justice were the main driving forces. However, his examination of the Bakufu's
attempts to reform the structure from within is less promising, as he sees the Bakufu
as fundamentally conservative and incapable of change.
THE MEIJI RESTORATION IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT
The Meiji Restoration in Japan is a significant event in the transition of non-industrialized
societies into modern nation states. However, it has been overlooked by specialists from other
areas, who have not considered the larger historical process of transitioning to a modern state.
Mexico, Turkey, and China have all experienced struggles in transitioning to modern states,
with Mexico's peasant revolution in 1910 remaining underdeveloped, Turkey's national
transformation under Kamal Ataturk in 1919 failing to develop, and China's republican
revolution in 1911 and the establishment of the Communist Party in 1949.

FROM SAVING THE PEOPLE TO MOBILISING THEM TO SERVE THE STATE

The Meiji Ishi was a time of turmoil in Japanese society, with ideas and relationships not yet
solidifying in the later "oligarchic state". The main concern became "a rich country, a strong
army" (Fukoku kyohei), and the transition from "rescue" to "mobilization" occurred with the
Meiji Restoration. This transformation did not happen through consensus and harmony, and
the Tokugawa house continued to participate in battles that brought down 120,000
government soldiers at Bakufu Toba and Fushimi, with 3,556 killed and 3,804 wounded.
The Meiji Restoration was neither a bourgeois nor a peasant revolution, with leaders
including both peasants and merchants. The opposition between "civilization" and
"Westernization" was emphasized, and the people's frustration with the change in arbitrary
customs increased, leading to struggles against the rulers and the rise of new religions like
Maruyama and Tenri. The tension between the demands of modernity and destruction of the
way of life of ordinary people was the driving force of the violence during and immediately
after the Restoration.
Japan's successful transformation was not only due to the rest it enjoyed, but also because of
its greater internal strength and indigenous institutions.
Conclusion:
The decline of the Tokugawa was caused by the generation of new social forces and the
tensions these created. Samurai, merchants and peasants found increasing problems, some of
them due to increasing productivity and prosperity. The Bakufu did respond and change but
the long-term changes in the economy, as well as the new intellectual trends but above all the
hostile international environment undermined Tokugawa rule. The middle of the nineteenth
century was the high tide of Western imperialism and Russia, Britain, France were active in
this region. Japan was saved the brunt of the onslaught because the powers were more
interested in China. Yet it must be emphasised that Japan’s transformation was carried out
under imperialist threat and this conditioned and directed her responses. The fear of being
colonized as the example of India showed, the burden of unequal treaties which removed
foreigners from Japanese jurisdiction and imposed heavy tariffs, fuelled the drive to
transform Japan into a modern nation-state.

CITATION:

 Hall, J.W. (1970). Japan from Pre-history to Modern Times. Centre for Japanese
Studies, the University of Michigsan. Chapter 13- The Meiji Restoration and Its
Meaning.

 Beasley, W.G. (1972). The Meiji Restoration. Stanford University Press.

 Fairbank, J.K., E.O. Reischauer and A. M. Craig. (1998). East Asia: Tradition and
Transformation. New Jersey: Houghton Mifflin, Chapter 15-Tokugawa Japan: A
Centralized Feudal State, Chapter 17- Japan’s Response to the West, and Chapter 18-
Modernization in Meiji Japan.