The Kansei and Tempo Reforms

The Tempo Reforms occurred during the Tempo Era which ran from 1830-1844. According to McClain they left two enduring legacies:

1. Among Daimyo, many lords began to distrust a shogunate that seemed inept yet stubbornly determined to impose its authority over the lords by threatening to confiscate their lands;

2. In the popular mind, a pervasive sense of failed expectations indicated an incipient loss of confidence in a government among the commoners, a nascent disbelief that the shogunate or the daimyo could ever formulate solutions to the social and economic malaise that was settling over the country. (McClain, 139)

So the reform "mindset" aided in the process of joining of dual sense of crisis: naiyu with gaikan or "Troubles Within, Danger from Without." In the end, we will inevitably place great weight on the importance of the arrival of Perry and other westerners with their armed flotillas as far as sparking a crisis in Japan, but as this page shows, there already existed considerable concern over the condition in which Japan found itself in the late eightennth century and there were genuine tensions between many compnents of society. It was understood by many: samurai, merchants, artisans, farmers, etc. that the ideal Confucian model of the stable 4-class system was not really operable in Tokugawa Japan. That model did not account for the rise of huge urban centers, the spread of market economy, the conversion of the samurai to an urban, literate but mostly unemployed class which claimed elite privileges but struggled with a justification for why they should be so privileged, and what accounted for the rise of a powerful merchant class. Merchants also chafed under their ideological relegation to last place in theConfucian hierarchy and sought to justify their existence by what they contibuted to society. Many different "schools" of Confucian-educated scholars arose and debated vigorously with one another years before the foreign crisis was manifest indicating, again, that the level of internal tension and dissatisfaction was high in late Tokugawa Japan even before foreigners entered the picture. The question was, how would they deal with these issues?

The following lecture notes are from the Cambridge History of Japan, Volume 5: The Nineteenth Century, Chapter 1, pp. 50-115, “Japan in the Early Nineteenth Century,” by Marius Jansen, and Chapter 2, pp. 116-167, “The Tempo Crisis,” by Harold Bolitho.

Adapted from: http://www.ups.edu/faculty/afield/Modern_Japan/kansei_and_tempo_reforms.htm

Jansen’s Thesis: Early nineteenth century Japan saw a growing contradiction between growth and spread of knowledge and rigid restrictions and censorship, leading to frustration and alienation among educated classes. This increased as China’s position as the center of civilization gave way to knowledge of Western power.

Bolitho’s Thesis: A combination of natural calamities, internal issues (commercialization, power of merchant class, decline of samurai and daimyo), and foreign threat (Western gunships, Opium Wars) in 1830s-40s led domains to seek radical alternatives to the political, economic, and social structure under the Tokugawa bakufu.

How to synthesize these two arguments to get the larger picture?

I. Marius Jansen’s Argument from “Japan in the Early Nineteenth Century,”
He begins with the Kansei Reforms. Tokugawa Ienari reigned from 1787-1837

The Kansei Reforms were carried out by regent/minister Matsudaira Sadanobu who was determined to curb corruption and misgovernment. He established austerity measures and limits on government spending and mercantile activities; he also reduced foreign trade in Nagasaki. Very concerned with growing power of merchants and dependence of Edo on trade.

Also built up administrative government in Edo and policing.

Goal: To reverse decline of Tokugawa, while reasserting the moral authority of goverment.

1790 proscribed heterodoxy in schools: only Chushi (Zhu Xi) Confucianism allowed—advancement in office predicated on knowledge of Confucian canon (men of ability and moral fiber).

Education
Growing number of educated people reflected in growth of schools 59 domain schools established between 1781-1803, 72 more between 1800-1840. Also, the number of private academies exploded.

Development of “national studies” Kokugaku.

Commercialization of literature, publishers increased circulation.

Censorship of Christian tracts and other potentially threatening lit (political, pornographic).

Ultimately reforms encouraged growth and mobility of educated people by opening up avenues for educated people in public affairs (jobs in gov’t).

Farmer’s sons could rise to positions of power through education.

Chinese literacy spread through poetry circles and clubs.

Urban Culture
Edo population over 1 million, built up through the sankin kotai system, samurai families and their excesses catered to by servants, merchants, and traders.

Culture of decadence and excess looked down upon by moralists, samurai and daimyo portrayed as weak and dissolute. Travel for pleasure was also proscribed, seen as wasteful. Mass pilgrimages caused chaos. Edo tourist sites celebrated in travel guides, literature and art, e.g., Hiroshige’s Hundred Views.

Edo was expensive but filled with pleasure and entertainment zones. People living there had a high level of literacy. Bookshops and book rental and libraries abounded. Books were censored and thus contained humorous and fantastical themes—form of escapism.

The Countryside
Bakuhan system prevented government from establishing an efficient system of allocation and control over rural areas.

Rural productivity varied from region to region; evidence of growing gap between wealthy and poor, vulgar displays of wealth by local samurai and wealthy farmers. Samurai status could, in effect, be bought leading to fluidity and mobility but also disorder and corruption.

Bakufu in 1800s set laws to restrict flow of goods, abolished guilds, encountered organized protests and petitions from villages and made efforts to rationalize landholdings, which were divided among daimyos, shogun-held territory, temples, etc. making local population hard to control and regulate--and difficult to solve problems of rural poverty.

Debates emerged over free markets and commerce vs. regulation and control.

Rangaku: Learning and the Western World
Dutch ships restricted to dejima, provided a window on the world for Japan.

Dutch imported goods from China and SE Asia and also imported books, led to growth of rangaku “Dutch learning." Also Dutch and German doctors living in Japan imparted medical knowledge eagerly absorbed by Japanese students.

The accuracy of European medical knowledge impressed Japanese students who compared it to Chinese knowledge.

A shift began from seeing China as the source of knowledge to Europe.

Meanwhile Russia was expanding its territory in NE Asia, and in 1700s explored Kurils, Japanese gov’t began to take notice of Russian intentions.
Russia and Japan came into first military conflicts over trade and territory at turn of nineteenth century.

English traders avoided Japan but American ships probed Deshima in disguise.

By 1840s, some Japanese scholars argued that Japan needed to stop worshipping China and begin to emulate the great Western powers such as the rising industrial power of America. News of Opium War in China shifted goverment attitude from conservatism and fear to recognition of need to learn from the West.

Conclusion
There was a perceived need for a synthetic approach to the growing crisis; we see the beginnings of kokutai (National Polity) ideology pioneered by Mito scholars (Mito was an influential shimpan or collateral domain) who saw the need to synthesize Japanese traditions and religion with a powerful centralized state.

II. Bolitho’s Argument "The Tempo Crisis":

The Tempo Crisis. The Era of “heavenly protection” (or tianbao, i.e. Tempo in Japanese), began in 1830.

1833 wet summer led to crop failure, especially in NE Tohoku.

Summer rains continued thru 1836, got worse. 100,000 starved in Tohoku, rice prices skyrocketed, rose fivefold and more, sickness, disease spread among weakened populace.

Civil disorder
Popular unrest, resentment spread.

Okagemairi: spontaneous pilgrimages of farmers to Ise Shrine.

Over Tempo era, scholars count 465 rural disputes, 445 peasant uprising, 101 urban riots, which peaked in 1836.

The scale of the uprisings was unprecedented; traditional leadership of village heads broke down as the poor attacked the rich.

Urban prices fluctuated violently leading to unrest, large populations of urban indigent as a result of urbanization over past century, highly volatile.

In 1837, Oshio Heihachiro, ex-gov’t official, circulated pamphlets attacking officialdom, organized peasant revolt against Osaka, encouraged redistribution of wealth (Robin Hood stuff), led 300 peasants to attack city, put down in 12 hours but caused damage and sensation.

The Foreign Threat
Western vessels impinging on Japanese shores.
August 1837 American ship Morrison left Macao for Japan to repatriate Japanese castaways, landed in Edo Bay, driven off by gunfire. By 1840 reports of British opium wars in China had reached Japan, frightened people.

Critics and Criticism
Popular unrest plus foreign military threat led people to questions effectiveness and entitlements of Tokugawa government, of daimyos and high-ranking samurai.

Lower samurai untrained and ill equipped, used to centuries of peace, also relatively poor.

264 daimyo relatively poor too, couldn’t keep up with changes in agriculture, which had divided into wealthy landlords and poor tenants, growth in commercial crops over subsistence crops: cotton, tobacco, indigo, more difficult to tax.
Government ran up debt.

Samurai lived in luxury in cities, used to effete lifestyles.
Criticism of samurai, of political situation, came from people of all walks of life.
Who is to blame? How should one interpret events? How should we deal with situation?

Many blamed the government for its corruption, low morals, arrogance and ignorance, its isolation, and poor defenses.
The government reacted with hostility, arrested dissidents, purged western learning.

The Daimyo system with its fragmented authority prevented internal wars but was poor in dealing with serious national crisis. The Daimyo system could not prevent foreign invasion. The Sankin kotai system straitjacketed daimyos, kept them powerless. What should they do?

Answer: The Daimyo should be able to fortify their domains, stock weapons and build ships. Sato Nobuhiro argued for a centralized state.

Domain Reforms
Traditional response to crises was “reform,” kaishin or chuko, kaikaku (gaige), vague response to unprecedented crisis.

Economy, frugality, promotion of men of talent—traditional Confucian response to disorder, saw crisis as moral not political/economic.

Domains reacted differently according to geographic location and other factors, some blame corruption of samurai city ways, urged frugality. Some cut samurai stipends, leading to more problems. Some argued for restriction of commerce.

Taxation discussed but not implemented—too dangerous.

Some encouraged cooperation between gov’t and merchants, granthing them samurai status in return for loans and expertise, building of daimyo monopolies on trade goods like cotton, wax, seed oil, paper, tobacco, and sugar.

Some daimyo fortified defenses, encouraged samurai to spread out and form peasant militia (similar to China).

Some imported weapons from Nagasaki, sent men to be trained in Western gunnery. Learned to build and use cannon and artillery.

Domains were hampered by inner factionalism, and resistance of han leaders to change.
Commercial competition among domains drove up prices, ruined stable economic relations. Domains in race for development both military and economic.

Bakufu Reforms
Shogun administrative area six times greater than any daimyo, had larger burden.
Scattered domains made administration difficult.

Tax loss, famine relief, civil unrest were huge problems.
Bakufu also responsible for pacifying barbarians. Yet shogun clung to status quo; the bakufu only began reforms in 1841 after Tempo Era had passed.

Why the delay? They needed opportunity. They waited for death of Ienari, 11th shogun, who reigned for 50 years.

Huge shakeup and purge of high officials in court followed.

Bakufu looked to Kansei and earlier “Confucian” reforms as model.
Moral health needed restoration. Urban life with gambling, drink, sex needed reform. Prostitution in Yoshiwara and other areas. Yet unlicensed prostitution flourished everywhere.
Teahouses and restaurants ordered closed, mixed bathing outlawed. Lotteries, gambling, tatoos prohibited. Porn literature, racy novels banned. Music halls and entertainment proscribed. Actors banished. Sumptuary regulations enforced.

Foreign policy changed, ships should be supplied with what they needed.
Study of foreign countries and military encouraged.

Land was reclaimed, wasteland cultivated. Policies designed to discourage rural migrants who plagued city and countryside. Restriction in mobility enforced.

In other words, no radical reforms; instead every reform program drew from traditional responses to disorder.

But in pricing and trade policy, some radical changes were made. Previously the bakufu had controlled trade and prices thru control of guilds, but guilds had spread underground over years. New policies encouraged free trade, lifting of restrictions on people engaged in trade. Idea was that prices would go down if restrictions lifted.

Daimyo monopolies targeted as sources of artificially high prices. Yet this affected economic stability in domains. Could shogunate really control the domains? Much resistance to interference—shogunate no longer as powerful as before. In 1843 Ieyoshi went to Nikko to worship at tombs of ancestors Ieyasu and Iemitsu. Domains forced to support shogun’s retinue and serve as escorts, others had to guard his castle. Many saw ritual as outdated and wasteful. Why revive it after 70 years? Shogun wanted to display his power over daimyo.

Bakufu also reappropriated land from domains to rationalize its holdings. Conservative? Yes but unprecedented show of power over domains.

Mizuno Tadakuni
1794-1851, architect of Tempo reforms. Known for love of food and sex. Daimyo of Hamamatsu. Led purges in 1841 following Ienari’s death. Not sure why he carried out these reforms.

Possibly influenced by the Opium Wars. After Opium Wars, Sato Nobuhiro, advocate of centralized government, was pardoned and Mizuno requested him to rewrite his blueprints for unified nation-state.

The Aftermath

Tempo reforms ended or whithered away quickly, or exploded in domains where the reformers were dismissed. In 1843 Mizuno was kicked out of office.

Did reforms succeed? Not really. In some cases they caused opposite of intended effect, eg price rises as result of lax controls over trade.

Urbanization and commercialization were forces impossible to stop.
Bakufu attempts to rationalize its domains met with popular unrest. Daimyo resisted impositions by bakufu.

Abe Masahiro installed as successor to Mizuno. He did nothing to change situation.

The Implications
Tempo era critical to understanding collapse of Tokugawa and feudal system.
Issue of defense highly sensitive. Who gets weapons? Would daimyos turn on each other?
New political alignments: Tokugawa Nariaki, daimyo of Mito, became immensely powerful, gathered men who dominated politics for next twenty years.
New factions and alliances built among daimyo. Mito learning popularized. Arms race begins.

Synthesis
Both scholars note the complete inadequacy of "traditional" (Chinese) methods of reform given the radically new social, economic context of Japan's nineteenth-century. Both recognize the importance of internal dynamics: the growth in economic and political power of a mercantile class, the relative decline in fortunes of samurai and daimyo as the country was increasingly urbanized and commercialized, and the difficulties of maintaining the bakuhan system in light of these radical of realignment. Western gunships may have catalyzed the Meiji Restoration and Japan’s bid to “modernize” and build a centralized state and industrialized economy, but the sources of tension lay within Japanese society well before the intrusion of Western powers in the mid-1800s.