Session 6 - April 21

[Taylor Bub]

I found Tonomura's work on the Gender relations in the Age of Violence to be particularly interesting.  In the work it explains how women could obtain the title of jito and through that title were able to obtain land and that the jito title could be passed along to daughters as well.  This also called for women to fight in the wars (though few occured during this time).  The work also mentions that when women used proxies or other people to fight for them they were "targeted or condemned" for not fighting.  I found this interesting because the work goes on to explain that if women did fight and showed merit in their efforts, they were excluded from any type of reward or acknowledgement.  I wonder what would be a worse punishment for the women; to choose to go to the war and fight, possibly die, and receive no commodations for your efforts, or to stay home and send a proxy to fight for you and be condemned for it?

[Jennifer Macchiarella]

Having just read several articles about Biden's proposals to support infrastructure in the US, and listening to a local NPR stations coverage of a problematic bridge (into West Seattle, for anyone that knows the area), I found the discussion of highways in Japan to have similar themes.  While the highways allowed for the System of Alternate Attendance as leaders moved from household to household, the also supported trade.  Building and maintaining roads costs money, but any national unification depends on leaders and soldiers, and citizens, being able to move around the country.  I teach 10th grade world history and we often look at infrastructure as a function of a successful government.  This section will add to that.

When some names began to sound familiar I realized that everything I think I know about Japanese history comes from watching the mini-series Shogun at the age of 9.  I'm grateful for the opportunity to add to that early experience.

[Sean Lobberecht]

The attempted Mongol takeovers of Japan in 1274 and 1281 provide an excellent opportunity to link the history and curriculum of main land Asia and Japan. I feel using the attempted Mongol takeover of Japan could be an excellent Segway into the history of Japan. As I have stated previously, I feel it is difficult to jump around from country to country because everything is so intertwined. Examining the reasons for the failed invasions could help students understand how things are so all encompassing and hstory does not happen in a vacuum. 

I think an interesting wrinkle would be to explore the myth of the Divine Winds. As legend has it, the Japanese were saved due to the fact that the Mongol fleet was caught in a tsunami. I feel a dive into some sources to critique the validity of this story would be an excellent opportunity for students to work on their critical thinking skills and practice ability to analyze sources. I was curious if anyone new about any sources that tell the tale of this legend? It would be great if there were multiple sources in order to give students different looks at this event. Based on Professor Ptelka's slide show it looks like there would be some good art pieces that could act as an excellent opener into this event. I think this activity could be taken further if it was not just about analyzing the sources but trying to get a discussion going around what role does this myth play in a Japanese national identity? What can we learn about the culture and people of Japan through this legend?

[Sean Lobberecht]

This event would be another excellent opportunity to show how interconnected the histories of different nations are. In an earlier post I talked about using the attempted Mongol invasions as a way to transition between histories would be an excellent idea. I think using the attempted invasion of Korea could be another excellent opportunity to jump back and forth through histories. This time period also intersects with the Three Unifiers as it was Hideyoshi who attempted the invasion of Korea. trying to understand the reasons for this invasion I believe can give students a clearer insight into Japanese warrior culture and this battle for supremacy in Eastern Asia. 

Using this event as a marking period as the beginning of a Korean Japanese rivalry would be interesting as well. I am looking forward to learning more about korea so I can attempt to put together curriculum that does not teach the histories of Japan, China, and Korea in a vacuum. If anyone has any resources related to how these three states interacted that would be awesome and greatly appreciated. I really want to do a better job of teaching how the history of different nations is intertwined. I feel it does a disservice to students to ot show them how connected the world was even in ancient times so bringing them a curriculum that is robust in the sense of showing these connections I think would leave students more interested.

[Jennifer Macchiarella]

The article about gender relations reminded me of this article from the NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/world/asia/korea-comfort-women-japan.html  Regardless of their places as wives or concubines, agents of their own economy or fully dependent on male relatives, women get abused and treated as sub-human.  I wish there was more information on marriage and gender relations among the commoners.  Women getting married for dowries or to cement relationships or to produce heirs seems to go across cultures.  

[Johnny Walker]

Sean, I was thinking the same thing! I first broached Japanese history in AP Modern World this year with the attempted Mongol Invasion.

However, I was not aware that the typhoon or "Divine Wind" was more myth than fact. In fact, it would be interesting to examine the role that myth plays in justifying rule. It reminds me of the Confucian idea of "Mandate of Heaven" where oftentimes a natural event such as flood or famine (or in this case, typhoon) will either justify or undermine a ruler's legitimate claim to power. And, perhaps that myth, would be more valuable to a ruler than to recognize the skill and effectiveness of an army.

In terms of sources, the first source I would use would be the secondary source of the map that shows two distinct Mongol invasions. What I enjoyed about the reasoning for the failure of these invasions also plays into our students' understanding of the Mongols. While they were an excellent land army, the Mongols' naval power was lacking in technology and tactics. (I actually use the same description to explain Napoleon's strength and weaknesses). Furthermore, because we see two separate invasions that were conducted years apart and from different vantage points, this also undermines the story that a divine intervention caused the Mongols' failed invasion.

In terms of primary sources, there was one painting I screen grabbed from the lecture of Japanese samurai attacking Mongols on their ships. As the primary source indicates, the Mongols in this depiction were not destroyed by a typhoon, but by the bravery and skill of the samurai.

Another interesting consequence of this repelled invasion was not just a Mongol failure to expand their empire, but the failure of the Japanese Emperor to be able to compensate the army. Traditionally, the military was rewarded with booty looted from the conquered. Yet, in this instance, the traditional rewards of battle did not encourage or reward naval defense. Rather, traditional rewards of looted spoils of war would rather reward civil war, war between states, or later, the invasion and holding of outside territory. I find it fascinating that the defensive structure that would have been most useful to the Japanese to repel either Mongol or later, European and American invasion, was not made into a profitable or beneficial system for the army to participate in.

[Johnny Walker]

I've been reading a survey history, "Japan in World History" by James Huffman who also characterizes Ashikaga Yoshimitsu's rule not only as a unifying force within Japan, but also establishing formal diplomatic and trading relationships with China. Huffman notes that Yoshimitsu was granted the title of "King of Japan" by the Emperor of China (Ming Dynasty), but only after accepting a "vassal status" and an exchange of tribute which angered daimyo. However, due to this relationship (even if subservient), the Japanese enjoyed trade with China for the next 150 years. 

It's interesting to notice how the changes in successive Chinese Dynasties affect its relationship with Japan. Obviously, the Yuan (Mongol) Dynasty had an antagonistic relationship. However, during the early Ming Dynasty, I think of the famous explorer Zeng He, and the diplomacy and naval strength demonstrated by the Chinese state from the voyages across the Indian Ocean trade networks from China to East Africa. Did China also make any voyages to Japan at this point? It seems as if their naval might would have been able to significantly affect their relationship with Japan. Because they already had a trading relationship, did they not want to antagonize the Japanese? Unlike the Mongols, who did not have a strong navy, why would the Ming choose not to engage Japan more forcefully? I realize that the Ming, shortly after Zeng He's voyages, chose to close off voyages of exploration and shore up their borders. However, I wonder how suceptible Japan was to Chinese invasion during this time period and what kept the Chinese from asserting their dominance.

[Bin He]

With the development of productive forces, human society is gradually moving forward from family, tribe, tribal alliance, nation and unification. Therefore, the political system evolved from alliance, enfeoffment and centralization. In the early human society, it was a small family as a unit. After the family grew, several different families intermarried and gradually formed a larger tribe. The tribes gradually merged into a tribal alliance. The tribal alliance would take turns in power. Finally, the leader of a certain tribe monopolized the power for a long time and finally established a state. Small states submit to big states, and big states recognize the legal status of small states, which is called enfeoffment. In the big states, prefectures and counties were formed, and eventually all the states were unified, and a completely unified system was established, which was centralization.

Before we talk about Japan’s centralization process, we need to talk about China as a benchmark. The abdication of the three emperors and five emperors can be seen as the tribal alliance taking turns in power, and finally Xia Qi established the state, and other states nominally submitted to Xia. With the continuous development of productive forces and the development and possession of land, the system of enfeoffment was formally established in Zhou Dynasty, which institutionalized the management of the subject country. At the same time, its relatives were enfeoffed to establish a new country. Here, the state of Zhou was actually the largest country, and other countries accepted the king of Zhou as the ruler of the world by the force of the largest country. However, King Zhao of Zhou did not return to the south, which greatly weakened the strength of Zhou. King Li and king you eventually lost their states, and King Ping moved eastward. The strength of Zhou was no longer the same as that of other vassal states. But in the spring and Autumn period, the power of the vassal states was limited, so they could only respect the king and seek hegemony. Monarchs generally can only rely on the strength of domestic families to govern the country, leading to monarchs are easily overhead by big families. This is true in Jin and Lu dynasties. After entering the Warring States period, the major countries completed the reform and gradually realized the county system. The county system and the later centralized system, compared with the previous enfeoffment system relying on family governance, is a huge leap. The concept of "public" really established, all families are "private", and the behavior of all officials who are "public" conflicts with the "private" of the family. If we only count Zhou's enfeoffment, it took 800 years from enfeoffment to centralization.

Now let's look at Japan. From the establishment of the Kamakura shogunate to the end of the Tokugawa shogunate, from 1192 to 1868, a total of 676 years. Through the shogunate of the three dynasties, Japan gradually completed the division of power over the whole Japanese land and consolidated it. Up to the Tokugawa shogunate, Tokugawa was only the biggest name (country). On the surface, it was centralized, but the feudal states were still inherited and managed by the families themselves. The central government could not appoint officials, and the important positions of the central organization were also inherited and controlled by several families.

Although many specific situations have their own characteristics, in terms of the great historical process, what Japan's shogunate can compare with is China's Spring and Autumn period and Warring States period.

 

 

[Daniella Leiato]

This week's lectures were incredibly interesting, and I can already see how I can implement this material into my lessons! I was most intrigued by the concept of Dejima Island and Japan's relationship with the Netherlands. I'm currently working through The Tempest by Shakespeare with my tenth grade students, and we have begun to analyze the play through the critical lens of postcolonialism (colonized vs. colonizer). The play quite literally takes place on an uninhabited island, and I think that bringing in material about Dejima Island would be really beneficial in our conversation about colonization and what that looked like during the 1600s (or how colonization was resisted). While teaching Shakespeare, I typically focus on the English and their worldwide colonial efforts, but analyzing the relationship between the Japanese and the Dutch (and others) would deepen my students' global understanding of the complex nature of trade and colonization. 

[Taylor Bub]

I found the views on adoption interesting as well.  It seems so strange that they don't regard the physical genes being passed on as important as their names being passed on.  I was wondering if families might have used this method to pass over children who were unfit to inherit and run the land?  This could serve as an easy way to avoid passing land or power to those who families might be embarrassed by, in terms of behavior or otherwise.  

[Bin He]

The chivalry class in Europe is very similar to the samurai class in Japan, which is quite surprising at both ends of Eurasia. The knight class and the warrior class were both produced and formed in the military activities, and their time was similar to that of the middle Tang Dynasty.

The process of its emergence is that the monarch enfeoffs part of the territory in the activities of external war and internal centralization, thus forming a direct or indirect subordinate relationship between the two classes and the monarch. Even the moral evaluation standards of knights and warriors are surprisingly similar, which are based on a certain religion and emphasize loyalty and bravery.

In the later period, the two classes also developed from simple military aristocracy to bureaucrat, and even the modern European aristocracy and the Japanese Chinese also evolved from these two classes.

[Taylor Bub]

I found it so interesting how Dr. Pitelka discussed how the Japanese people viewed the oceans around them almost as a moat to protect them from other cultures, which allowed the to maintain such a strong cultural identity.  The idea that they kept open trade routes with only specific people (the Dutch, China and Korea) is interesting but is a testament to Japan's strength in denying colonialism.  It is interesting to think of Japan using the ocean around it as a sort of border protector, in preventing trade when they did not want it, avoiding colonialism and providing protection from a military standpoint.  I have never really though of how; lucky' Japan was in those times in allowing for them to stay so strong in their own cultural identity.

[Bin He]

The samurai, quoting from Confucian ethics, is to eat the rice of the lord of the king, and must resolutely abide by the absolute obedience of the lower to the upper. Although the chaos of "down against the upper" appeared in the Warring States period, this relationship of absolute obedience did not result Weakening is only a step-by-step strengthening, until the establishment of the Edo Shogunate, the ethics and morals of the samurai were institutionalized, so the national character of obedience has penetrated into the bones of the Japanese at this time.

A high recognition and obedience to the collective is one of the core contents of Japanese values. In contemporary Japan, it is not surprising if you see long queues during peak periods, but no one jumps in.

 

[Morgan Burt]

I also found this very interesting. During his recorded lecture he mentioned not allowing any other countries in, other than the specific times when the Dutch were allowed to trade and engage with the Japanese. However, when he also mentioned today the geographical location was also a protector, in regards to Spain and other nations being distanced. I had the same thought as you did before the lecture regarding the ocean as a protector, but not necessarily distance from other nations. 

In addition, the bubonic plague was discussed, and due to their strict border policies, I wonder if that also had an impact on low numbers or is it not even reaching Japan? This could have also served as a “protector” from the plague. 

[Melina Melgoza]

Thank you so much for a wonderful week of learning. Learning about other people, cultures, and experiences is key to support our students in learning how to be respectful and accepting of others. I learned so much from the videos and texts, but the one that particularly stood out to me was, "Gender Relations in the Age of Violence." This is the first year I teach World History, prior to that I have only taught U.S. History, Ethnic Studies, Principles of American Democracy, Government, and Student Leadership and this gave me so many ideas on how to be inclusive of Asian cultures within my other classes as well.

In Ethnic Studies, for example, we discuss ideas of sexism and other systems of oppression. Usually, I give some examples through American movies (sometimes Disney or sometimes non-cartoon clips), but after reading this article, it made me realize I should embed Asian history and understanding of gender relations. This article gives an important perspective of how women, regardless of their social standing, get treated. I think I need to be creative and constantly reimagine and think about how to embed this new knowledge. There are many important connections to be made.  

[Author]

Posts