73. “Nara Takeji kaisroku (san),” pp. 357–58.
74. Ibid., p. 355; Jiji shinbun (Aug. 10, 1925).
75. “Nara Takeji kaisroku (san),” p. 355.
76. Asano Kazuo, “Taishki ni okeru rikugun shokono shakai ninshiki to rikugun no seishin kyiku: Kaiksha kiji no ronsetsu kiji no bunseki,” in Nakamura Katsunori, ed., Kindai Nihon seiji no shos: jidai ni yoru tenkai to ksatsu (Kei Tsshin, 1989), p. 455.
77. Fujiwara, Shwa tenn no jgonen sens, p. 43.
78. Ibid., p. 44.
79. Miyaji Masato, “Seiji shi ni okeru tenn no kin” in Rekishigaku kenkykai, ed., Tenn to tennsei o kangaeru (Aoki Shoten 1988), p. 97.
80. Yasuda Hiroshi, “Kindai tennsei ni okeru kenryoku to ken’i—Taish demokurashii-ki no ksatsu,” in Bunka hyron 357 (Oct. 1990), p. 188.
81. Ibid., p. 157. Article 1 of the new thought-control law stated:
Anyone who has formed an association with the object of altering the national polity [kokutai] or the form of government [seitai], or disavowing the system of private ownership, or anyone who has joined such an association with the full knowledge of its objects, shall be liable to imprisonment with or without hard labor for a term not exceeding ten years.
82. Suzuki, “Taish demokurashii to kokutai mondai,” p. 63.
83. Kojima, Tenn, dai ikkan, pp. 342–43. Kaneko Fumiko eventually committed suicide while in prison.
84. Kanazawa Fumio, “Gyzaisei seiri, fusen, chian ijih: dai 49 kai teikoku gikai–dai 52 kai teikoku gikai,” in Uchida Kenzet al., eds., Nihon gikai shi roku 2 (Dai Ichihki Shuppan K. K., 1990), pp. 400–401.
85. Suzuki, Kshitsu seido, p. 167.
86. Ibid., p. 167.
87. Suzuki, Kindai no tenn, p. 52.
88. Tokoro Shigemoto, Kindai shakai to Nichirenshugi (Hyronsha, 1972), pp. 130–32.
89. Ibid., p. 133.
90. Ibid., p. 135.
91. Maruyama Teruo, “Tennsei to shky,” in Inoue Kiyoshi et al., Shwa no shen to tennsei no genzai (Shinsensha, 1988), p. 183.
92. Right-wing organizations increased from 23 in 1926 to 196 in 1932. After 1929 many of them added anticapitalist rhetoric to their usual anti-Westernism. The more important ones were the new study associations in which young bureaucrats played leading roles. See Suzuki, Kshitsu seido, p. 170.
93. In the early 1930s, Yasuoka reaffirmed the separation of the kokutai from the form of government (seitai), and preached that any form of government, whether parliamentarism or military dictatorship, should be tolerated as long as it served to protect the kokutai. Otabe Yji, “Tennsei ideorogii to shin Ei-Bei ha no keifu: Yasuoka Masahiro o chshin ni” in Shien vol. 43, no. 1 (May 1983), pp. 27, 29, and n. 3.
94. Suzuki, Kindai no tenn, pp. 51–52.
95. Ibid., p. 53, citing Nagata, p. 85.
96. Ibid., p. 54.
97. Kurozawa Fumitaka, “Gunbu no ‘Taish demokurashii’ ninshiki no ichidanmen,” in Kindai Gaikshi Kenkykai, ed., Hendki no Nihon gaik to gunji: shiry to kent (Hara Shob, 1987), p. 49.
98. Ibid., p. 48.
99. Ibid., p. 49, citing Inspector General of Military Education Mut Nobuyoshi in Mar. 1932.
100. Kawano Hitoshi, “Taish, Shwa-ki gunji eriito no keisei katei: rikugun shk no gun kyaria sentaku to gun gakk teki ni kansuru jissh bunseki,” in Tsutsui Kiyotada, ed., ‘ Kindai Nihon’ no rekishi shakai gaku: shin-sei to kz (Bokutakusha, 1990), pp. 95–140.
101. Hata Ikuhiko, ed., Nihon riku-kaigun sg jiten (Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai, 1991), p. 735.
102. Kawano, “Taish-Shwa-ki gunji eriito no keisei katei,” pp. 105–6.
103. Ibid., p. 120.
104. KYN, dai ikkan, pp. 33–35, 37, 41–42.
105. Watanabe, “Tennsei kokka chitsujo no rekishiteki kenky josetsu,” p. 264.
106. Ibid., p. 265.
107. Ibid., p. 262.
108. Takahashi Yichi, “Inoue Tetsujir fukei jiken saik” in Terasaki Masao et al., eds., Kindai Nihon ni okeru chi no bunpai to kokumin Tg (Dai Ichihki K. K., 1993), p. 347. The pamphlet carried the names Tyama Mitsuru, Tanaka Hiroyuki, Iogi Ryzo, and Ashizu Kjiro.
109. Ibid., pp. 349, 358.
110. Tokoro, Kindai shakai to Nichirenshugi, p. 119.
111. Tanaka Hinosuke, Shishi dan shen, 6 (Shishi Zensh Kankkai, 1937), pp. 343ff.
112. Tamura Yoshiro, “Kindai Nihon no ayumi to Nichirenshugi,” in Tamura Yoshir and Miyazaki Eishu, eds., Kza Nichiren 4, Nihon kindai to Nichirenshugi (Shunjsha, 1972), p. 3.
CHAPTER 5
THE NEW MONARCHY AND THE NEW NATIONALISM
1. KYN, dai ikkan, p. 66. The number 124 was concocted centuries earlier by not counting empresses, deleting the emperors of the southern court, and lopping off names that did not accord with certain sources. No one knows exactly how many emperors Japan has had because the dynastic records do not correlate and are contradictory, and the way of naming them has changed over time.
2. The four rescripts are reproduced and discussed in Senda Kak, Tenn to chokugo to Shwashi (Sekibunsha, 1983), pp. 21–25.
3. Hatano Sumio, “Mansh jihen to ‘kych’ seiryoku,” in Tochigi shigaku 5 (1991), p. 108. Nara did not always “act in unison” with the court group but frequently gave priority in his actions to the army organization to which he belonged.
4. Problems connected with defining the court group are addressed in NH.
5. When Kichizaemon died in June 1926, Saionji expressed his concern to Makino over how to secure the Sumitomo family after the death of its head. “The new head of the Sumitomo family is very young, but that family’s influence is great and is not limited to them. Since Sumitomo is a state organ it is desirable for the public interest and security to have its foundation strengthened. I agree completely with the prince.” See MNN, p. 259.
6. Hatano, “Mansh jihen to ‘kych’ seiryoku,” p. 107.
7. Hirohito summoned Saionji to Tokyo after Prime Minister Inukai was assassinated in May 1932, and again following the army mutiny of February 26, 1936, at which time Saionji participated in the selection of Hirota kki as prime minister. See Harada Kumao, Saionji k to seikyoku, dai gokan (Iwanami Shoten, 1951), pp. 6, 8. Cited hereafter as Harada nikki.
8. Masuda Tomoko, “Tenn: kindai,” in Nihonshi, 4 kan, p. 1244.
9. NH, p. 28.
10. On Harada’s career, see Thomas F. Mayer-Oakes, Fragile Victory: Prince Saionji and the 1930 London Treaty Issue, from the Memoirs of Baron Harada Kumao, Translated with an Introduction and Annotations (Wayne State University Press, 1968), pp. 41–42.
11. Although Konoe and Hirohito differed profoundly on certain foreign policy issues, Konoe remained personally close to Hirohito until mid–1941.
12. Shji Junichir, “Konoe Fumimaro-z no saikent: taigai ishiki o chshin ni,” in Kindai Gaikshi Kenkykai, hen, Hendki no Nihon gaik to gunji (Hara Shob, 1987), esp. pp. 101–5.
13. Gt Muneto, “Taish demokurashii to kazoku shakai no saihen,” in Rekishigaku kenky 694 (Feb. 1997), pp. 19–34, 63.
14. Mizutani Taichir, “Kytei seijika no ronri to kd: Kido Kichi nikki ni tsuite,” in Mizutani Taichir, Taish demokurashiiron: Yoshino Sakuzjidai to sonogo (Ch Kronsha, 1974), pp. 176–287.
15. Masuda, “Tenn: Kindai,” p. 1243.
16. Watanabe Osamu, “Tenn,” in Nihonshi, yonkan (Heibonsha, 1994), p. 1246.
17. It Takashi, “Kaisetsu,” in MNN, p. 715; also pp. 321, 323; Suzuki, Kshitsu seido, p. 169.
18. KYN, dai ikkan, pp. 79–80. After conveying Konoe’s views to high Imperial Household Ministry officials, Kawai went back to Konoe at the House of Peers. When Kawai returned to the palace, he mailed a copy of his proposal to Konoe. Kawai also sought the advice of constitutional law scholar Uesugi Shinkichi.
19. “Nara Takeji kaisroku (san),” p. 327. Meiji was not enshrined and worshiped as a god until 1920, eight years after his death.
20. Nakajima Michio, Tenn no daigawari to kokumin (Aoki Shoten, 1990) p. 116; KYN, dai ikkan, pp. 73–80.
21. KYN, dai ikkan, p. 2
19, entry of Oct. 8, 1927; Japan Times and Mail, Nov. 5, 1928.
22. See Kawai’s diary entry of May 1, 1929; Takahashi Hiroshi, “Kaisetsu: tsukurareta kych saishi,” in KYN, dai rokkan (Iwanami Shoten, 1994), pp. 256–57. Takahashi notes that both rice cultivation and the practice of sericulture were deeply related to the Harvest Festival, the most important ceremony of the imperial house. The new, unhulled harvest was offered by the emperor to the gods, while silk drapery was employed in the requiem for dead emperors, held on the eve of the Harvest Festival.
23. For details see NH; Kanazawa Shio, “Gysei seiri, fusen, chian ijih: dai 49 kai teikoku gikai-dai 52 kai teikoku gikai,” in Uchida Kenz et al., eds., Nihon Gikai shiroku 2 (Dai Ichi Hki Shuppan K. K., 1990), pp. 401–6.
24. See the long entry of June 15, 1927, in MNN, pp. 268–69.
25. NH, p. 5.
26. On Oct. 30, 1928, General Ugaki criticized the money lavished on the enthronement ceremonies at a time when “the masses are suffering for lack of adequate food and clothing.” He later noted: “Police control throughout the period of the succession…was extraordinarily severe and many critical voices are saying that it exceeded the bounds of common sense.” Cited in Ogino Fujio, “‘Shwa tairei’ to tennsei keisatsu: Shwa tairei keibi kiroku o chshin ni,” in Nishi Hidenari et al., Shwa tairei kiroku shiry: kaisetsu (Fuji Shuppan, 1990), pp. 30, 55.
27. In 1927 the Tokyo Broadcasting System (today’s NHK) produced the first live broadcast of the National Middle School Baseball Tournament from Koshien Stadium in Nishinomiya City, Hygo prefecture. The following year saw its first broadcast of a sumo wrestling tournament. Sasaki Ryji, Gendai tennsei no kigen to kin, p. 90.
28. In contrast to state Shinto, a complete creature of the Japanese government, sectarian Shinto had more leeway in interpreting Shinto, except where its teachings clashed with kokutai ideology.
29. See Takahashi Hiroshi, “Shinkakuka no kizashi: Shwa no tairei,” in KYN, dai ikkan, pp. 307–8.
30. Nakajima, Tenn no daigawari to kokumin, p. 109.
31. Takashi Fujitani, Splendid Monarchy: Power and Pageantry in Modern Japan (University of California Press, 1996), p. 236.
32. Sasaki, Gendai tennsei no kigen to kin, pp. 90–91.
33. Cited from Mochizuki Keisuke den, p. 361, in Nakajima, Tenn no daigawari to kokumin, p. 119.
34. Nakajima (Tenn no daigawari to kokumin, p. 110) furnishes a good example of such counterpoint in the following instruction given by Education Minister Shda Kazuo to a conference of local officials on July 13, 1928:
Nowadays many people harbor thoughts that run counter to national sentiment based on the kokutai. Influenced by these ideas, some students have been violating their duties; others have even been implicated in the recent Communist Party incident. This is a matter of grave concern for the state…. In order to save this situation, we first should have them understand the founding principles of our country and thereby nurture in them a firm, unshakable national spirit…. I believe the forthcoming grand enthronement ceremonies provide the greatest opportunity for us to heighten the spirit of students and get them to master the concept of the kokutai.
35. Fujiwara Akira, ed., Nihon minsh no rekishi 8, dan’atsu no arashi no naka de (Sanseid, 1975), p. 180.
36. Nakajima, Tenn no daigawari to kokumin, pp. 60–61.
37. Nishi Hidenari, “‘Shwa tairei’ to kokumin: ‘Shwa tairei yoroku’ o chshin toshite,” in Nishi Hidenari et al., Shwa tairei kiroku shiry: kaisetsu, p. 25.
38. Ibid.
39. For the material in this and the next paragraph, I am indebted to Christine Kim, “Imperial Pageantry in the Colonies: An Examination of the Korean Response to Hirohito’s Enthronement” (paper, Harvard University, Apr. 1997).
40. Senda, Tenn to chokugo to Shwa-shi, p. 77; Nezu, Tenn to Shwa-shi, j (San Ichi Shob, 1976), pp. 46–47; Tokush Bungei shunj: tenn hakusho (Oct. 1956), p. 77; Okada Seiji and Hikuma Takenori, “Sokui no rei, daijsai no rekishiteki kent,” in Bunka hyron 357 (Oct. 1990), pp. 62–87.
41. The historian Yasumaru Yoshio notes that according to Miyaji, the daijsai rite was discontinued from 1466 to 1687, replaced by a ritual of purification by water, and it was no longer needed. The daijsai was resumed in 1687, under the influence of Suika Shinto, which emphasized the emperor’s bansei ikkei. Henceforth the emperor was a god not only for reasons of bloodline descent but also because Amaterasu mikami had directly invested him with divinity as a result of his sharing of sacred grain with her. This was the concept of the daijsai adopted by the Meiji elite in an official instruction on the daijsai in 1871. See Yasumaru Yoshi, Kindai tennz no keisei (Iwanami Shoten, 1992), p. 23. The adherents of the heretical Shinto sects of motoky and Tenriky rejected this official view.
42. Nakajima, Tenn no daigawari to kokumin, p. 58; Okada, Hikuma, “Sokui no rei, daijsai no rekishiteki kent,” p. 79.
43. Tomura Masahiro, Shinwa to saigi: Yasukuni kara daijsai e (Nihon Kitoku Kydan Shuppankyoku, 1988), p. 68; Yuge Tru, “Roma ktei reihai to tenn shinka,” in Rekishi hyron 406 (Feb. 1984), where he notes that in contrast to the ancient Romans who deified their emperors in broad daylight, usually after death, the Japanese deified their emperors while they were still living, at night. Also see Okada, Hikuma, “Sokui no rei, daijsai no rekishiteki kent,” p. 77; Ihara Yoriaki, Kshitsu jiten (Toyamabo, 1943), p. 75. Gyoza or goza is defined as the seat or seats in front of a deity, where the emperor, empress, or grand dowager sits.
44. The Tokyo nichi nichi shimbun reported on Nov. 15, 1928: “There is no way to view the shinza within the innermost chambers since it has always been the most sacred, awe-inspiring mystery,” and, “One should not make indiscriminate inferences about the mysteries within the innermost chambers.” Cited in Yuge, “Roma ktei reihai to tenn shinka,” p. 9.
45. Nishi, “‘Shwa tairei’ to kokumin: ‘Shwa tairei yoroku’ o chshin toshite,” p. 26.
46. Japan Times and Mail, Dec. 3 and 4, 1928.
47. Nakajima, Tenn no daigawari to kokumin, pp. 79–80.
48. Japan Times and Mail, Nov. 23, 1928.
49. Yasumaru, Kindai tenn zono keisei, pp. 23–24. The theory of Hirohito’s deification was strengthened by the publication in 1928 of Daijsai no hongi (Cardinal principles of the great food offering ceremony) by the ethnologist Origuchi Nobuo, who argued that the emperor has a divine nature because of his sacred marriage during the daijsai.
50. Sasaki, Gendai tennsei no kigen to kin, p. 91.
51. Nakamura Masanori, Nihon no rekishi 29, rdsha to nmin (Shgakukan, 1976), p. 325; Hsei Daigaku hara Shakai Mondai Kenkyjo, ed., Shakai, rd und dai nenpy, dai ikkan, 1858–1945 (Rd Junpsha, 1986), p. 278.
52. One procession (May 28 to June 9, 1929) was to the Kansai region (Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto); another to Shizuoka prefecture from May 18 to June 3, 1930: a third to Gumma, Tochigi, and Saitama prefectures in Nov. 1934, and a fourth to Hokkaido from Sept. 24 to Oct. 12, 1936.
53. Sakamoto Kjir, Shch tennsei e no pafuoomansu: Shwa-ki no tenn gyk no hensen (Kamakawa Shuppansha, 1989), pp. 4–5; Dai Kasumi Kai, ed., Naimu shshi, dai sankan (Chih Zaimu Kykai, 1971), p. 770. Nara linked the 1928 revision of the Peace Preservation Law to the government’s fear of direct appeals to the emperor while on tour. See “Nara Takeji kaisroku (san),” p. 367.
54. Naimush-shi, dai sankan, pp. 761–62.
55. Ibid., pp. 761–63.
56. Yasumaru, Kindai tennz no keisei, pp. 289–90.
57. Jitsugy no Nihon zkan: gotaiten kinen shashing (Nov. 1928), p. 57.
58. Hoshino Teruoki, “Tairei no shogi oyobi sono igi,” in Jitsugy no Nihon (Nov. 1928), p. 69.
59. During 1927–28, the initiative in promoting the divine and militaristic image of the emperor came directly from the palace, and from key figures in the court milieu and civil bureaucracy. They began the proselytization of the Japanese spirit and gave new life to extremism originating from within orthodoxy.
60. Nakajima, Tenn no daigawari to kkumin, pp. 123–24.
/> 61. From “The Great Enthronement Ceremony and National Morality: Strive to Promote the Way of the Father and the Mother,” an editorial in “Yokohama beki shimp,” July 14, 1928, cited in Nakajima, Tenn no daigawari to kokumin, p. 125.
62. Ibid., p. 128.
63. Ibid.
64. Ibid., pp. 129–30.
65. Ibid., p. 129, from “Young Japan and Its Wordly Mission,” Dec. 1, 1928.
66. Ibid., p. 130.
67. D. C. Holtom, Modern Japan and Shinto Nationalism: A Study of Present-Day Trends in Japanese Religions (University of Chicago Press, 1943), pp. 23–24.
68. Yasumaru, Kindai tennz no keisei, pp. 12–13.
69. Nakajima, Tenn no daigawari to kokumin, p. 131.
70. Fujiwara Akira, ed., Nihon minsh no rekishi 8, dan’atsu no arashi no naka de, pp. 178–79.
CHAPTER 6
A POLITICAL MONARCH EMERGES
1. Suzuki Masayuki, Kindai tennsei no shihai chitsujo (Azekura Shob, 1986), part 2.
2. Senshi ssho 31, kaigun gunsenbi 1 (1969), pp. 375–76; Kurono Taeru, “Shwa shoki kaigun ni okeru kokub shis no tairitsu to konmei: kokub hshin no dainiji kaitei to daisanji kaitei no aida,” in Gunji shigaku 34, no. 1 (June 1998), pp. 12–13.
3. For chronology see Nakamura Masanori, ed., Nenpy Shwa shi (Iwanami Shoten, 1989), p. 5.
4. Hirohito attended the privy council deliberations on the edict, was aware of the crackdown being mounted against the Left, and sought to have certain unspecified conditions or reservations added to the rescript before approving it. What they were, and what he found objectionable in Prime Minister Tanaka’s reporting of the matter to him, is not known. KYN, dai nikan, pp. 110–11; MNN, pp. 321, 322.
5. Kanda Fuhito, “Kindai Nihon no sens: horyo seisaku o chshin toshite,” in Kikan sens sekinin kenky 9 (Autumn 1995), p. 15.
6. Yui Daizabur, Kosuge Nobuko, Reng koku horyo gyakutai to sengo sekinin (Iwanami Bukkuretto no. 321, 1993), p. 19. In opposing the ratification of the Geneva Treaty of July 27, 1927, Concerning the Treatment of Prisoners of War, naval leaders, on Nov. 15, 1934, argued that “Japanese military personnel are forbidden to become prisoners;” and “[i]f we adopt the treaty as it stands…we would have to revise the regulations governing punishment in the military, which would make discipline very difficult to maintain.”
Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan Page 74