Hiraizumi Kiyoshi (1895-1984): 'Spiritual History' in the Service of the Nation In Twentieth Century Japan

By

Kiyoshi Ueda

A Thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Department of History, in the University of Toronto

© Copyright by Kiyoshi Ueda, 2008 Library and Bibliotheque et 1*1 Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition

395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Canada Canada

Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-44743-7 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-44743-7

NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par Plntemet, prefer, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non­ sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation. reproduced without the author's permission.

In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne Privacy Act some supporting sur la protection de la vie privee, forms may have been removed quelques formulaires secondaires from this thesis. ont ete enleves de cette these.

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires in the document page count, aient inclus dans la pagination, their removal does not represent il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant. any loss of content from the thesis. Canada Abstract 11

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi (1894-1985): 'Spiritual History' in the Service of the Nation In Twentieth Century Japan

Kiyoshi Ueda Doctorate of Philosophy Department of History, University of Toronto, 2008

Abstract

Why and how can some Japanese remain "un-repentant" about their wartime history and even reaffirm the righteousness of Japan's military actions during the Second World War?

Both Japanese and foreign observers have been puzzled by "outrageous" statements and

"unjustifiable" historical interpretations, often concluding that Japan is unable to come to terms with its recent past. While liberal and Marxist historians in Japan have made pioneer studies of the consequences of Japan's military actions and the victims of Japan's wartime ideology, few have tried to identify the source of the logic underlying "Japan's un-repentant" views or to pursue the subject critically and constructively, neither blindly romanticizing nor dogmatically condemning it.

This dissertation examines the role of "spiritual history" in the service of the nation in 20th century Japan. More specifically, it identifies a view of medieval history which state authorities actively promoted in the prewar period as the "ethical, moral, historical, and religious" backbone of "Japan's un-repentance" in the postwar period. It locates the source of this view of medieval history in the 19th century, when the Japanese government

Kiyoshi Ueda Abstract iii promoted the ethical and moral principles underlying the "southern court" view of history

(Nancho seito ron shikan), a 17th and 18th ethical and moral interpretation of 14th century

Japan (and a core component of spiritual history), as guiding principles for the moral education of imperial subjects. This set of principles was applied to the relationship between individuals and the state. It set Japan's overseas expansion within the context of

Japanese mythology and shaped Japan's perceptions of the war until 1945. Despite

American efforts to erase Japan's prewar values, some wartime proponents of the southern court view of history preserved these principles and used them to influence national debates in the postwar period. This set of principles continues to function as a source of the logic behind the illogicality of Japan's "un-repentance" today.

The thesis follows the life of "spiritual" historian Hiraizumi Kiyoshi (1895-1984), chief professor of the Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University from the late 1920s to

Japan's defeat in 1945. Hiraizumi played a key role in the inheritance (before 1920s), revitalization (1920s and early 1930s), application (1930s), reinforcement (1940s), and continuation (from 1945 to 1984) of these principles in the service of the imperial nation.

The study places him in the centre of the intellectual history of 20th century Japan, using empirical methods to determine a cause of the ongoing postwar historical controversy. The study is intended to serve as a model for the future study of Japanese national history from inside.

Kiyoshi Ueda Acknowledgements iv

Acknowledgments

I was able to complete this work because of the guidance, assistance, and encouragement I received in Canada and Japan. I would like to begin by thanking historians at the

Department of History at University of Toronto for their guidance. I am particularly grateful to Professor Ian Radforth for agreeing to become my supervisor and for giving me invaluable comments on the first draft in 2007. I would like to thank Professor Andre

Schmid, Professor Tom Keirstead and Professor Ken Kawashima of the Department of

East Asian Studies for their evaluation of the dissertation in spring 2008. I would like to thank Professor Peter Nosco of the Centre for Asian Studies at University of British

Columbia for reading my dissertation as External Examiner in May-June 2008.

1 should also mention Professor Jane Abray, Head of the Department of History,

Professor Eric Jennings, former Graduate Coordinator in the Department of History,

Professor Lori Loeb, Graduate Coordinator of the Department of History, and Jennifer

Francisco (currently at the Faculty of Medicine) and Davina Joseph, Graduate

Administrators of the Department of History, and Celia Sevilla, Programme Administrator of the Department of East Asian Studies who made the administrative arrangements necessary for the defense and completion of my dissertation. Thanks go to Professor

Emeritus Sylvia Van Kirk and Professor Emeritus Robert Accinelli who were helpful when

I began my graduate studies. Professor Timothy Brook (currently at University College,

University of Oxford) and Professor Michael Szoyni (currently at Harvard University) gave me comments when I presented papers at the Faculty/Graduate Student Colloquium.

I would also like to thank the members of my former thesis committee: Professor

Emeritus John S Brownlee of the Department of History, Professor Emeritus Michael

Kiyoshi Ueda Acknowledgements v

Donnelly, and Professor Emeritus Victor Falkenheim of the Department of Political

Science. Professor Brownlee educated me in the study of modern Japanese history with tremendous patience, and he wrote numerous letters of introduction each time I visited

Japan for field research. Thanks go to Professor Emeritus Shuzo Uyenaka, Professor

Emeritus David Waterhouse and Professor Rick Guisso of the Department of East Asian

Studies, Dr. Yasko Nishimura, Associated Scholar in the Department of History &

Philosophy of Science & Medicine, Jen Hoff, Editor at Pontifical Institute in St Michael's

College, Frank Hoff, Professor Emeritus of Japanese Literature and Performing Arts at the

Department of East Asian Studies, and to the staff of the Cheng Yu Tung East Asian

Library in Robarts Library, where I began my study on modern Japanese history.

I have done most of my research in Japan and have received a great deal of support there. I was a research fellow at Institute of Social Sciences at University of Tokyo for two years, researching under the mentorship of Hiraishi Naoaki, Professor Emeritus of

Japanese Intellectual History and former Head of the Institute. Professor Hiraishi allowed me to attend his seminar on the reading of historical materials from the early modern period and always welcomed me in his office to discuss my research. I benefited from discussions with Sekiguchi Sumie, formerly a doctoral student in the Faculty of Law and now Assistant Professor of Japanese Intellectual History at Hosei University. I was also helped by Karube Tadashi, Professor of Japanese Intellectual History in the Faculty of

Law.

My research topic was shaped by the wealth of materials available through the

University's library system, the main library, as well as the following; the libraries of the

Institute of Social Sciences, the Historiographical Institute, the Institute of Social

Information Research, and the Institute of Oriental Culture; the libraries of the Faculties of

Kiyoshi Ueda Acknowledgements vi

Literature, Economics, Law, Agriculture, and Education; and the Library for Magazines and Newspapers of the Meiji Period. In particular, I would like to thank the Division of

Primary Sources on Early Modern and Modern History in the Faculty of Law for allowing me to use Takeshita Masahiko Diary.

Accomplished students of various schools of history mentored me on research on modern history with primary sources in Japan. Ito Takashi, Professor Emeritus at the

University of Tokyo, Professor at the Graduate School of Policy Studies (Seisaku kenkyu daigakuin), and Dean of the Empirical Study of Modern Japanese History, kindly and patiently advised me on empirical methods of historical enquiry, unwritten diplomacy, and the etiquette necessary to obtain primary sources. Professor Ito also introduced me to Mrs.

Kono Shizuko of Tokutomi Soho Memorial Museum; with his introduction, I was allowed to have a copy of Hiraizumi's letters to Tokutomi Soho.

I want to express my gratitude to the following historians in Japan: Professor

Kimura Masato, Chief Researcher, Shibusawa Eiichi Memorial Foundation; Professor

Emeritus Yamane Yukio, Tokyo Women's University; Professor Masuda Hiroshi, Toyo

Eiwa Women's University; Professor Shimizu Kiyoshi, Kogakukan University; Mr. Nagae

Taro, a member of the Board of Directors of the Association of the Study of Japan

(Nihongaku kyokai); Daito Nobusuke, Head Librarian, Kaiko Library at Yasukuni Shrine;

Inoue Jun, Head of the Section of Historical Sources at Shibusawa Memorial Museum;

Professor Yoshida Yutaka, Hitotsubashi University; Professor Awaya Kentaro, Rikkyo

University; Professor Nakahara Michiko, Vice-President of the International Department,

Waseda University; and Professor Emeritus Kano Masanao, Waseda University.

In the course of my research I conducted a number of telephone interviews. I interviewed two of Hiraizumi's students. I spoke with Tanaka Takashi, Professor Emeritus

Kiyoshi Ueda Acknowledgements vii of Ancient Japanese History and former President of Kogakukan University, as well as the late Murao Jiro, a former chief member of the censorship committee on school textbooks in the Ministry of Education during the Ienaga History Textbook Trial. I discussed

Hiraizumi with Professor Emeritus Hata Ikuhiko, Faculty of Law, Nihon University, an authority in the study of military history of modern Japan. I received advice on source materials from Miyachi Masato, Professor Emeritus and former Head of the

Historiographical Institute, University of Tokyo, currently Head of the National Museum of Japanese History.

I have visited many libraries and appreciate the helpful staff of the following institutions: National Archives of Japan, National Diet Library of Japan (NDL), Modern

Japanese Political History Material Room (NDL), Oriental Library (NDL), Library of the

Imperial Household Agency, Military Archives of Japan Defense Agency, National

Institute of Educational Policy Research of Japan, Library (Kaiko Bunko) of Yasukuni

Shrine, Library of National Showa Memorial Museum (Showa Kan), Memorial Museum of Tokutomi Soho, Tokyo Metropolitan Library, the Main Branch, Library (Atsuta Bunko) of Atsuta Shrine (Aichi prefecture), Yokohama Archives of History, the Research Section in the Library of the Association of Shinto Shrines, Shibusawa Memorial Museum, Tokyo

Metropolitan Library, Tama Branch, Library of Tokyo Metropolitan University, Library of

University of Tsukuba, Taigei Library of University of Tsukuba, Library of Nippon Sports

Science University, Library of Ochanomizu Women's University, Library of Nagoya

University, Central Library of Waseda University, Library of Toyo Eiwa Woman's

University, Central Library of Hitotsubashi University, Central Library of Meiji University, and Hoover Institute of War and Peace, Stanford University.

The staff of the following institutions kindly send me materials by mail: Reference

Kiyoshi Ueda Acknowledgements viii

Room of the National Police Academy, Central Library of Shizuoka Prefecture, Library of

Toyama Prefecture, Library of Toyama Prefecture, Library of Fukui Prefecture, Kumagaya

Library of Saitama Prefecture, Library of National Defense Academy in Japan, Ohara

Institute for Social Issues at Hosei University, Hokkaido University Library, Library of

Wayo Women's University, Library of the Museum of Modern Japanese Literature, Fukui

Newspaper (Fukui Prefecture), Library of Tottori Prefecture, Library of Kagoshima

Prefecture, Library of Aomori Prefecture, Library of Kumamoto Prefecture, Library of

Akita Prefecture, Library of Sonoda Women's University (Hyogo Prefecture), Library of

Yamagata Prefecture, Library of Kochi Prefecture, Bofu Municipal Library (Yamaguchi

Prefecture), Katsuyama Municipal Library (Fukui Prefecture), and Hokkaido Otaru

Commercial University.

I have traveled in Japan for research many times and would like to mention two significant occasions. In January 2003,1 made a research trip to Nagoya in Aichi prefecture and Ise in Mie prefecture. Professor Shimizu Kiyoshi of Kogakukan University kindly hosted me and provided me with some lecture materials from Hiraizumi. During the summer of 2005, I finally visited the Hokuriku region and Hakusan Shrine in Fukui prefecture. Hiraizumi Takafusa, grandson of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Chief Priest of Heisenji

Hakusan Shrine, Professor of Japanese Medieval History at Kanazawa Industrial

University, and his wife welcomed me one morning in July and shared their views of

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi in the old house where he was born and grew up. Hiraizumi Takafusa gave me permission to use his grandfather's materials scattered in archives and libraries throughout the nation. He also allowed me to visit the grave of his grandfather and arranged a meeting with Nishimura Hideyuki, research fellow of Fukui Municipal Museum of Local History, to learn about the Matsudaira family, the lord of Fukui-Echizen Domain,

Kiyoshi Ueda Acknowledgements ix and its culture of Imperial loyalism. And I thank the staff of the following institutions in

Fukui: Library of Fukui Prefecture, Fukui Municipal Library, Library of Fukui University, and Suruga Municipal Library.

Following this trip to Fukui, I visited Kanazawa in Ishikawa prefecture and researched at Library of Kanazawa University, Library of Ishikawa Prefecture, Kanazawa

Municipal Library, and Kanazawa Modern Literature Museum. The staff of Library of

Kanazawa University was particularly helpful in the use of materials from its collection of the library of 4th High School (Daiyon koto gakko) which Hiraizumi attended.

In Toronto, Dr. John D. Meehan of Regis College, a long-time friend and historian of Canada's relations with Asia, read a manuscript version of my dissertation in fall 2007.

Steven Rumazza read a draft of all chapters over the summer of 2007. Suzuki Wataru, a

PhD candidate at Ontario Institute for Studies of Education, helped me complete the bibliography in English and Japanese. Dr. Elizabeth Thompson, my editor, guided me at the last stages of writing and educated me immensely. I would like to thank the following friends: Professor Glenn Taylor, former Dean of Residence at Wycliffe College, Professor

Marion Taylor of Wycliffe College, the Rev. Dr. Dorcus Gordon, Dean of Knox College,

Daniela D'Aniello of Knox College, Dr. Liesl Smith of Gordon College, Professor

Michelle Faubert of the University of Manitoba, Anthony Meehan, Duncan Plaunt, Linda

Nye, Chita Cameron, Ross Cameron, Professor Emeritus of Department of Pathology,

Kenji Shiobara, as well as my friends at Trinity College Tennis Club.

Finally, I would like to thank my family in Japan: the late Hitoshi and the late

Shizuko, Poccho, Yoko, Mitsuo, Shigeko, Saburo, and Tomoko. My mother Noriko kindly hosted me in Akasaka each time I stayed in Tokyo. I would like to thank everyone for their enduring support at every stage of this seemingly never-ending project. I could never have

Kiyoshi Ueda Acknowledgements x completed this project without their love and encouragement.

Kiyoshi Ueda viii

Table of Contents

Abstract ii

Acknowledgements iv

Introduction 1

Parti: Historical Background Chapter 1: The Southern Court View of History as Part of Spiritual History in Japan 36

Part2: Intellectual Formation

Chapter 2: Early Years: 1895-1915 58

Chapter 3: Intellectual Formation at Tokyo Imperial University: 1915-1929 78

Chapter 4: His Visit to the West: April 1930-July 1931 108

Part3: Practical Application Chapter 5: The Revitalization of "Spiritual" History: The 1930s 133 Chapter 6: Japanese Mythology and "Spiritual" History in Japan's Overseas Expansion: 1931-1940 176

Chapter 7: "Spiritual" History and the Great East Asian War: 1941 -1945 197

Part4: Continuity and Persistence Chapter 8: The Restoration of Dogi (the Way of the Just): 1945-1985 229

Chapter 9: The Postwar Activities of Hiraizumi and His Students 256

Chapter 10: "Spiritual" History as a Source of the Logic behind the Illogicality of "Japan's Un-Repentance" 282

Bibliography 298

Kiyoshi Veda Introduction 1

Introduction

In recent years, Germany and Japan have been compared on the issue of how they have dealt with their wartime histories. Germany has successfully acquired the image of a reformed former aggressor, now repentant for the actions of Nazi Germany. The same cannot be said for Japan. In fact, in postwar Japan, a series of national debates caused many observers to question the stance of the Japanese. These problematic debates included: the proposed amendment of the 1947 Japanese pacifist constitution; the discussion of the national anthem Kimigayo and the national flag Hinomaru; the determination of the National Founding Day; the history textbook trial, which pitted

Professor Ienaga Saburo against the Ministry of Education; the enshrining of class-A war criminals at Yasukuni Shrine; the reaffirmation of the legitimacy of Japan's military actions during the Second World War (the Great East Asian War [Daitoa senso] in the eyes of some

Japanese); and the denial of the Tokyo War Crimes Trial's view of history and its judgment.1

On the surface, these events appear to be independent issues. However, when we look more closely, we see certain interconnections which call into question Japan's post-war "repentance." More specifically, individuals involved in these heated debates shared a common view of "history," acted according to a certain set of "principles," and worked towards the same objective, namely, the defense of "the essence of the nation."

They were absolutely committed to this essence. We must have an accurate understanding

of this view of "history," this set of "principles," and the defense of "the essence of the

1 Each of these will be dealt with in due course in the dissertation. 2 They are called essentialists in this work. Professor Emeritus John S. Brownlee, Department of History, University of Toronto, suggested the use of this term during a discussion with the author. Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 2 nation," if we wish to get at the root cause of the debates and understand Japan's apparent lack of repentance for its wartime actions. Importantly, we need to know what is meant by the southern court view of history, and we must consider the significance of a Professor of

History at Tokyo Imperial University, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, whose dissemination of the southern court view of history influenced a nation.

The southern court view of history (Nancho seitoron shikan),3 an ethical and moral interpretation of the medieval history of 14th century Japan (Chusei), was developed by Japanese essentialist scholars (Shinto believers, Neo-Confucians, and proponents of the southern court view of history) during the early modern period (Kinsei: the 17th and 18th centuries). It has had a considerable impact on the course of the history of modern Japan up to and including the present time.4 The "ethical and moral principles" on which this particular interpretation of history is based influenced the attitude of the Japanese towards the Meiji Restoration of the 19th century. Although its influence declined during the Meiji and the Taisho periods, state authorities were determined to reinvigorate its ethical and moral effects from the mid-1920s to 1945. Despite American efforts to undermine prewar values, the same set of "ethical and moral principles" survived Japan's defeat in 1945 and served as the guiding principles for Japanese essentialists involved in a number of the national debates mentioned above, all of which were closely linked to the question of how the history of the nation ought to be interpreted.5

3 Nancho Sexto Ron literally means "the theory of the legitimacy of the Southern court." However, throughout the dissertation, I use a simplified term, "the southern court view of history." 4 Peter Nosco of University of British Columbia presents a similar view on this point in Remembering Paradise: Nativism and Nostalgia in Eighteenth-Century Japan (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990). However, Nosco focuses on the major scholars of "Nativist Studies" (Kokugaku), and suggests possible influences of their thoughts on the rise of "new nationalism" in Japan during the 1980s. 5A11 were discussed by Hiraizumi Kiyoshi in his writing and his lectures. Although the full extent of his influence can never be known, it is certain that he was highly respected in the conservative Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 3

This view of history and the principles upon which it is based continue to be

effective today. Ironically, "Japanese ultra-nationalists" sincerely believe they act

"ethically and morally" while the rest of the world views them as "un-repentant Japanese."

The effective handling of this particular set of "ethical and moral" principles underlying the southern court view of history can be a way for Japanese essentialists to re-examine their views of Japan's recent history while critically acknowledging the effects of the set of

principles as a foundation of nationhood. Ideally, this dissertation will provide such an

opportunity. For a non-Japanese audience or Japanese who are not Shinto essentialists, the

following work will explain the principles upon which Japanese "ultra-nationalists" are

loyally acting and which they staunchly defend, even today. The study will show that a

source of Japan's "un-repentance" lies in its interpretation of recent events (including

World War II) through the lens of the southern court of medieval Japan.

It will approach this through an in-depth look at Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, a Professor of

the Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University, a key figure in the dissemination of

these principles before, during, and after the war. The study takes a biographical approach

to a study of his life, but not as a form of individual-worship. Nor is it written to defend his

ideas and actions. Rather, this dissertation examines Hiraizumi's ideas about spiritual

history and his efforts to disseminate them in the service of the nation in twentieth-century

Japan. It sees the world (and the twentieth century) through his eyes to understand his

perspectives on the world, the period, history, and the nation, whether current, historical, or

historiographical. It does not intend to promote his perspectives or his usage of the

southern court view of history as the core of spiritual history at present or in the future.

segments of both prewar and postwar Japan, and his students and sympathizers still continue to rely on his view of history. Thus, his views have continued relevance today. Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 4

Still, we cannot fully comprehend the history of twentieth century Japan without

acknowledging the role that spiritual history played and the involvement of historians in its promotion.

Although the dissertation shows Hiraizumi's life as a historian, this is not a

"great-man" history that overemphasizes the significance of his contributions. Rather, this

study was conducted as a case study with a view to revealing the nature of Japanese society,

its structure and the institutions that actively sought Hiraizumi's service as

historian/spiritual historian. More generally, postwar Japanese historiography dismissively

describes him as an isolated case. But as the dissertation makes clear, Hiraizumi

collaborated with the state authorities of the period, and he had continued relations with

key organizations and individuals from the prewar period to postwar period. We can learn a

considerable amount about twentieth century Japan from this in-depth study of Hiraizumi's

life.

Hiraizumi contributed to the positivist study of medieval history in his early career.

But his intellectual growth effectively ended by 1928-29. By 1931 he was devoting himself

to his "religious" mission, spreading "Japanese Spirit" (Ninon seishin) with a view to

consolidating the nation "spiritually." He repeated himself endlessly in hundreds and

thousands of lectures and writings, seeking to promote ethical and moral lessons through

his teaching of the southern court view of history. His teaching was a core part of such

state-orchestrated programs as National Spiritual Education (Kokumin seishin kyoiku) and

National Moral Education (Kokumin dotoku kyoiku), with the support of Meiji state

Shinto. Although he did not initiate those grand projects, he worked for the state and within

state structures.

Many organizations invited him to lecture because his ideas fit with their interests;

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 5

Hiraizumi helped mobilize individuals behind public policies. Many people, including

Kamikaze (Divine winds) pilots, heard his lectures and read his books and articles. Some

admired him personally. Nonetheless, it is difficult to assess the influence of his ideas upon

individuals' actions, or upon the formulation of state policies, or on historical events.

It is interesting that after the war Hiraizumi was purged as a "wartime writer," but

not as a "war criminal." (The Japanese Communist Party placed him at the top of its list of

the wartime reactionary historians.) He was not called to the Sugamo Prison where all

class-A war criminals and some class-B criminals were kept before and during their trials.

But this issue should not be put to rest without further examination of Hiraizumi.

Notably, he promoted "the scholarship to find the place to die" (Shisuru tokoro wo erutame

no gakumon) during the war and frequently lectured about the set of ethics and morality

that implied a particular concept of death and life (Shiseikan) to young soldiers who were

about to depart for battle. Many never returned home. Hiraizumi himself survived the war

and the defeat of the Japanese nation. Moreover, shortly after the defeat, he resumed the

activities he had pursued before the defeat and remained influential in the conservative

camp of postwar Japan, albeit without assuming an official position. He was personally

determined to defend the National Polity of the imperial nation, and once again in the

postwar period, the conservative segments of Japanese society began to seek his service.

Keep in mind that some of these conservatives played significant roles in Japan during

reconstruction and beyond.

Hiraizumi was critical of Japan's defeat simply because it was a defeat in war. But

he firmly opposed the idea that Japan's ideal was "ethically and morally" wrong before

1945. Instead, he held the view that Japan's wartime ideal was still "ethically and morally"

right and correct after its defeat. Its enemy was stronger than Japan in terms of power.

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 6

While asserting this view, he expressed sadness about the loss of the precious lives of the young Japanese soldiers and students. He was also disappointed by the loss of Japan's overseas territories, which, he thought, could be repossessed. But the loss of precious lives was permanent.

Unlike Japanese liberals and Marxists who produced pioneer studies of modern

Japanese history from critical angles, Hiraizumi overlooked the consequences of Japan's military actions, at home and overseas, and the victims of Japan's wartime ideology in which he played a leading role as spiritual historian. People in Japan and abroad rightly perceived (and perceive) it as a sign of his "un-repentance." Not only that, until his death in 1984, he continued to affirm Japan's actions and the "ethical and moral" principles that defined and assisted the country during the war, thereby continuing to assert with conviction the view of the Great East Asian War (Daitoa senso shinkan). The conservative segments of Japanese society appreciated the consistency of his views and respected him, calling him Sensei, even while some of his and his students' views outraged liberals and leftists in Japan, not to mention peoples of neighboring nations that the Japanese armed forces had occupied.

These features made Hiraizumi Kiyoshi a controversial figure in modern Japanese historiography, and his continuing presence in the postwar period made him a taboo topic for academic historians to pursue with objectivity for many years. No matter how we interpret his historical role, Hiraizumi was an influential figure in twentieth-century Japan who must be taken seriously. The study presents the activities of the spiritual historian as the extension of the intellectual, spiritual, and sentimental traditions that had their roots in the 17th and 18th centuries. It studies their appearance throughout the 20th century. Tracing

Hiraizumi's life helps to show the intellectual, personal, and institutional continuities of

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 7

Japan in the postwar period. It implies a reassessment of the historical meaning of the year

1945 in Showa history. Most importantly, tracing Hiraizumi's life from start to end will help us uncover the root cause of the postwar historiographical debates - this is the chief reason for this study of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi.

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi (1895-1984)

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi was a man of unswerving faith in the Japanese Shinto religion, and his

faith stayed intact throughout his life. This is not common in Japan where religious relativism is widely accepted. In fact, his faith in Shinto and his commitment to the

Imperial nation defined his role as the historian of the Nation's History. The son of the

hereditary priest of Hakusan shrine (a medieval institution), Hiraizumi was born in

Hakusan, Fukui prefecture, on February 16, 1895, during the era in which "the Spirit of

Meiji Restoration" (Meiji no seishin) was in decline and many considered the Meiji State

Shinto outdated.

Hiraizumi was always concerned about political and intellectual developments. At

Tokyo Imperial University, he understood his role as historian in the area of applied

historical scholarship (Oyo shigaku) as well as in pure historical scholarship (Junsui

shigaku). Seeking an anchor for the imperial nation during a time of political

diversification and destabilization, he was not satisfied with the Rankian positivist method

of history for its "lack of thought" and moved on to cultural history. His intellectual journey in search of historical method accorded with the change in the intellectual climate

of the society during the 1920s when, as some point out, the rise of nationalism was quietly

nurtured and grew during the most liberal era in the history of prewar Japan. His mentors,

such as Professor Kuroita Katsumi, and some national leaders, such as Arima Ryokitsu of

Kiyoshi Veda Introduction 8 the Imperial Navy, groomed this young historian to assume a key role in the promotion of the southern court view of Japan and in the reinvigoration of Meiji State Shinto during

1920s.

The rise of Hiraizumi as "spiritual" historian had begun by 1928; he dominated the field of the Nation's History by 1936, where he stayed until the defeat of the "Imperial nation" in 1945. This time period happened to accord with the period in which imperialism, militarism, and expansionism, rose, flourished, and was defeated in Japan. He "religiously" and "historically" tried to solve present problems by realizing the restoration of "the ancient imperial system," following the example of the Kenmu Restoration of 1334 although, in reality, his scholarly and religious activities had practical implications for the lives of individuals and the course and development of the nation's politics.

Among other things, he de-secularized a secular university by the Shinto faith into the study of history, calling it the Study of the Nation's History (Kokushigaku). He undertook and promoted historical research looking for new historical findings to strengthen the validity of the southern court view of history. Such selective enquiry limited intellectual freedom in the field of historical scholarship at Tokyo Imperial University and made deep impressions on history students who became future leaders in Marxist scholarship and liberals who embraced neither "spiritual" history nor Marxism.

During the 1930s, state authorities invited Hiraizumi to deliver "spiritual" lectures for education of the individuals at their institutions. He became actively involved in such grand projects as National Morality and the National Spirit, Intellectual Guidance, Spiritual

Education, and Thought Control, and educated a number of future national leaders. Active participation in those projects was regarded as the responsibility of Imperial university historians, who were all aware that some anecdotes they presented in public, while not

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 9 historically accurate, were nonetheless correct and useful for instruction in "ethical and moral" points of view. As for Hiriazumi, his faith in "history" was a driving force in assuming this role, and he expected others to follow. Some were inspired by such a way of historical interpretation and embraced the notion that "ethics and morality" prevailed over the rule of law. He hoped this would lead to the consolidation of the Imperial nation in the way he believed it once had been.

Most significantly, he applied a spiritualist interpretation of the critical junctures of the Nation's History to the present relationship between individuals and the state. This included the concept of Death and Life (Shiseikan), as well as the ethical principle of Gi and the moral principle of CM. As a result, some postwar critics argue he was responsible for the death of countless numbers of young soldiers, who fought and died in the battlefield, many diving into the enemy's ships in the Pacific during the 1940s. Others argue that he was not significant at all. He was invited by institutions and delivered spiritual lectures to young soldiers who were already ordained to die in battle.

Hiraizumi did not change his view of history and the state after Japan's defeat in

1945. He returned to Hakusan where he began his lectures to his students and the locals by

September of that year. He called for the restoration of the Way of Gi (Dogi) in the war-defeated nation; in his view, this was fundamental to "the restoration of Japan."

Hiraizumi called for the denial of the Tokyo War Crimes Trial and discredited the view of history upon which its judgment was based. For the rest of his life, he was a student of modern history, attempting to discern "the true cause" of the Great East Asian War.

Although historians of modern history do not highly regard his study of modern history, it

remains "ethically and morally" correct in the eyes of his students and sympathizers to this

day.

Kiyoshi Veda Introduction 10

Hiraizumi was purged as a wartime writer in 1946, but his students were young and not placed high enough to be removed. As a result, they remained in the National

Self-Defense Forces (both the Ground Forces and the Maritime Forces), Police, and the

Ministry of Education, and other key segments of postwar Japan. Furthermore, his former students frequently invited their mentor to their institutions and Hiraizumi delivered his spiritual lectures just as he had before 1945. His students were determined to preserve his view of history and re-published his prewar out-of-print books.6 They also acted according to the same set of "ethics and morality" when they were involved in national history-related debates. To understand these debates, we must inquire into the definition of history they learned from Hiraizumi before, during, and after the war. When his funeral was held in Hakusan in 1984, his students and some conservative national leaders said their farewells to this patriotic historian who "lived inside history" and devoted his life to the Imperial nation.

Like many historians of the Nation's History before 1945, Hiraizumi selectively used a few events and individuals of the medieval history of Japan to provide concrete historical examples of ethical and moral ideologies as navigational devices for the Japanese of his time (the 1930s and 1940s). What puzzles many non-Japanese and contemporary

Japanese is that this interpretation of the medieval period (defending the legitimacy of the southern court) remains a critical part of a Japanese interpretation of the history of the nation as well as the country's current affairs. This study of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi aims to provide a critical and historical context for the persisting presence and its influence on

Japanese society today.

6 In addition, his book was read by the public. For instance, a major publisher Kodansha published 17th paperback editions of The Story of the History of Japan for the Youth. Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 11

Images of Hiraizumi in Postwar Literature

Japanese historians have tended to place responsibility for the wartime actions of their profession squarely on the shoulders of a few prominent figures, thereby freeing themselves from any responsibility. For example, historian Imai Osamu suggests that

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi has been made the scapegoat for historians' collaboration in Japanese

militarism, fascism, and imperialism. In a similar fashion, the poet Takamura Kotaro

(1883-1959) has become the scapegoat for the writers and poets' collaboration with state

authorities, and General Tojo Hideki (1884-1948) is blamed for the militarist actions of

"the Imperial Army."7 Possibly needing to erase certain aspects of their own past, some

postwar Japanese historians tend to ignore Hiraizumi, neglect him, forget him, or criticize

him personally. Few comment on his historical scholarship in medieval cultural history. In

"The Meaning of 'Study' (Gaku) in the 'Study" of History in Japan: With regards to

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi,"8 historian Osumi Kazuo commented that he was taught a particular

type of history at National School (Kokumin gakko) until the Japanese defeat and then, all

of sudden, he was told that the history he had been taught was false. Although only a junior

high school student, he questioned the conscience of the historians. Why did the Study of

the Nation's History (Kokushigaku) suddenly lose its place in scholarship? Instead of

questioning war responsibility, an issue which predominated at the time, he asked whether

this new reality clearly demonstrated the character (nature) of historical scholarship in

7 Imai Osamu, " 'Senso to rekishika' wo meguru saikin no kenkyu ni tsuite: Abe Takeshi shi Taiheiyd senso to rekishigaku to Imatani Akira shi no Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ron wo chushin ni," Nenpo Nihon Gendaishi 7 (Tokyo: Gendai shiryS shuppan, 2001). 8 Osumi Kazuo, "Nihon no rekishigaku ni okeru 'Gaku': Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ni tsuite", originally appeared in Kokushi Kenkyushitsu 7, 8 (February 1959, February 1960). It is later included in Osumi Kazuo, Chusei Shisoshi Eno Koso: Rekishi, Bungaku, Shukyo (Tokyo: Meicho kankokai, 1984). This was the year Hiraizumi Kiyoshi passed away at home in Hakusan, Fukui prefecture. Kiyoshi Veda Introduction 12

Japan. Apart from the issue of the conviction and bravery of scholars, had the study of history become vulnerable in wartime Japan? Osumi questioned the meaning of the anger currently being expressed, arguing that this would not resolve the issue in any decisive way.

The way Osumi reframed his questions was ahead of his time. Historians in subsequent years did not follow this angle, arguably because it may have been nearly impossible for those who directly suffered as a result of Hiraizumi, his students, and his

Study of the Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University, to be objective. An exception to this is Haga Noburu, who contributed "The Social Functions of Spiritual History," to

Criticism on Intellectual History of Historical Scholarship of Modern Japan (1974). Haga closely read a few of Hiraizumi's journal articles, such as "The Marrow Bone of the Study of the Nation's History," with a view to analyzing the social effects of "spiritual" history that Hiraizumi promoted.9 In addition, some historians who were history students at Tokyo

Imperial University before 1945 mention Hiraizumi in their autobiographies, reminiscences, and diaries. Although such work provides valuable information about how people perceived Hiraizumi, each account is based on one person's impression, and as a result, they lack objectivity. Others have written Japanese historiography according to their rejection of Hiraizumi. Some even exclude him from historiography. For instance, he is omitted from Historians of Japan (1976) edited by Nagahara Keiji and Kano Masanao, even though Hiraizumi's mentors Kuroita Katsumi and Tsuji Zennosuke are mentioned.10

9 HagaNoboru, Hihan: Kindai Nihon Shigaku Shiso Shi (Tokyo: Kashiwa Shobo, 1974). 10 Nagahara Keiji and Kano Masanao, ed., Nihon no rekishika (Tokyo: Nihon Hyoronsha, 1976). Interestingly, Kuroita was the leading proponent of the southern court view of history and the promoter of "Japanese Spirit. He mentored Hiraizumi in those aspects, but the postwar historians have avoided criticizing Kuroita for his role in those aspects while criticizing Hiraizumi for the same roles.

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 13

Such treatment of the eminent historian of the wartime period precludes the ability of the postwar generation to put the present into proper historical context. To make sense of what happened in 20th century Japan, we must critically examine the roles played by leading wartime "historians," including Hiraizumi.

Many have condemned Hiraizumi and his students for their wartime actions.

Hayashi Kentaro, Professor of Western history, and President of the University of Tokyo in the postwar period, wrote The Shadow of the Things That Are Changing: The Steps that

One Intellectual Took (I960).11 The wartime members of the Society of Historical

Scholarship (Rekishigaku Kenkyukai) constitute another (partial and largely negative) major source of information. Its members, including Hani Goro, Inoue Kiyoshi, Kitayama

Shigeo, and Ishii Takashi, wrote about Hiraizumi. Bear in mind that they are all critical of

Hiraizumi, who was absolutely intolerant of students pursuing Marxist scholarship. In particular, as a student of history at Tokyo Imperial University, Hani was one of very few historians who publicly criticized Hiraizumi, his view of history, and his activities before

1945. In a discussion with Hani, Inoue (a student of Hani) criticized the involvement of

Study of the Nation's History in war efforts; and in What Do We Learn From History?

(1973), he noted that Shigakukai and its leader Hiraizumi twisted history by instigating imperialism and fascism. Hani called Hiraizumi a war criminal (Senpan).12 We also find information about Hiraizumi, his students, and their activities on campus, in a series of reminiscences by Ienaga Saburo, The Steps That a Historian Has Taken (1977)I3and As a uHayashi Kentaro, Utsuriyuku monono kage: ichi interi no ayumi (Tokyo: Bungei shunju shinsha, 1960). 12 Hani Goro and Inoue Kiyoshi, Rekishi ni nani wo manabuka: Hani Goro Inoue Kiyoshi Gendaishi Taidan (Tokyo: Gendai Hyoron Sha, 1973). 13 Ienaga Saburo, Ichi rekishigakusha no ayumi (Tokyo: Sanseido, 1977). Richard H. Minear translated the book into English. See Japan's Past, Japan's Future: One Historian's Odyssey (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2001). Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 14

Result of Living through the Critical Period of Seventy Years (1988).u Ienaga studied under Hiriazumi and worked under the direction of his student Hirata Toshiharu in the editing of Shigaku zasshi during the first half of the 1930s. But he went in the opposite direction after the war, ultimately suing the Ministry of Education for its censorship of the school textbook he wrote while others of Hiraizumi's students stood on the side of the

Ministry. The trial lasted 11 years.

Irokawa Daikichi contributed a few articles about Hiraizumi and his students to The

Spirit ofMeiji (1968)15 and The Lies and Dreams of a Historian (1974).16 Unfortunately, his writing centers on personal attacks of Hiraizumi, mocking his practice of Shinto rituals in the academic environment. However, it does not challenge his historical scholarship in the area of medieval history. Further, the articles avoid analyzing his concept of history even though they promote the image of Hiraizumi as the leading historian in the expression of "the View of the History of the Imperial Nation" (Kokoku shikan), a term which became popular in postwar Japan to identify the view of history that "assisted Japanese militarism and imperialism,"17 which dominated the ethical and moral education of the nation before

1945.18

Many of those students became leading Marxist historians after the war. They rejected the prewar concept of the Nation's History (Kokushi) and launched a scientific study of the history of Japan (Nihonshi). In the public domain they fought Hiraizumi's

14 Ienaga Saburo, Gekido no nanajunen wo ikite (Tokyo: Shinchi shobo, 1988). 15 Irokawa Daikichi, Meiji no seishin (Tokyo: Chikuma shobo, 1968). 16 Irokawa Daikichi, Rekishika no uso toyume (Tokyo: Asahi shinbunsha, 1974). 17 Nagahara Keiji's The View of History of the Imperial Nation (1983) was a case in point. Nagahara Keiji, Kokoku shikan (Iwanami booklet No.20) (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1983). 18 Hiraizumi was at the core of it. Yamaguchi Muneyuki of Kyushu University raised his concern about the term Kokoku shikan walking alone and presented his analysis of the view of the Emperor that appears in Hiraizumi's view of history. See "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi hakushi ni okeru tenno," Rekishigaku Chirigaku Nenpo 10. Kiyoshi Veda Introduction 15 students in a series of national debates on interpretations of the history of Japan.

Admittedly, this camp also produced some constructive scholarly work about Hiraizumi and his school of history, including "The view of history by Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: A Typical of the View of the History of the Imperial Nation" (1977)19. Here, the historian Matsuo

Shoichi, a supporter of Ienaga during the textbook trial, wrote a pioneer work on Hiraizumi, his wartime scholarship and off-campus activities, and the after effects of his view of history in postwar Japan. He points out the victims of his view of history in both Japan and neighboring nations. He places Hiraizumi within the historical framework of fascism in

Japan, saying that Hiraizumi played a key role. Notably, his article was written when there were concerns about the resurgence of Japanese militarism (re-militarization) and imperialism in the 1970s. In other words, it was based on the view that Hiraizumi was still at work behind the scenes. Matsuo was correct on this point.

Some eminent historians of the postwar period have acknowledged their academic indebtedness (Gaku'on) to Hiraizumi. However, these historians by no means endorse

"spiritual" history, which Hiraizumi promoted before and after the war. For example, Sato

Shin'ichi wrote The Turmoil of the Southern and Northern Courts (1965),20 still regarded as an authoritative and comprehensive work on the period of the Southern and Northern courts.21 Sato was a student under Professor Hiraizumi in the Division of the Nation's

History at Tokyo Imperial University during the war. In the book, he acknowledges

Hiriazumi. At the same time, he advises his readers to go back to Tanaka Yoshinari's historical scholarship and to advance in research to overcome Hiriazumi's wartime

19 Matsuo Shoichi, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi no rekishikan: senzen sengo no kokoku shikan no ichitenkei", Matsuo Shoichi, Nihon Fashizumu shiron (Tokyo: Hosei daigaku shuppan kai, 1977). 20 Sato Shin'ichi, Nanbokucho no dor an (Nihon no rekishi 9) (Tokyo: Chuo koronsha, 1965). 21 I express my appreciation for Professor Emeritus Shuzo Uyenaka, Department of East Asian Studies at University of Toronto, to advise me to consider the background context. Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 16 historical scholarship on Japanese medieval history. Tanaka was one of Hiraizumi's mentors but he was one of a few who advocated approaching both courts on equal terms, as for example in his The History of the Period of the Southern and Northern Courts

(1922).22 As Sato points out, the postwar historical scholarship on the period of the

Southern and Northern Courts made great strides, overturning much of Hiraizumi's work.

Many eminent postwar historians, including Sato, had studied under Hiraizumi during the war. Their scholarly objective in the postwar period was to search out the facts about the period and to reinterpret it in light of those facts. For instance, in The Way to the Ancient

History: Sixty Years of the Positivist Historical Scholarships (1980), Sakamoto Taro says he immensely benefited from Hiraizumi's instructions on how to read historical documents.23 And in The beginning of the modern historical scholarship in Japan: a

Reminiscence of a Historian (1996),24 Okubo Toshiaki frankly admits that he benefited from the method for textual analysis of medieval documents that he learned from

Hiraizumi during a seminar at Tokyo Imperial University. Medievalist Ishii Susumu expresses his recognition of Hiraizumi's scholarly contribution to the study of the medieval history25 in "A Theory on Medieval Society" (1978), even though he did not agree with

Hiraizumi's view of history when he was a student at Tokyo Imperial University in the early 1930s. Finally, Amino Yoshihiko, a historian of medieval history, acknowledges

Hiraizumi's scholarly contributions in the study of asylum (Ajlru) in ancient Japan.26 Keep

22 Tanaka Yoshinari. Nanbokucho jidaishi (Tokyo: Meiji shoin, 1922). 23 Sakamoto Taro, Kodaishi e no michi (Tokyo: Yomiuri shinbunsha, 1980). 24 Okubo Toshiaki, Nihon kindaishi kotohajime: ichi rekishika no kaiso (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1996). The author is a grandson of Okubo Toshimichi, one of the elder statesmen of the Meiji period. 25 Ishii Susumu, "Chusei shakai ron," Iwanami Koza: Nihon rekishi 8 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1978). Amino Yoshihiko, "Mikai shakai no ajiru," in Amino Yoshihiko, Zoho: muen, kugaku, raku: Nihon chusei nojiyii to heiwa (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1987). It is originally published in 1978.

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 17 in mind that these historians all maintained critical positions with respect to Hiraizumi's

"spiritual" history and took different directions in the postwar period.

A few historians have pointed out that some postwar historians borrowed ideas from (and were inspired by) Hiraizumi's prewar scholarship but failed to give credit to

Hiraizumi. For instance, in "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and the Theory of Kenmon" (2001),

Imatani Akira of the City University of Yokohama notes that the medievalist Kuroda

Toshio borrowed from one of Hiraizumi's major works without giving him credit.27 Tada

Shinbei says that Hiraizumi and his students made major contributions to the study of

Western philosophers such as Edmund Burke,28 but no Japanese scholars have mentioned this in the postwar period. Imai and Tada both address the tendency of postwar historians to ignore Hiraizumi and his students' academic contributions. Imai points out that postwar academia remained silent even though they were aware of the situation, most likely because of their disagreement with the role that Hiraizumi and his students played as

"historians" during the war. It was problematic to praise what they had done, but it was also problematic to erase their scholarly contributions.

Unlike the members of the Group for the Study of History (Rekishigaku kenkyukai) and other critics, Hiraizumi's wartime students and those sympathetic to him and his view of history promoted a positive image of the man and his work. For instance, Suyama Yukio, a former officer of the Imperial Army, describes Hiraizumi as a historian of the Nation's

History who gave a sense of courage to the youth through his books during the war in

Demon of Strategy: Obata Toshishiro (1983).29 Obviously, their views were much less

27 Imatani Akira, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi to kenmon taisei ron," Ueyokote Masataka, Chusei no shaji to shinko (Tokyo: Yoshikawa kobunkan, 2001). 28 Tada Shinbei, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi hakushi no rekishikan to obei shiso," Yokohama shodai ronshu, 30-2, 1996. 29 Suyama Yukio, Sakusen no oni: Obata Toshishiro (Tokyo: Fuyo Shobo, 1983). Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 18 popular as postwar Japan tried to leave its past behind. Many of them had been wartime members of Shukokai, a patriotic student organization led by Hiraizumi at Tokyo Imperial

University since 1931 and Seisei Juku, Hiraizumi's private academy founded near the university in 1933. They wrote about Hiraizumi in their reminiscences; these include the late Hirata Toshiharu, the late Murao Jiro, the late Nagoe Tokimasa, Tanaka Takashi, and

Tokinoya Shigeru. All were key figures in the conservative segments of postwar Japan; they continued to act according to the view of history that Hiraizumi taught them. After the war, his students published a number of articles in three journals Nihon, Geirin, Shintoshi kenkyu, which Hiraizumi had founded; in these, they tended to praise their mentor, often uncritically. While largely uncritical, these sources provide invaluable information about the authors' activities during and after the war, as well as their views of Hiraiuzmi.30

Hiraizumi as a Subject of Postwar Scholarship

In "Unusual Scenes," published in Notes on the History of Historical Scholarship in Showa

(1984)31 Saito Takashi says that "the political activities of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi after his return from the West in 1931 remained unstudied." While historians have explored some

aspects of his activities, no one has undertaken a comprehensive empirical study, and much research remains to be done. In fact, only in recent years have historians expressed a more

objective view of Hiraizumi. It is perhaps easier now because Hiraizumi passed away in

1984 and is thus becoming a figure from the past.

Current critics are less weighted down with the past. Shimokawa Ryoko quotes

from the works of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and his student Hirata Toshiharu on Kitabatake and

30 For detail, please see "Notes on Sources." 31 Saito Takashi, "Ijo na fukei," in Saito Takashi, Showa shigakushi noto: Rekishigaku no hasso (Shogakukan sozo sensho 89) (Tokyo: Shogakukan, 1984). Kiyoshi Veda Introduction 19 his major work Jinno shotoki in The Confucian Study of Kitabatake Chikafusa. (2001). A new generation of scholars able to approach Hiraizumi and his scholarship is emerging in

Japan. Some are producing articles and books on Hiraizumi.33 As mentioned, the medievalist Imatani Akira is a pioneer in the study of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi as part of the history of 20th century Japan. A common theme in his writing is the question of whether historians can escape becoming involved in politics. Other scholars look at the responsibility of historians in war. A group of historians and intellectuals who participated in the symposium "Reflections on Historical Scholarship" sponsored by the journal Sozd no sekai (The World of Creativity) in 1995, chose Hiraizumi as the main topic; they discussed the role of historians during the war and their contributions to war efforts.34 Abe

Takeshi comments on the collaboration of historians in Japanese war efforts, looking specifically at Hiraizumi in "The View of History of the Imperial Nation" (Kokoku shikan) in The Pacific War and Historical Scholarship (1999).35

Some historians are now attempting to place Hiraizumi within the historiography and intellectual history of Showa Japan, particularly the war period. Yamaguchi Muneyuki,

Kyushu University, argues in "Dr. Hirauzmi Kiyoshi's View of the Emperor" (1986) that although Hirauzmi defined and promoted the Way of the Subject (Shindo), if one carefully looks into Hiraizumi's definition of the Way of the Subject, one sees his view of the

Emperor.36 In "The Dream of a Historian: About Hiraizumi Kiyoshi,"37 Karube Tadashi,

32 Shimokawa Ryoko, Kitabatake Chikafusa no Jugaku (Tokyo: Perikansha, 2001). 33 Nogi Kunio, a student of Tanaka Takashi, a former president of Kogakukan University, made a detail bibliography of scholarly writings on Hiraizumi and it appears in Nogi Kunio, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi Hakushi kenkyu bunken mokuroku," in Tanaka Takashi, ed., Hiraizumi Kiyoshi hakushi zenchosaku shokai (Tokyo: Bensei shuppan, 2004). 34 Inoue Sei'ichi, Imai Akira, Hata Ikuhiko, and Yamafushi Tetsuo. "Shinpojiumu Nihon rekishigaku no hansei," Sozd no sekai 95 (Tokyo: 1995). 35 Abe Takeshi, Taiheiyo senso to rekishigaku (Tokyo: Yoshikawa kobunkan, 1999). 36 Yamaguchi Muneyuki, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi hakushi ni okeru tenno," in Rekishigaku: Chirigaku Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 20

Professor of Japanese Intellectual History in the Faculty of Law, University of Tokyo, places Hiraizumi in the intellectual climate of the Taisho period; he describes how the notion of dream (Yume) appears in Hiraizumi's view of history. Karube is the first scholar at the University of Tokyo to choose Hiraizumi, a former faculty member, as a focus of his scholarly work. In "Muraoka Tsunetsugu and Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: With Regards to their understandings of Suika Shinto" (2000),38 Tajiri Yuichiro demonstrates his assumption that Hiraizumi's scholarship on the Suika branch of Shinto founded by Yamazaki Ansai was pursued in response to the scholarship on the subject by Muraoka Tsunetsugu

(1884-1946), an eminent intellectual historian of Tohoku Imperial University. Konno

Nobuyuki of Tohoku University studies Hiraizumi's view of "the Japanese" in wartime

Japan in "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's View of 'the Japanese' During the Showa Period" (2003).39

Miyazaki Eriko, International Christian University, shows how Kenkoku University tried to bring about the peaceful co-existence of various peoples in Manchukuo in Kenkoku

University and the Harmony among the Peoples40 (1997). In The Study of Kenkoku

University (2003),41 the late Professor Yamane Yukio, a student of Oriental History at

Tokyo Imperial University when Hiraizumi was Professor, criticizes the founding of the university under the leadership of the Kanto Army (part of the Imperial Army of Japan), saying that the university was an instrument of Japan's imperialism, and that Hiraizumi nenpd 10 (Kyushu daigaku, 1986). 37 Karube Tadashi, "Rekishika No Yume: Hiraizumi Kiyoshi wo megutte," in Kindai Nihon kenkyukai, ed., Nenpd: Kindai Nihon kenkyu 18: Hikaku no naka no Kindai Nihon Shiso (Tokyo: Yamakawa shuppansha, 1996). 38 Tajiri Yuichiro, "Muraoka Tsunetsugu to Hiraizmi Kiyoshi: Suika Shinto no Rikai wo Megutte," in Tokai Daigaku Kiyo: Bungakubu 74 (2000). 39 Konno Nobuyuki, "Showa ki ni okeru Hiraizumi Kiyoshi no Nihonjin kan," Nihon Shisoshi Kenkyu 34 March 2003. 40 Miyazaki Eriko, Kenkoku daigaku no minzoku no kyowa (Tokyo: Kazama Shobo, 1997). 41 Yamane Yukio, Kenkoku daigaku no kenkyu: Nihon teikoku shugi no ichi danmen (Tokyo: Kyuko shoin, 2003). Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 21 was a leading figure in laying the groundwork for this.

The first book-length scholarly work on Hiraizumi was published only four years ago.42 Political scientist Uemura Kazuhide of Kyoto Industrial University has looked into

Hiraizumi's view of the state (Kokka kan) and German historian Friedrich Meineke's influence on Hiraizumi. In Maruyama Masao and Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Politicism (Seiji

Shugi) in Japan during the Showa Period (2004),43 he conducts a comparative study of the

"historical theologian" (Rekishi shingakusha) Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and the liberal Maruyama

Masao (1914-1996), one of the most influential political scientists in postwar Japan; he points out the commonality of logic in the modes of thinking between the two intellectuals even though they stood on opposite sides in terms of systems of 20th century thought.

Hata Ikuhiko, an authority on the imperial armed forces in modern Japanese history has shown an interest in the relationship between Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and the Imperial

Army during the 1930s. Since his undergraduate years at University of Tokyo Hata began to interview many former Army officers and accumulated primary information about the

Showa history. In his authoritative work The History of the Fascist Movement in the

Military (1962)44 Hata points out that the Imperial Army had a tradition of importing ideologues from outside to speak in its institutions, and he briefly cites Hiraizumi as one such ideologue.45 He shows how Hiraizumi's students recruited students of the Cadet

Academy of the Imperial Army during the first half of 1930s in "Another February 26

However, a non-scholarly book on Hiraizumi was published earlier. See Tatamiya Eitaro, Kami no kuni to cho rekishika: Hiraizumi Kiyoshi (Tokyo: Ozankaku shuppan, 2000). 43 Uemura Kazuhide, Maruyama Masao to Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Showaki nihon no seiji shugi (Tokyo: Kashiwa shobS, 2004). 44 Hata Ikuhiko, Gunfashizumu undoshi (Tokyo: Kawade shobo shinsha, 1977). 45 He also wrote Hiraizumi's relations and influences on some leaders of the Imperial Army in "Anami Korechika" and "Katakura Tadashi" in Hata Ikuhiko, Showaki no gunjin tachi (Tokyo: Bungei shunju, 1982). Kiyoshi Veda Introduction 22

Incident: The Hiraizumi School of History and the Young Military Officers" (1992). In this article, based on interviews he conducted with former officers, Hata demonstrates that

Hiraizumi's students, who were appointed to professorship at the Cadet Academy of the

Imperial Army, recruited a group of young officers to Seiseijuku (Hiraizumi's private academy founded near Tokyo Imperial University in 1933) in 1934-1935. However, Hata only illuminates a few key aspects of Hiraizumi's activities with the Imperial Army outside the campus; as a result, his activities in other segments of society remain to be explored.

Wakai Toshiaki, a lecturer of ancient Japanese history at Kansai University, was the first to conduct an empirical method inquiring into Hiraizumi.47 Twenty-two years after

Hiraizumi's death, he published Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Devoting Oneself to the Imperial

Nation (2006).48 Here, he draws on a number of primary sources, including Hiraizumi's work (not his personal material, however) and others' comments. Wakai also uses official sources from Tokyo Imperial University and various governmental ministries, including the Ministry of Education, to explore the nature of their relations with Hiraizumi before

1945.

Hiraizumi in Literature and Scholarship in English

American novelist John Toland was the first English-language writer to be interested in

Hiraizumi's activities during the war, largely because of Hiraizumi's involvement with the

46 As I studied the primary sources, I became critical that Professor Hata Ikuhiko might have failed to indicate some primary sources in this article. 47 Wakai Toshiaki of Kansai University has written some articles on Hiraizumi, including "Another Image of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi." He discusses the development of the study of local history within the context of the development of the history of the imperial nation during the 1930s in "The View of History of the Imperial Nation and the Study of Local History." Wakakai studies Hiraizumi's boyhood in Hakusan, his junior high school years in Ono City, his high school years in Kanazawa, and his university years in Tokyo, in "The Personal development of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi."47 48 Wakai Toshiaki, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Mikuni no tame ni ware tsukusanamu (Minerube Nihon hyodensen) (Tokyo: Minerube shobo, 2006). Kiyoshi Veda Introduction 23

Imperial Army. Toland visited Japan and interviewed Hiraizumi. He describes Hiraizumi's wartime activities, including his teaching at Seiseijuku, his private academy, in The

Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire: 1936-1945 (1970).49

In historical scholarship, H. Paul Varley of Columbia University has an extended discussion of Southern Court historiography and its modern legacy in Imperial Restoration in Medieval Japan (1971).50 In it, he says that Hiraizumi was a major figure in the promotion of the Southern Court view of history in the Showa period. Varley also produced the authoritative English translation of Jinno shotoki, the most significant medieval works promoting the southern court view of history.51 In it, Varley refers to

Hiraizumi and his students' scholarship on Jinno shotoki from both the wartime and postwar periods.

Ben-Ami Shillony, Hebrew University, describes Hiraizumi's involvement with young army officers, including Prince Chichibu, during the February 26 Incident in Revolt in Japan: The Young Officers and the February 26 1936 (1973),52 Shillony consulted some

Japanese sources, including "Hiraizumi School of History and the Imperial Army,"53 but

John Toland, The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire: 1936-1945 (New York: Random House, 1970). Hiraizumi describes his first meeting with Toland in his autobiography Higeki Juso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1985). Here, Hiraizumi says that Toland's book is interesting but there are some historical inaccuracies. 50 H. Paul Varley, Imperial Restoration in Medieval Japan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971). But there is incorrect information on page 186, where Varley writes that "in 1936 a Kenmu Council (Kenmu kaigi) was founded to gather and publish materials on the Restoration, The leading figure of the council was Professor Hiraizumi Kiyoshi." Varley seems to misunderstand Gi H (being just) in Kenmu Gikai Hii^ii^ (the Club for the Gi of the Kenmu Restoration) with Gi ^(exchanging opinions) in Kenmu Kaigi jUtS^ill (the Council for the Kenmu Restoration). Since the ethical principle of Gi ji was fundamental to Hiraizumi's view of history., this needs to be mentioned here. 51 H. Paul Varley, trans., A Chronicle of Gods and Sovereigns: Jinno shotoki of Kitabatake Chikafusa (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980). 52 Ben Ami Shillony, Revolt in Japan: The Young Officers and the February 26 1936 Incident (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973). 53 Takashita Masahiko, "Hiraizumi Shigaku to Rikugun," in Gunji shigaku 17. (Tokyo: Gunji Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 24 not all of his book is historically accurate.54

Shuzo Uyenaka, Professor Emeritus of the Department of East Asian Studies,

University of Toronto, refers to Hiraizumi Kiyoshi in his article "The Textbook

Controversy of 1911: National Truth" (1983).55 Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi of York

University in Toronto wrote Japanese Loyalism Reconstrued: Yamagata Daini's Ryiishi

Shinron of 1759 (1995)56 and briefly discusses the role Hiraizumi Kiyoshi played in the promotion of the "National Essence View" within the framework of "Campaign to Clarify

Our National Essence" (Kokutai Meicho Undo) during the 1930s and 1940s.

John S. Brownlee, Professor Emeritus of the Department of History, University of

Toronto, mentions Hiraizumi in the translation of The Six National Histories of Japan by

Sakamoto Taro,57 and includes a chapter on Hiraizumi in Japanese Historians and the shigaku kai, May 1969). 54There was speculation on what was discussed by Prince Chichibu and Hiraizumi in the train from Hachinohe to Tokyo right before the Incident. Following the view expressed in some Japanese secondary sources, Shillony writes, "It is conceivable that Hiraizumi's aim in joining the prince was to convince him of the necessity of a Showa Restoration in accordance with the rebels' wishes. When Prince Chichibu's train stopped in Omiya, Satama prefecture, his younger brother Prince Takamatsu boarded it to welcome Chichibu home. As Takamatsu shared the Emperor's views on the rebellion, his advice to Chichibu was probably the opposite of that of Professor Hiraizumi" (176). However, according to Iwata Masataka, a young former Army officer (Seinen shoko), revealed in Child koron on March 1992 that Hiraizumi opposed the rebellion, attempting to stop it with his students by directly talking to the rebel leaders in the midst of the event. Speculations on Hiraizumi's view of the rebellion will end only when Kujakuki, his personal diary during the Incident, becomes available to the public, hopefully in the near future. 55 Shuzo Uyenaka, "The Textbook Controversy of 1911: National Truth," in John S. Brownlee, ed., History in the Service of the Japanese Nation. Vol. 2 (Toronto: University of Toronto-York University Joint Centre on Modern East Asia, 1983). Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, Japanese Loyalism Reconstrued: Yamagata Daini 's Ryiishi Shinron of 1759 (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1995). As a doctoral student at Princeton, Wakabayashi studied under Professor Ienaga Saburo at the Tokyo University of Education (Tokyo kyoiku daigaku) for several years while the Ienaga textbook trial was proceeding. (The Ministry of Education later relocated Tokyo University of Education to Ibaraki prefecture; it later became known as Tsukuba University.) Wakabayashi is one of a few in North America to actually experience the remaining influences of the Hiraizumi school in the postwar period and is committed to taking a firm position against their ideas and influences today through his scholarship on the early modern and modern periods. 57 Sakamoto Taro, The Six National Histories of Japan, trans, by John S. Brownlee (Vancouver:

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 25

National Myths, 1600-1945: The Age of the Gods and Emperor Jinmu (1997).58 Brownlee has also contributed to Western scholarship on Japanese intellectual history by introducing a series of influential Japanese historians, including Mikami Sanji, Kuroita Katsumi, Tsuji

Zennosuke, and Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. Finally, Sey Nishimura and Brownlee translated

Hiraizumi's The History of Japan for Youth (Shonen Nihonshi) (1970), publishing it as The

Story of Japan (1997).,59

Richard H. Minear of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst has translated

Ienaga Saburo's Ichi rekishi gakusha no ayumi, published as Japan's Past, Japan's Future:

One Historian's Odyssey (2001).60 This helps English-language readers explore the life of

Ienaga, who was an undergraduate student of Professor Hiraizumi in the Division of the

Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University in the mid-1930s. The publication helps readers make sense of the prewar background of the postwar historiographical debates, including the Ienaga textbook trial that lasted 12 years.

Approach

How do I approach Hiraizumi Kiyoshi? As a liberal, I have had to address the thorny issue of how to study a system of thought that absolutely denied and denies liberalism in the historical context of the pre-1945 Japan. I have not followed any particular model,61 as

UBC Press, 1991), xxiii. John S. Brownlee, Japanese Historians and the National Myths, 1600-1945: The Age of the Gods and Emperor Jinmu (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1997). 59 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, The Story of Japan (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 1997). Tanaka Takashi, one of the last of Hiraizumi's students at Tokyo Imperial University before 1945 and President of Kogakukan University in the postwar period, now runs Seisei kikaku from his home in Ise, Mie prefecture. 60 Japan's Past, Japan's Future: One Historian's Odyssey (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC., 2001) Minear dedicates this work to Professor Ienaga Saburo. 61 John F. Howes, Professor emeritus of University of British Columbia, Japan's Modern Prophet: Uchimura Kanzd 1861-1930 (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2005). Howe's extremely well-researched book on the eminent Japanese Christian took him more than 50 years to complete. See also John Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 26 this would have resulted in theoretical, ideological, and discourse-related biases. Moreover, any approaches driven by theory, ideology, or discourse could hinder the study of a controversial historical figure such as Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, especially in Japan where scholars remain deeply divided on crucial issues in the interpretation of the history of

Japan. More specifically, had I chosen a specific approach, I might have failed to obtain the cooperation of historians of various other schools of thought during my numerous research trips to Japan.

Most importantly, however, I have avoided these approaches to this study of

Hiraizumi because I want to present his view of the world and his discourse on history as accurately as possible. However, the study does not intend to promote or endorse his ideas, as I have already stressed. Only after getting nearer to this objective, only when I truly understand the man and the era, can I take a more critical position on his views of the world and his discourse on history. In other words, I do not want to alter his views and his discourse of history to make them fit into my own arguments and perspectives. Admittedly,

I find it extremely difficult to see the world precisely as he saw it, or to comprehend his discourse in the way he meant it to be understood. Trying to do so is a challenge.

English, Citizen of the World: A Life of Pierre Trudeau: Volume One: 1919-1968 (Toronto: Knopf Canada, 2006). I would like to thank Dr. John D. Meehan for introducing me to these books in 2006. Herbert Bix published his well-researched biographical study on Emperor Hirohito. See, Hertbert P. Bix, Hirohito and Making of Modern Japan (New York: Harper-Collins Publisher, 2000). I sought a model for my study in the biographical works of Canadian empiricists. As for biography, I have read numerous biographical books in Canadian history, as for example, Craig Brown, Robert Laird Borden: A Biography (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1975), John English, Lester Pearson: Shadow of Heaven: 1897-1948 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989), and John English, Lester Pearson: The Worldly Years: 1949-1972 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992). I also read biographical books by Michael Bliss. As for the organization of my writing and the presentation of my research in this dissertation, I learned from Ian Radforth, The Royal Spectacle: The 1860 Visit of The Prince of Wales to Canada and the United States. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004), John D. Meehan, The Dominion and the Rising Sun: Canada Encounters Japan, 1929-1941 (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2004), and Robert Bothwell, The Penguin History of Canada (Toronto: Penguin Canada, 2006).

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 27

Nonetheless, I have sought to show exactly what he and his students stood for before, during, and after the war.

Finding and examining original sources and relating them to other original sources are an indispensable (albeit often tedious) task if one wishes to present a coherent view of history. The study of modern Japanese history is no exception. To this end, I have carefully examined historical sources and came up with an original thesis. In other words, the study does not rely on a particular ideology or system of thought. Nor do I place the study within a specific paradigm or discourse. I do not make a selective use of facts to strengthen or defend a system of thought or discourse.

Like Hata Ikuhiko and Wakai Toshiaki, I make use of an empirical method in my attempt to study Hiraizumi objectively. In my view, this is the only way to suggest alternatives to the views of Hiraizumi presented by the left and some liberal critics, while also avoiding the overly positive and selective assessment of his influence provided by his students, sympathizers, and followers. I hope to dispassionately consider both sides of the story; each point of view yields some aspects of historical truth. Most importantly, it is the only way to come to a fair assessment of the historical role that Hiraizumi played in 20th century Japan without either blindly praising him or dogmatically condemning him. I hope this study will provide a model for future studies of national history from inside.

Notes on Sources

As mentioned in my acknowledgements, Hiraizumi maintained a diary, Hiraizumi Diary

(Hiraizumi Nikki). Unfortunately, this remains generally unavailable to researchers, although his descendants and some of his students have access. Some, including Yoshioka

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 28

Isamu, who was Professor at Kogakukan University in Ise, even quote from this source.62

Hiraizumi Akira, his eldest son, edited and published some parts of his father's research

diary covering his trip to the West from 1930 to 1931 and distributed it as Diary to his

students in 1968.63 Since the death of Akira, Hiraizumi Takafusa, a grandson of Hiraizumi

Kiyoshi and Head of the Hiraizumi family, has had possession of all personal material. The

majority of the sources on Hiraizumi will not be available to the public until they are

inherited by Takafusa's son, mainly because the names of wartime leaders appear in them.

The Hiraizumi family feels that it must protect their privacy and the privacy of their

descendants.

The situation is gradually changing because some of Hiraizumi's wartime students

have passed away, and many of those who felt that the release of the primary sources

violated their own privacy have also died. In this sense, the empirical study of Hiraizumi

and modern Japanese history is reaching a new phase - just as the archives of the former

Soviet Union have recently been opened to Russian and foreign researchers. Japanese

historians now visit Russia to read Japanese official documents confiscated in China by the

Russian Red Army when it took over the region from the Kanto Army in 1945. In this

worldwide trend, a number of primary sources have selectively and sometimes

conveniently been "discovered" in Japan and have appeared on the front page of major

newspapers.64

Apart from his diary, as a student of history Hiraizumi published more official (and

62 Yoshioka Isamu, Kuroki Hiroshi (Gifu: Kyoiku shuppan kyokai, 1979). 63 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Diary (Katsuyama: Shikaseiban, 1991). 64 A good example is a recent discovery of the personal diary of the imperial servant Tomita. The source reveals Emperor Hirohito's discontent with Matsudaira Nagayoshi's decision to enshrine the souls of the Class-A war criminals at Yasukuni shrine in Tokyo. This helped end the on-going public debates on where the will of the emperor resided over the issue. Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 29 selective) accounts of his activities. He produced an autobiography, Higeki Juso (1985),65 and he wrote about his involvement in national governance during the Great East Asian

War and analyzed the cause of this war in Japan's Tragedies and Ideals {Nihon no Higeki to Riso) in 1978.66 He also provided an account of his lecture trips nationwide during the postwar period in three volumes, There are Still Mountains and Rivers {Sanga ari).

Professor Ito Takashi of the Policy Research University (Seisaku kenkyu daigaku) in Tokyo, Dean of the Empirical Study of Modern Japanese History, with a team of three young historians from the Division of the Study of the Nation's History, University of

Tokyo, interviewed Hiraizumi in his home in Hakusan in November 1978. The record of the interview was later published as "Interview with Former Faculty Member of University of Tokyo: Interview with Hiraizumi Kiyoshi Sensei.,,6& Tanaka Takashi, Hiraizumi's student and former President of Kogakukan University, personally requested Professor Ito to release the entire record; he edited it and published it as Kanrinshi kankoroku: I walked on My Way.69 These two accounts provide some of Hiraizumi's reflections on his life.

In my attempts to understand Hiraizumi, I have consulted the two volumes of his autobiographical chronology Kanrin Nenpu (Sei and Zoku).10 Such consultation is essential even though he was extremely cautious when discussing his political activities during the 1930s and 1940s. Saito Takashi wrote in 1984 that the political activities of

Hiraizumi remained unknown, and this is still true today. For this reason, whenever

65 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higeki juso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppan bu, 1985). 66 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon no higeki to riso (Tokyo: Hara shobo, 1977). 67 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Sanga ari (Tokyo: Tachibana shobo, 1957). He described his life-long partnership with his wife Hayako in Kanai no omoide, expressing his appreciation to her. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanai no omoide (Tokyo: Kajima shuppansha, 1983). 68 "Tokyo daigaku kyushokuin intabyu," Tokyo daigakushi kiyo 13.14,15,16,17,18 (Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai, 1995, 96, 97, 98, 99). 69 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. Kanrinshi kaikoroku: waga michi woyuku (Tokyo: Sozosha,1995). 70 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964). Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 30 possible, I searched for and used primary sources, even though I did not always get the results I wanted. This study also draws on many different types of publications (journal articles, books, and both national and provincial newspapers in Japan) and the records of the lectures Hiraizumi gave throughout his life.

I have collected primary source materials from more than 40 libraries and archives all over Japan. I visited those places and interviewed people. At the same time, I have benefited from his students' tireless efforts to preserve their mentor's teaching. For instance, Tanaka Takashi, a student of Hiraizumi and former President of Kogakukan

University, edited The Collection of Dr. Hiraizumi's Theory of History: Mainly His View of

History?1 This collection includes Hiraizumi's journal articles and lectures representing his view of history before and after 1945. Revering the Wise Sage is another collection of his articles and lectures. Nogi Kunio, a student of Tanaka Takashi at Ise Seiseijuku, produced a detailed bibliography under the supervision of Nagoe Tokimasa, head of the

Mito branch of the Association; it appeared in Tanaka Takashi's The Hiraizumi School of

History and the View of History of the Imperial Nation (2000).73 This work represents a major contribution to the study of Hiraizumi. At the same time, Hiraizumi delivered countless lectures nationwide throughout his life, so many, in fact, that even his students do not have an accurate account of them. I have found a number of documents that remain unlisted in this bibliography. Such findings are part of my contribution to the field of modern Japanese history.

71 Tanaka Takashi, ed., Hiraizumi Hakushi Shironsho: Rekishikan wo shu to shite (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 1998). 72 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Sentetsu wo aogu (Tokyo: Nihongaku kyokai, 1975). It was re-published by Kinseisha in 1998, the same year Hiraizumi hakushi Shironsho was published. 73 Tanaka Takashi, ed. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi to kokoku shikan (Tanaka Takashi hyoronshu 2) (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 2000). Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 31

Although these accounts contain indispensable information, researchers must pay close attention to their historical accuracy. In my attempts to do so, I consulted primary sources from sources other than those provided by Hiraizumi and his students. These primary sources come from the period concerned; they have not been written retrospectively. For example, I used documents issued by the Ministry of Education (the

Division of Student Affairs, Department of Ideology, and Department of Indoctrination), the Military Police, the Department of Justice, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and the

Ministry of Foreign Affairs. These materials broaden our knowledge of Hiraizumi's collaboration with these institutions during the war. Careful examination reveals what has not been mentioned or remembered elsewhere by Hiraizumi and his students. I have also checked published diaries of prominent figures of wartime Japan, for example,

Saionji/Harada Diary, The Reminiscence ofOkada Keisuke (1980), Kido Diary and Prince

Takamatsu Diary. Together with the discussions of Hiraizumi mentioned earlier in this section, these sources help construct more a complete picture of Hiriazumi as university educator, historian, and disseminator of "Japanese Spirit" (Ninon seishin) before 1945.

I also collected Hiraizumi's articles that appeared in academic journals, popular magazines, and national and provincial newspapers. In particular, articles published in

Shigaku zasshi, the official journal for the Society of the Study of History (Shigakukai) at

Tokyo Imperial University, provided essential information on his scholarly contributions to the field of the Study of the Nation's History (Kokushigaku) before 1945. And I collected

"spiritual" lectures (Seishin kowa) delivered at institutions all over Japan in an attempt to

74 With regards to Prince Takamatsu Diary, during the research trip to Fukui and Kanazawa in the August of 2005, Hiraizumi Takafusa, a grandson of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, asked the author whether or not the author has seen and confirmed the existence of the original copy of the Diary. The author has not yet confirmed it. But the Diary is published, widely circulated, and often quoted by historians. Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 32 understand what Hiraizumi Kiyoshi meant by "Japanese Spirit," "the Nation's History," and "the ethical and moral principles" throughout his life. Those institutions include, to name only a few, the major educational institutions of both the Imperial Army and the

Imperial Navy, the national and provincial police training centers, and the provincial education committees. Finally, I consulted textbooks on the Nation's History used at the

Tokyo Imperial University, the Imperial Army and the Imperial Navy, and the National

Police Training Center, in my attempt to show how Hiraizumi applied his ideas to his service to the Imperial Nation before and after August 15, 1945, and to understand how those concepts and principles are still at work in Japan in 2007.

In addition to the sources listed above, some novelists have written well-researched books and articles on critical events in the history of 20l century Japan, even though they are outside academia. For example, in researching Make an Apology for Great Crime by

Presenting my Death: The Minister of the Army Anami Korechika (1980), Tsunoda Fusako personally interviewed Anami's son about his father and presented information derived from the interview.75 After confirming the validity of the source, I selectively incorporated the information into my work.

I have also researched the continuity of Hiraizumi's view of history in the postwar period, a topic usually avoided by Japanese historians.76 Nor do Japanese political scientists deal with the topic, even when the postwar period is their scholarly focus. For example, Hata Ikuhiko chooses not to discuss Hiraizumi and his students' activities in the postwar era in "Another aspect of the February 26 Incident: Hiraizumi's School of History

75 Tsunoda Fusako, Isshi Taizai Wo Shasu: Rikugun Daijin Anami Korechika (Tokyo: Shinchosha, 1980). Also, see, the works by Agawa Hiroyuki, Hosaka Masayasu and Tachibana Takashi, who all did original research on Hiraizumi and contributed to our understating of Hiriazumi. It is well worth reading what they wrote about Hiriazumi. 76 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Zokuroku Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1987). Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 33 and the Young Officers" (1992). But Hiraizumi Kiyoshi remains relevant to us in 2008 because his view of history continues to influence state affairs. For this reason, as a student of modern Japanese history, I have challenged the unspoken rule in the field. I seek to demonstrate the role of "spiritual" history in the present and to show that it is at work today.

Direction

Japanese scholars have tended to treat Hiraizumi and his activities as an isolated incident in

Showa-era academia (1926-86). In fact, it is almost as if Hiraizumi acted alone. This dissertation, however, shows a longstanding history of the dissemination of the southern court view of history, noting specifically its relationship to official Meiji state policy. The

Meiji government overtly promoted the southern court view of history as the basis for the

Way of the Subjects (Shindo) to assist the National Polity (Kokutai) of Japan, which was the "restored" ancient imperial system after 300 years of the rule of the Tokugawa

Shogunate. This dissertation places Hiraizumi Kiyoshi within this historical context. He did not start this movement of disseminating the southern court view of history on his own.

Rather, he was consciously taking part in a continuing "tradition" that had been reinforced since the start of the Meiji period in 1868.

One of the few works to accurately present Hiraizumi's role in this context is

Murata Masashi's The Theory of the Southern and Northern Courts: Historical Facts and

77 • •

Ideology (1959). Historian Sato Shin'ichi also places Hiraizumi in this context in The

Turmoil of the Southern and Northern Courts (1965),78 his authoritative work on the study 77 Murata Masashi, Nanbokuchdron: Shijitsu to shiso (Nihon rekishi shinsho) (Tokyo: Teibundo, 1959). 78 Sato Shin'ichi, Nanbokucho no dor an (Nihon no rekishi 9) (Tokyo: Chuo koronsha, 1965). Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 34 of the period of the southern and northern courts in the postwar period.79 The present work carries this analysis forward, arguing that Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and his students' activities demonstrate the continuity and persistence of the Meiji "tradition." This is the first comprehensive study of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi in the English language and the first to examine him in this historical context in either Japanese or Western scholarship.

The dissertation is divided into four parts. In Part One, Chapter One briefly describes the historical background of the Southern court view of history as part of

"spiritual" history in Japan and provides the historical context in which Hiraizumi is placed in this study.

Part Two lays the groundwork for the following sections, discussing the intellectual formation of the Japanese spiritual historian, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi (1895-1931).

Chapter Two focuses on his early years (1895-1915); it shows that the southern court view of history and the Shinto faith already were integral parts of his view of history when he was in Fukui prefecture, even before he began to study at Tokyo Imperial University.

Chapter Three discusses Hiraizumi's ongoing intellectual formation at Tokyo Imperial

University from 1915 to 1929.80 Chapter Four concerns his trip to the West from 1930 to

1931, when he confirmed his already well-established view of history.

Part Three discusses Hiraizumi's practical application of "spiritual" history

(1931-1945). Chapter Five begins with his return from the West in July 1931; at this time,

Hiraizumi was determined to rescue the nation by spreading Seishin. To this end, he

79 I express my appreciation for Professor Emeritus Shuzo Uyenaka, Department of East Asian Studies at University of Toronto, to advise me to consider the background context. 80 The chapter shows that he diligently mastered the Rankian positivist historical method, which was then predominant in the Division of the Nation's History at the university. He moved on to cultural history, which was rapidly becoming the more popular approach to history. He concluded that while politics and culture come and go in the course of history, something runs eternally through the course of history. He identified this as the Seishin (G: Geist: E: Spirit) of history and of the nation.

Kiyoshi Ueda Introduction 35 applied spiritual history to define the relationship between individuals and the state.

Chapter Six examines his dissemination of spiritual history in Asia from 1931 to 1940.

More specifically, it shows how he applied spiritual history to provide a historical explanation for Japan's expansion. Finally, Chapter Seven moves into the war years, showing how spiritual history was applied to give historical meaning to the deaths of

Japanese soldiers in the Pacific War.

Part Four discusses the persistence of "spiritual" history in the postwar period.

Chapter Eight notes Hiraizumi's objectives in the new context, while Chapter Nine examines the postwar activities of Hiraizumi and his students. Finally, Chapter Ten illuminates the role of spiritual history as a source of the logic behind the illogicality of

Japan's "un-repentance." It also suggests solutions for the continued legacy of "spiritual" history.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 36

CHAPTER ONE

The Southern Court View of History as Part of "Spiritual" History in Japan

The Southern court view of history was the most significant aspect of the "spiritual" history that Hiraizumi Kiyoshi practiced and promoted throughout his life.1 However, he did not invent either the Southern court view of history or "spiritual" history. Rather he inherited them, renovated them, and passed them on to the next generation through his students. He began as a young promising historian who closely followed the trends in western historical scholarship and aspired to integrate Japanese history into western

scholarly trends. However, he soon chose to take up a particular interpretation (the

Southern court view of history) of the Nation's History; from that point, he religiously promoted it as the only interpretation of Japanese history, even though he most certainly knew there were many other interpretations. He often told Hiraizumi Takafusa, his

grandson, that one must understand the era in which one lived in order to understand one's

1 What does "spiritual" history mean in this context? The term is an English translation of Seishinshi. However, this English translation does not carry the meaning of the Japanese term very well. Seishin (E: Spirit) could be better expressed by the German concept of Geist, more specifically Volksgeist (E: National Spirit; J: Kokumin teki seishin). The study of Volksgeist was one of the objectives of German historical science (G: Geschichtswissenschaff). At the same time, Japan had its own tradition of Seishin. There was ancestor worship: to revere and manifest the Seishin of one's ancestors in Shinto. Among others, the Kimon school of Yamazaki Ansai (1618-82), the late-Mito school of Tokugawa Mitsukuni (1628-1700) and the school of Yamaga Soko (1622-85) were the major contributors to the development of Japanese historical scholarship on Seishin in the early modern period. One impact that Hiraizumi Kiyoshi had on the Japanese intellectual history of the 20th century was to combine the teachings of these Japanese schools and to renovate the Japanese concept of Seishinshi using the methods and ideas of Geschichtswissenschaff.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 37 role.2 But why did he become so selective in his use of history? This chapter explores the historical context within which this promising young historian's choices were made.

The issue of legitimate imperial succession often dictated the interpretation of the national history in Japan. In fact, this was a main focus of major historical projects throughout the course of Japanese history. There were always conflicts and contradictions between the ideal of history and the facts of history, and Japanese historians were often caught between the two. In theory, in the Nation's History (Kokushi) of Japan, the

National Polity (Kokutai) was defined as "rule of a state by the immediate direction of the emperor," or Tenno shinsei, an arrangement, that was believed to exist at the beginning of the history, according to Kojiki (712) and Nihon shoki (720), two ancient historical writings.

In reality, Bakufu,4 the warrior class (Buke), not the Emperors and courtiers (Kuge) in

Kyoto, controlled national governance until with the support of imperial loyalists, such as

Kusunoki Masashige and Nawa Nagatoshi, Emperor Godaigo (1288-1339) defeated the

Kamakura Bakufu (1183-1333) in his second attempt, thereby restoring "the ancient imperial system," and accomplishing the Kenmu Restoration5 of 1334.

This imperial governance by Emperor Godaigo did not last long. Ashikaga Takauji

(1305-1358) of the warrior class challenged this newly established "ancient imperial rule," militarily overwhelmed the imperial court in Kyoto and its nationwide supporters, and

2 Uemura Kazuhide, Maruyama Masao to Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Showaki Nihon no Seiji Shugi (Tokyo: Kashiwa shobo, 2004), p.336. 3 I have created the English term "the Nation's History" for Kokushi because Kokushi had particular historical and religious connotations in pre-1945 Japan. These connotations are assumed to be part of all following discussions of the Nation's History throughout this dissertation. 4 Bakufu is roughly translated as a feudal government headed by Shogun, a supreme leader of the warrior class in Japan. 5 This medieval restoration of "the ancient imperial rule" is known as Kenmu no Chuko or Kenmu no Shinsei. There is a study of Emperor Godaigo and the Kenmu Restoration in English. See Andrew Edmund Goble, Kenmu: Go-Daigo's Revolution (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 38 finally endorsed Prince Kogon (1313-64) and Emperor KSmyo (1321-80) of the Jimyoin branch in Kyoto in August 1336; this became known as the northern court (Hokucho). Four months later, Emperor Godaigo, a member of the Jitoin branch, who escaped Kyoto to the mountain of Yoshino, founded an imperial court known as the southern court (Nancho).

From Yoshino, Emperor Godaigo fought the northern court and Muromachi Bakufu led by

Ashikaga Takauji. For the next 57 years, aristocrats, the warrior class, and the rest of the population were involved in military conflicts in the name of defending one of the two courts. This became known as the War between the Northern Court and Southern Court

(Nanbokucho no nairan).

From 1339 to 1343, the conflict intensified; in this period the imperial loyalists of the southern court, such as the Kusunoki family (Kusunoki Masanori), the Kitabatake family (Kitabatake Akiie), the Nitta family (Nitta Yoshisada), and the Kikuchi family of the Kyushu region, fought bravely and sacrificed themselves for the restoration of the southern court as the sole legitimate line of the imperial throne. The death of Emperor

Godaigo in 1339 shocked the loyalists, but they continued to fight the northern court assisted by the Muromachi Bakufu.

During this period, Kitabatake Chikafusa fought at Oda castle, Seki castle, and

Taiho castle, in attempts to reinvigorate the forces of the southern court in eastern Japan.

He wrote Jinno Shotoki {A Chronicle of Gods and Sovereigns) 6 in Oda castle, hoping to obtain the support of the warrior class in this part of the nation. He assisted Emperor

Gomurakami (1328-68) and directed the imperial loyalists. Bakufu tried to suppress the

6 There is an authoritative English translation of Jinno Shotoki; see H. Paul Varley, trans. A Chronicle of Gods and Soveriegns: Jinno Shotoki of Kitabatake Chikafusa (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980). Varley also has an extended discussion of southern court historiography and its modern legacy in H.Paul Varley, Imperial Restoration in Medieval Japan (New York: Columbia University of Press, 1971). Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 39 forces of the southern court but failed because of internal conflict between Takauji and

Ashikaga Tadayoshi (1306-1352) over control. Kitabatake conquered Kyoto, captured three princes of the northern court and three insignia of the imperial throne, and returned to

Yoshino with them. In theory, the southern court could claim its legitimacy as the sole line of the imperial throne with possession of the three insignia. In reality, three major forces

(Muromachi Bakufu, Ashikaga Tadafuyu [d.1400?], a successor of Tadayoshi, and the

Southern court) kept the balance of power. The Muromachi Bakufu sent Imagawa Ryoshun

(or Sadayo: 13267-1420?) to Kyushu and suppressed the remaining military forces of the southern court there. In 1392, this conflict was brought to an end when, with the strong lead of the Muromachi Bakufu, Emperor Gokameyama (-1424) of the southern court and

Emperor Gokomatsu (1377-1433) of the northern court agreed on a truce. Emperor

Gokameyama returned the three insignia (Jingi) to Emperor Gokomatsu,7 the two courts were "unified as one" (Goitsu), and the northern court became the legitimate line of the imperial throne.8

After "unification,"9 the imperial house was that of the Northern court. The descendants of Emperor Godaigo and their loyalists attempted to repossess their legitimacy on a few occasions but without success; they gradually faded away in the shadow of history. Information on their whereabouts completely disappeared from literature after the

When the Americans occupied Japan, a major concern of the supporters of the imperial system was the protection of the three insignia of the imperial throne from the foreign occupiers. 8 Sato Shin'ichi produced an authoritative study of the period of the Northern court and the Southern court in the postwar period. See Sato Shin'ichi,, Nanbokucho no dor an (Nihon no reksihi 9) (Tokyo: Chu5 koronsha, 1965). 9 The fact that the two imperial courts existed during the same period could be a problem from the standpoint of the theory of the National Polity (Kokutai), because it advocates that only one imperial line has continued from the beginning of the Nation's History to the present without interruption. Yet Japanese historians in subsequent centuries have come up with explanations for this discrepancy between the ideal of history and the facts of history. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 40

Onin War (1467-77). In fact, no books supported the Southern court for next 300 years.10

Courtiers of the Northern court wrote history so as to support the legitimacy of the

Northern court. (Some folklore about their survival was passed down in remote villages in some parts of the nation, but the authenticity of their stories remained in question.)11

At the same time, a series of popular writings, notably Taiheiki (Probably written around 1371), helped build up sympathy towards Kusunoki Masashige (-1336), the

1 7 Southern court loyalist. He became a folk hero. Some even worshiped him; this became known as worship of Nanko (NankS suhai). In 1560, Emperor Ogimachi pardoned

Masashige as the enemy of the court (Choteki) when Kusunoki Masatora, who claimed to be his descendant, requested the pardon.13 The growth of these popular sentiments laid the foundation for the sentimental ideology (Shinjo teki shiso) of the early modern and modern periods. More importantly, it helped build a foundation for the subsequent scholarly development of the Southern court view of history.

In addition to this growth of public sentiment towards Masashige and other imperial loyalists of the Southern court, Neo-Confucian scholars systematized the ethical and moral interpretation of the Southern court view of history in the 17th and 18th centuries.

In the official history commissioned by the Edo Bakufu (1603-1680), Hayashi Razan

(1583-1657) and his son Gaho (1618-80) compiled 310 volumes of Honcho tsugan

(1640-70) in which they supported the legitimacy of the Southern court. It was the first such occasion since the Jinno shotoki was written about 300 years earlier.14 Gah5 later

10 Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokucho seijun ronsan (Tokyo: 1911), p.53. 11 Murata Masashi. Nanbokuchoron: shijitsu to shiso (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1959). 12 Varley describes the influence of Taiheiki upon the development of the public image of Kusunoki Masashige in H.Paul Varley, Imperial Restoration in Medieval Japan (New York: Columbia University of Press, 1971). 13 Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokucho seijun ronsan (Tokyo: 1911), p.53. 14 Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokucho seijun ronsan (Tokyo: 1911), pp.54-5. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 41 switched his position to supporting the Northern court legitimacy as he completed 230 volumes of Zoku honcho tsiigan in 1670.

What then, is the "Japanese morality" (Nihon no dotoku) that 20th century essentialists such as Hiraizumi Kiyoshi claimed 17th and 18th century Japanese

Neo-Confucian scholars derived from the actions of the medieval Southern court? Simply stated, it rests on three principles: the ethical principle of Gi (roughly translated as the Just or fidelity to one's principle);16 the moral principles of Chu (roughly translated as loyalty);17 and the moral principle of Ko (filial piety or being dutiful to one's own parents and ancestors).18 CM is solely directed towards one's sovereign or master. Ko is directed towards one's parents. In the case of Japan, when there is a conflict of interest between

Chu and Ko, one must always choose to act with CM. In other words, one must sacrifice one's parents in order to serve one's master.19 Serving one's master with CM requires

15 The Hayashi family would later crush with the Mito branch of the Takugawa family over the issue of the publication of the History of Great Japan. 16 Gi j| has several definitions: 1) observe the Way (Michi or Do), one of the five cardinal virtues [Gojo]of Confucianism (i.e, benevolence, justice, politeness, wisdom, and fidelity); 2) the morality between sovereign and subjects; 3) the attitude of mind to the service of the state and the public, as well as a person who possesses this quality; 4) being good and right (correct); 5) things are standing to reason [sense], or things are in accord with reason, or things are reasonable; 6) persons with good conduct [deed] and virtue; 7) Misao: chastity or virginity; and 8) Setsugi: fidelity to one's principle; constancy; honor; adhere to one's principles. In Japan the ethical principle of Gi was studied and promoted by Yamaga Soko in the early modern period. Yoshida Shoin acted according to this principle at the end of the Tokugawa period. Nogi Maresuke, Admiral of the Imperial Navy and a tutor of the Emperor Meiji, belonged to this school. Hiraizumi promoted the concept of "true Japanese" during the 1930s and 1940s, as well as Bushidd (the Way of the Warrior). Gi or Dogi (the Way of Gi) was its core principle. 17 Chu H& has the following definitions: 1) loyalty; 2) sincerity; a true heart; devotion; 3) to serve with sincerity [Makoto]; 4) to serve the sovereign with true heart [Magokoro]; and 4) respect [Uyamau]. The Kimon school of Yamazaki Ansai studied this moral principle in depth and influenced the behavior of the Bakumatsu shishi. His students of the Kimon wrote history according to this principle. Hiraizumi inherited many aspects of the study of the Kimon and promoted them in the 1930s and 1940s. 18 Ko # has two definitions: 1) to serve one's father and mother well; 2) to serve one's ancestors well. 19 This idea did not exist in the Chinese counterpart. This moral principle had significant ideological implications since the founding of the Meiji State because the state authorities Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 42 courage, and here, one needs the ethical principle of Gi. One should act without hesitation to fulfill one's duty to realize Chu even at the cost of one's life. Those ethical and moral principles were known as Chugi.

This set of ethical and moral principles did not originate in Japan but in China during the Song period. Thus, in Japan, it became known as Song Studies (Sogaku) and included Zen Buddhism and Neo-Confucianism. The set of ethical and moral principles became the core system of thought of the feudal nation governed by the warrior class

(Bushi). For centuries, the Emperor resided in the imperial palace and the court aristocrats resided in Kyoto, while the warrior class governed the nation. Scholars of the early modern period (the 17th and 18th centuries) used this set of ethical and moral principles to define the relationship between the Emperor and his subjects within the context of the ancient

imperial system, which they sought to restore in the latter part of the Tokugawa's 300-year rule.

A good example is Tokugawa Mitsukuni (1628-1700) and his grand project, The

History of Great Japan (Dai Nihon Shi), which took the late Mito school of history more

than 200 years to complete (1657-1906).20 Mitsukuni argued in The History of Great

Japan that the Southern court was legitimate, simply because of its possession of the

insignia before the "unification." Yamazaki Ansai (1618-1682) combined Shinto and

Neo-Confucianism to create Suika Shinto;21 his students, such as Kuriyama Senpo

promoted the concept of Family State (Kazoku Kokka). It is based upon the five relationship of Confucianism, which was applied to relationship among families under the Emperor as the sole head of the nation as the family. Interestingly, Ko must be prevailed by the moral concept of Chu towards one's master; in the context of pre 1945 Japan, the Emperor. In this way, families were always subjugated to the state and united as one consolidated "moral" state. 20 Mitsukuni shared the popular sentiments towards Kusunoki Masashige and built a monument for him in 1692 at the site of the 1336 battle of Minatogawa where he died. 21 He had valued Nihon shoki as the foundation of the history of Japan. According to the Shinto theory of the insignia and the Neo-Confucian theory of Meibun, he began writing the Mirror of Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 43

(1671-1706), Mitake Kanrei (1674-1718) and Asaka Kanpaku (1656-1737),22 played crucial roles in defining the theory of Taigi Meibun23 and thus clarified the theory of

Kokutai (the National Polity) in the Nation's History through Mitsukuni's grand project. In this context, the school, under the patronage of the Mito-branch of the Tokugawa family, revitalized the Southern court view of history.

Yamazaki's influence extended into the area of religion. Shinto scholars and priests, such as Ogimachi Tadamichi, a courtier in Kyoto, and Atobe Yoshiaki (1659-1729), his disciple in Edo, inherited his teaching; they continued the Suika Shinto24 and advocated the Southern court legitimacy. Yamazaki and his students combined Japanese mythology and Shinto faith with the Neo-Confucian principles of ethics and morality, components which shaped subsequent interpretations of the national history of Japan. They practiced the interpretation of the Nation's History according to abstract concepts reinforced by

Japan (Wakagami), a book on Japanese history, but without completing it 22 Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokucho seijun ronsan (Tokyo: 1911), pp.59-60. 23 Historian Bito Masahide explains: "Taigi Meibun is a theory based upon Japanese interpretations of Neo-Confucianism during the 17th and 18th century. In the ancient study of Confucianism there was a theory of Seimei in which Mei (name and concept) and Jitsu (reality and substance) must be one and the same. When this was not the case, namely master failed to assume one's responsibilities, it was inevitable for the master to lose one's position or status. In other words, it became a theory that would support the theory of Ekisei kakumei.... (Ekisei revolution). As opposed to this theory developed in China, in Japan the theory of Meibun placed its emphasis upon the execution of the responsibilities that accompanied with one's own social status. In other words, it emphasized the execution of the social role of Shokubun.... The social order of Mei was hoped to be unchangeable. Therefore, it has the characteristics of anti-revolution. In Japan, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Yamazaki Ansai, Yamaga Soko, and Fujita Yukoku of the late Mito school of history, all advocated the respect for "Meibun." In the book Meiseiron, Fujita argued that to clarify the name and substance between master and subjects was the foundation of social order. This concept was later developed into the idea of "Respecting Emperor and Expelling Barbarians" (Sonno Joi). Also, in Japan, this concept of Meibun was put together with the term Taigi, in which the morality between master and subjects was placed above the morality among the members of a family. In this way, the phrase Taigi Meibun was formed." See Kokushi Dai Jiten (Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobunkan). Japanese state authorities applied this theory to counteract revolutionary ideas, and Hiraizumi used history to promote this theory of Taigi Meibun during the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s. 24 Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokucho seijun ronsan (Tokyo: 1911), P.61. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 44 religious faith (or vice versa). In a similar way, the elements of ethics and morality and religious faith were integrated into history in the early modern period.25

Although The History of Great Japan had a considerable impact on the intellectual development of the early modern and modern periods, the authorities of the time did not welcome its publication. Some thought it Mitsukuni's personal view of history. When the

Mito branch of the Tokugawa family presented it to the Edo Bakufu in 1720, Hayashi

Nobuatsu, Head of the official academy (Daigaku gashira) of the Bakufu, thought it opposed the academy's support of the Northern court. He attempted to block publication by approaching the Imperial Court (the Northern court) in Kyoto. The Edo Bakufu raised the question of whether the current Emperor was legitimate. This issue remained unsolved for more than 10 years. Despite the Imperial court's reluctance, the Edo Bakufu finally gave permission for the publication of The History of Great Japan in 1734. The Imperial court finally accepted it in 1810.26

In the 17th century there was another significant development in scholarship on the

Northern and the Southern court period. Some scholars began to advocate the view of co-existence of both courts in the 14th century. They rationally saw history according to facts. In 1684, Honcho nendaiki (author unknown) was the first work to demonstrate this historical view. Arai Hakuseki (1657-1725), the Neo-Confucian scholar and eminent historian, supported the legitimacy of both courts in Tokushiyoron (1712). During the 18th and 19l centuries, Natsushima Motonao (1778-1862), a history officer (Shikan) of the Edo

Bakufu, wrote Nanzanshi. Shikamochi Masazumi, known for his study of Manyoshii, a

25 In my opinion, since then, history could be described as a product of synthesis rather than a product of analysis. Moreover, as a subject of religious worship, such history requires subjectivity rather than objectivity. Early modern Shinto/Neo-Confucian scholars shaped the nature of the historical understanding which the modern Japanese state adopted as its "historical" basis. 26 Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokuchd seijun ronsan (Tokyo: 1911), pp.66-9. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 45 collection of ancient Japanese poems, wrote Nihon gaishi hyo. Together, they presented what became known as the theory of the co-existence of the Northern and Southern courts

(Heiritsuron). This had a significant impact upon the development of modern historical scholarship on the subject.

Popular sentimental literature was also influential. Rai Sanyo (1780-1832) popularized Masashige as the ideal image of the imperial loyalist of the Southern court in

Nihon gaishi (1829). This image of Masashige inspired many young men in the early modern period. They came to possess the Seishin of Masashige and acted according to the

Seishin "to defeat the (Edo) Bakufu and to restore the ancient imperial system" in the 19th century.

This reinvigoration of the Southern court view of history was inseparable from the restoration of "the ancient imperial system," namely, the Meiji Restoration and the founding and development of the Meiji State in 1868. In the Meiji Restoration, a group of powerful domain leaders from the southern island of Kyushu defeated the Tokugawa family in the name of restoring the reins of government to the Emperor (Taisei wo hokan sum). Hence, a form of government returned to its essence, as described by Nihon shoki

(720), an ancient Japanese historical writing that sets out the essentialists' theory of history.

The Tokugawa family exited Edo Castle. Emperor Meiji entered the castle from the Kyoto imperial palace and the imperial family continues to reside there. In an apparent paradox, in the eyes of the proponents of the Southern court view, modern Japan began by returning to the beginning of its history.

27 Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokuchd seijun ronsan (Tokyo: 1911), pp.78-9. This view was taken up by Shigeno Yasutsugu (1827-1910), Professor of History at Tokyo Imperial University, in the 19th century; it became an accepted interpretation of the Southern and Northern court period in mainstream academia into the 20th century.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 46

When the Meiji State was founded, the Meiji government promulgated the

Constitution of the Empire of Japan (Dai Nihon teikoku kenpo) of 1889, in which the

Emperor was stipulated as divine.28 The government reinvigorated Shinto as the state religion and created State Shinto (Kokka Shinto). Meiji Japan was a constitutional monarchy with an aspect of theocracy.29 Its government supported the legitimacy of the

Southern court and commissioned some grand historical projects, and its institutions produced some publications to this end.30 The Meiji state honored the Seishin of

Masashige, the Southern court loyalist, to support the restored imperial system under the reign of the Emperor, who was a descendant of the Northern court. In fact, the government was inclined to declare the Southern court legitimate, at least in the field of education, because the Seishin of Masashige was regarded as indispensable for teaching imperial subjects (Shinmin) about being just (Gi) and loyal (Chu) to the Emperor. In this way, the ethical and moral principles that defined the feudal relationship between lord and vassals were re-applied to defining the relationship between the Emperor and imperial subjects in the 19th century - even though the Meiji imperial system was founded by defeating the feudal regime of the Edo Bakufu.

In Meiji Japan, history and religion assisted each other to sustain the newly

Hirobumi Ito, Commentaries on the Constitution of the Empire of Japan., trans.by Miyoji Ito (Tokio:Chu-o daigaku, 1906). 29 This ancient revivalism (Fukko shugi) primarily was an intellectual product of the Nation's Studies (Kokugaku) by Hirata Atsutane (1776-1843). 30 For instance, the History Section of the Imperial Court edited Taisei kiyo under the supervision of Yamagata Aritomo (1838-1922) in 1883. The Section of the Compilation of the Chronological History at Tokyo Imperial University edited Kokushigan in 1890, The Agency of the Shinto Shrine and Ceremony (Jingu shicho) edited Kojiruien in 1896. Outside the government, Confucian scholar Fujisawa Nangaku of Osaka prefecture supported the Southern court legitimacy in Nihon tsushi in 1884. (His son played a role in the national controversy of 1911.) Kurita Kan (1835-99) of Mito, a student of Fujita Toko (1806-55), an eminent scholar of the late Mito school, presented the theory of a spurious insignia (Giki setsu) in support of the Southern court's legitimacy in 1898. See Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokucho seijun ronsan (Tokyo: 1911), pp.80-230

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 47

"restored" imperial system. The Southern court view of history played a crucial role in this regard. One state project was to honour and manifest the Seishin of those who had contributed to and sacrificed their lives for the restoration of the ancient imperial system throughout the course of the Nation's History. State authorities systemically proceeded with this project at Shinto shrines throughout the nation.31 In 1960, the Shinto scholar

Okada Yoneo divided the project into 16 stages; stages included honouring Emperor

Gotoba and Emperor Godaigo, as well as a number of imperial loyalists of the Southern court, such as Kusunoki Masashige, Nitta Yoshisada (1301-38), Kitabatake Akiie

(1318-38), and Nawa Nagatoshi (-1336). A list of scholars who clarified the National

Polity and promoted the Southern court view of history in subsequent years was included as well; on the list are Yamazaki Ansai, his students, and the scholars of the late-Mito school of history.32 The Seishin (E: Spirit, G: Geisf) of these historical figures was attributed to the ethical and moral principles on which the late-Mito school history had based The History of Great Japan. Later, probably under the guidance of the Ministry of the Imperial Household, Emperor Meiji even granted rank to those who had died many centuries ago. Meiji Shinto practitioners would say the Emperor granted rank to those figures because they are not dead; they are still alive "spiritually." In any event, their

Seishin became sanctified under State Shinto. But more importantly, the ethical and moral principles that defined Seishin became sanctified and inviolable under State Shinto, ultimately functioning as a core instrument for the Education of National Morality

31 Some leading scholars of the late Mito school of history, such as Aizawa Seishisai, originally defined this notion in their works. A good example is The New Thesis (Shinron) by Aizawa. There is a good English translation and an excellent study of the book; see Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, Anti-Foreignism and Western Learning in Early-Modern Japan: The New Thesis of 1825 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986). 32 Okada Yoneo, "Jingu, Jinja SSkenshi", in Shinto bunka kai, ed., Meiji ishin Shinto hyakunenshi (Dai ni kan) (Tokyo: ShintS bunkakai, 1960). Kiyoshi Veda Part One: Historical Background 48

(Kokumin Dotoku Kyoiku) of the modern Japanese state.

This Japanese tradition of "spiritual" history (Seishinshi) was strengthened further by the introduction of German historical science (G: Geschichtswissenschaft) to Japan in the 19th century. Tokyo Imperial University hired Ludwig Riess (1861-1928), a student of

Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886) at the University of Berlin, to develop its history program.

From 1887 to 1902, Riess taught future leaders in the field of historical scholarship in

Japan.33 From their German counterparts, historians of Tokyo Imperial University learned about research methods (collecting vast numbers of documents and other forms of evidence at archives and private residences), the historian's relations with the state, and

Volksgeist. German scientific historians said that German Volksgeist (E: the National

[People's] Spirit; J: Kokumin teki seishin) most clearly appeared in the medieval ages of

German history.34 As noted above, the German model fit the Japanese usage of medieval history as the core of the Nation's History. In this way, "Japanese tradition" was more sharply defined as a result of German scholarship; a major task of Japanese historians became the promotion of the Volksgeist of Japan - the "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon seishin).

The Nation's History (Kokushi), including the Southern court view of history as its core component, provided numerous concrete "historical" examples to demonstrate its ethical and moral principles to a wider audience. As a result, a series of anecdotes became sanctified and remained immune from reinterpretation. Japanese historians had to research within the limits of the sanctified history of the nation in the Meiji (1868-1912), Taisho

(1912-1926), and Showa (1926-1989; 1926-1945 in particular) eras. In sum, the clarification, continuation, and defense of Seishin define the "spiritual" history (Seishin

33 John S. Brownlee, Japanese Historians and the National Myths, 1600-1945: the Ages of Gods and Emperor Jinmu (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1997). 34 Ernst Breisach, Historiography (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1983). Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 49 shi) of Japan in the modern period. The recognition of Seishin was indispensable for the establishment of the Way of Subjects (Shindo) and for the foundation of the education of the national morality (Kokumin dotoku) and national spirit (Kokumin seishin) until 1945.

It was generally understood that by having this morality and spirit, one could take part in the illumination of the Seishin that eternally runs through the history of the imperial nation and in the clarification of the National Polity. Each subject was expected to live inside

"history" and take part in it.

Not all historians jumped on the bandwagon. Some were skeptical of a "spiritual" history designed to assist State Shinto. While the Meiji state (the Northern court) informally espoused the Southern court view of history as its official view of the Nation's

History, inside the Imperial palace, the Emperor privately seemed to continue the tradition of the worship ceremony for his Northern court ancestors. Moreover, "history" in the context of the Nation's History proved to be a combination of history, mythology, ethics and morality, and religion: they were not separable entities. Thus, a number of historians began to look for an alternative historical truth, seeking a variety of historical methods by which to understand the history of Japan and challenge this seemingly blinkered view of the Nation's History.35

Academic historians supported either the Northern court view of history (Hokucho seitoron shikan) or the co-existence of both courts (Heiritsuron shikan). Shigeno Yasutsugu

(1827-1910), Kume Kunitake (1839-1931), Tanaka Yoshinari (1860-1919) and Mikami

Sanji (1865-1939) supported this latter view and conducted their positivist historical scholarship at Tokyo Imperial University. This view predominated in mainstream academia

35 Japanese historians of the Meiji period were well aware of the philosophies, methodologies, and historiography of western historical scholarship. They understood that there was more than one way of interpreting history. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 50 while the Southern court view of history was growing as the norm in national education.

These contradicting interpretations of the Nation's History created tension and became the source of controversy and the subject of public debates by the end of the Meiji period. In 1900 Shigeno criticized The History of Great Japan in his lectures "To present my humble view on the special features of the History of Great Japan." In the same year

Kikuchi Kenjiro of Mito wrote the article in Shigaku zasshi to counter-argue Shigeno's opinion.36 Furthermore, the Research Committee on the Drafting of the Chronology of the

Imperial Nation (Teikoku nenpyo soan chosakai) was formed in the Ministry of the

Imperial Household in 1904. Among other issues, its members discussed how to treat the issue of the Southern court and the Northern court. Some members, including Mikami

Sanji and Hoshino Hisashi (1839-1917), Head of the Historiographical Institute at Tokyo

Imperial University, expressed their support for the theory of co-existence of both courts

(Heiritsuron). Inoue Tetsujiro (1855-1944), Professor of Philosophy at Tokyo Imperial

University and an eminent promoter of the concept of the National Morality (Kokumin

Dotoku), argued passionately for the Southern court legitimacy from the standpoint of

Dogi (the Way of being Just) and firmly opposed Mikami and Hoshino's view.37

State authorities were concerned about the spread of socialism, communism, and even anarchism toward the end of the Meiji era. The Lese-majesty affair (Taigyaku jiken) occurred in the fall of 1910 and ended in early 1911. Police rounded up a number of socialists, including Kotoku Shusui (1871-1911), and jailed them. After being indicted for attempts to assassinate the Emperor, they were sentenced to death by hanging according to

Article 73 of the Constitution of the Empire of Japan.38 During the trial Kotoku reportedly

36 Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokucho seijun ronsan (Tokyo: 1911), pp.82-3. 37 Murata Masashi. Nanbokuchoron: shijitsu to shiso (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1959), p.225. 38 Hirobumi Ito, Commentaries on the Constitution of the Empire of Japan., trans.by Miyoji Ito Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 51 told the judge that the current emperor was the descendant of the Northern court that had stolen the imperial insignia from the Southern court. Reportedly, the judge did not respond.39

In the same year a debate on the legitimacy/illegitimacy of the Southern court and

Northern court (Nanbokucho seijun ron) took place in the Imperial parliament. Kita

Sadakichi (1871-1939), editorial officer of the Ministry of Education, described the

Northern court and Southern courts as standing equally (Heiritsu ron) in one of the elementary school history textbooks approved by the state (Kokutei rekishi kyokasho) in

1903. For the next 10 years, the textbook was widely used for teaching history to schoolchildren. However, when Kita delivered his lecture on moral education (Shushin) and history before a group of schoolteachers and at the Ministry of Education, proponents of the Southern court view of history40 raised concerns about the impact of the theory of co-existence upon teachers and students. Matsudaira Yasukuni, Lecturer at Waseda

University, and Makino Kenjiro, President of the Education Committee of Mito city, raised the issue first, and Fujisawa Genzo brought it to a parliamentary session. They were concerned that this historical view would cause "confusion" in the minds of imperial subjects because Kusunoki Masashige and Ashikaga Takauji, the vassal of the Northern court, could be both portrayed as loyal. They saw that such ethical and moral relativism

(Tokio:Chu-o daigaku, 1906). 39 Sato Shin'ichi, Nanbokucho no doran (Nihon no reksihi 9) (Tokyo: Chuo kSronsha, 1965), P.6-7. 40 Some private organizations and individuals actively campaigned for the legitimacy of the Southern court. Kuroita Katsumi (1874-1946), Associate Professor of the Nation's History, was a member of the Organization for the Defense of the National Polity of Great Japan (Dai Nihon Kokutai Engodan) and was "the only history Professor who advocated the southern court legitimacy at Tokyo Imperial University where the rest of the historians espoused the other interpretations. As a result, he had received bad reputation (Akuhyo)." Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higeki juso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980), p.432. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi (1895-1984), his student, later followed in Kuroita's footsteps at Tokyo Imperial University. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 52 could lead to another lese-majesty affair.41

After this incident, the Ministry dismissed Kita. The administration of Prime

Minister Katsura Taro (1847-1913) requested Emperor Meiji to recognize the Southern court as legitimate because of its significance as a core of National Moral Education

(Kokumin dotoku kyoiku). Reportedly, Yamagata Aritomo (1838-1922), an Elder

Statesmen (Genro) and President of the Privy Council, submitted the matter for an Imperial decision. During one of their meetings, Emperor Meiji told Yamagata about his position supporting the Southern court's legitimacy. The Imperial Rescript was issued on March 3,

1912.42 Komatsubara Eitaro, Minister of Education, subsequently sent the provincial governors (Chiho chokan) a note explaining the modifications needed for making the history textbooks conform to the Imperial decision, and the Ministry of Education undertook the revision of the textbooks. The Ministry formed a committee to discuss the matter, and there were a series of heated debates until a consensus was reached in support of the Southern court.43

During and immediately after this incident, debates were provoked in various segments of society on a national level. The theory of confrontation (or co-existence) between the Southern court and the Northern court (Nanbokucho tairitsu ron), was raised by historian Yoshida Togo (1864-1918), a former reporter of Yomiuri Newspaper and Professor of History at Waseda University. Ukida Kazutami (1859-1945), progressive liberal and Christian, advocated the theory of the Northern court as the legitimate line (Hokucho seito ron). Inoue Tetsujiro (1855-1944), Professor of Philosophy at Tokyo Imperial University and an introducer of German idealism to Japan and a promoter of the concept of national morality (Kokumin dotoku), Anezaki Masaharu (1873-1949), Professor of Religion and a founder of the Lecture on the Study of Religion (Shukyogaku koza) at Tokyo Imperial University in 1905, Kuroita Katsumi, and Miura Hiroyuki (1871-1931), Professor of History at Kyoto Imperial University and authority in history of Japanese legal system, supported the Southern court as the legitimate line (Nancho seito ron). The issue was debated from the standpoints of national morality (Kokumin dotoku), history education, legal theory on the imperial legitimacy, and the system of the textbooks approved by the state. The opposition used the incident as a pretext to attack the Cabinet. See Murata Masashi, Nanbokuchdron: shijitsu to shiso (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1959), pp.245-5. 42 Murata Masashi, Nanbokuchdron: shijitsu to shiso (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1959), pp.238-40. 43 Murata Masashi, Nanbokuchdron: shijitsu to shiso (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1959), pp. 242-3. Hozumi Yatsuka (1860-1912), Professor of the Constitution at Tokyo Imperial University, who advocated the need for revision from a legal point of view, and Kato Hiroyuki (1836-1916), Professor in the Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 53

A diversification of political views developed during the Taisho period (1912-26), considered the most democratic era in prewar Japan. Professor Yoshino Sakuzo

(1878-1933) of Tokyo Imperial University promoted the idea of Minpon shugi (roughly translated as "democracy"), and the influence of the 1916 Russian Revolution reached

Japan. Some openly criticized the Meiji imperial system. In this climate, the effectiveness of the Southern court view of history as an instrument of national moral education was in a rapid decline. Not surprisingly, state authorities were concerned about these trends and sought ways to reverse them. They tried to unify the interests of individuals and the interests of the state by reinvigorating the ethical and moral principles on which the

Southern court view of history was based.44 They re-applied the tradition of public sentiments for Kusunoki Masashige in an attempt to popularize those principles and sought to reassure the absoluteness and definifiveness of his ethical and moral character. To this end, the Southern court needed to be recognized as legitimate, and this historical view needed to be taught in school education. More importantly, the legitimacy of the Southern court had political and "religious" significance as a basis of national worship (Kokumin teki shukyo). It was hoped that the imperial subjects would believe in the Seishin of imperial loyalists, such as Masashige. Ideally, Meiji "Shinto" would regain its significance as the state religion and resume its role in National Polity (Kokutai).

State authorities tried to accomplish these objectives throughout the Taisho period but with limited success. As a result, they sought further commitment from the historians of the Nation's History at imperial universities (Teikoku daigaku). The majority of

Faculty of Law at Tokyo Imperial University, who emphasized the need to respect historical facts, were crushed during the committee meetings. 44 The majority of historians would have agreed that the issue was settled the Southern court view of history was not entirely fact-based but was "correct" from ethical and moral points of view and according to public sentiment. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 54 historians supported the concept of the Nation's History. At the same time, however, they had scholarly reservations about claiming the Southern court view of history as fact-based and as the only way of interpreting the Nation's History.45 Under the circumstances, some state authorities actively searched for somebody within mainstream academia who could assume the role of strengthening the factual base of the Southern court view of history in scholarship and effectively promote the view in education. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, educated as a historian of the Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University was an excellent prospect for assuming these roles because of his social, historical, religious, and intellectual background.46

The Lese-majesty Incident and the Debate on Determining the Legitimacy/

Illegitimacy of the Southern and Northern courts (Nanbokucho seijun ron) shocked

Hiraizumi (he was only 17 years old at the time).47 The success of the Russian Revolution

Tanaka Yoshinari (1860-1919), Professor of the Nation's History at Historiographical Institute, Tokyo Imperial University, was a proponent of the theory of the co-existence of the two courts. Even after the Ministry of Imperial Household and the Ministry of Education decided that the Southern court was legitimate in the area of education, Tanaka and Mikami wished to continue a course called the history of the Northern court and the Southern court (Nanbokuchoshi) because they believed historical research must be purely scholarly at a university. However, Ueda Toshikazu (1867-1937), Dean of the Faculty of Literature, insisted that the course must be taught as the History of the Yoshino Court (Yoshinochoshi). Yoshino was the name of the mountain where the Southern court was located. Tanaka did not disagree with his superior but continued to teach the course under the new name. After his death his students, including Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, compiled Tanaka's study of the period of the Northern and Southern court and published it as The History of the Period of the Northern and Southern Court in 1922. See Mikami Sanji, "Tanaka hakushi no etsureki," in Tanaka Yoshinari, Nanbokucho jidai shi (Tokyo: Meiji shoin, 1922), P. 11-13. 46 He was the son of the priest of the prestigious Shinto shrine that had close ties with the Kusunoki family in the medieval period. In the early modern period, one of the shrine's patrons was the Matsudaira family, lord of the Fukui-Echizen domain. In particular, Matsudaira Shungaku studied imperial loyalism and scholarship on the Southern court view of history from Tokugawa Mitsukuni and played a crucial role before the Meiji Restoration. As a boy, he was nurtured by adults sympathetic to this view of history in Fukui prefecture. At junior high school, he read Jinno Shotoki, becoming familiar with the scholarship of Hashimoto Sanai, a student of the Kimon school founded by Yamazaki Ansai. He then attended high school in Kanazawa, the castle town of the Kaga domain governed by the Maeda family, traditionally sympathetic to this historical view. (See Chapter Two) 47 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), P.4. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 55 and the subsequent execution of the Russian emperor warned him that similar events might occur in the Imperial nation,48 a possibility that must be prevented at any cost. Clearly, the national moral education needed to be strengthened.

Hiraizumi promoted the Southern court view of history with conviction but did not blindly worship this historical view. Rather he understood other interpretations of the

Nation's History. When Hiraizumi entered Tokyo Imperial University in 1921, he began studying history under distinguished professors including Mikami Sanji, Tsuji Zennosuke and Tanaka Yoshinari. None was a proponent of the Southern court view.49 After entering graduate school, however, Hiraizumi sought mentorship from Kuroita Katsumi, a young associate professor, who was alone in supporting the legitimacy of the Southern court in the History Department (Shigakuka). Kuroita became a key figure in the grooming of

Hiraizumi as a leading proponent of the Southern court view of history.

He also understood the diverse approaches to modern historical scholarship better than anybody else in his class,50 even if he did not adopt them uncritically. Hiraizumi studied western historical methods and philosophies; he then selectively applied them to his work on Japanese history. For instance, he took up the topic of Asyl (E: Asylum) at religious institutions (popular in the west.) and applied the European concept of

"medieval" (Chusei) to Japanese history.51 Most importantly, Hiraizumi was inspired by the method of German Historical Science (G: Geschichtswissenschafi) at Tokyo Imperial

University and later in Germany. Its emphasis on Volksgeist gave him a sense of conviction

48 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980). 49 Mikami and Tanaka supported the view of co-existence of the two courts whereas Tsuji wrote a journal article that praised the character of Ashikaga Takauji who defeated the Southern court. 50 He graduated at the top of his class and received a silver watch from Emperor Taisho at the undergraduate convocation at Tokyo Imperial University on July 9, 1918. 51 See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Chusei ni okeru shaji to shakai tono kankei (Tokyo: Shibund5, 1925). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Chusei ni okeru seishin seikatsu (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1925). Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 56 as to the universality of the Shinto/Japanese Neo-Confucian scholarship that sought Nihon

Seishin in the Kenmu Restoration.

The effectiveness of the Southern court view of history as an instrument of national moral education declined at the end of the Meiji period and remained this way throughout the Taisho period. Hiraizumi therefore developed a sense of mission in the revitalization of this historical view and in the promotion of a reinvigorated version during the Taisho and

Showa periods. The Southern court view of history meant much to him, partly because he regarded it as essential to the national moral education of the imperial subjects, who should serve loyally and defend the National Polity (Kokutai goji) from both domestic and international challenges, thereby securing the Imperial nation (Kokoku goji).52

In his writings and speeches on "spiritual" history, Hiraizumi focused on a very few individuals from the past and on a few moments in Japan's long history.53 He revered the

Seishin of the Emperors, who tried to accomplish the restoration of "the ancient imperial system," and the Seishin of the imperial loyalists, who sacrificed their lives to accomplish this historical ideal. Hiraizumi sought the eternal continuity of such Seishin in the timeless world of the Nation's History. In this context, he actively promoted the idea of "the

Revival of the Way of the Warrior" ("Bushido no fukkatsu")54and the image of Kusunoki

Masashige as its embodiment during the 1930s. He expected each person "to live inside of history." (Rekishi no naka ni ikuru) and to unite with historical figures. For Hiraizumi, this subjective study of the national history was a religious act and lecturing was an evangelical

52 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokka goji no seishin" in Kaigunsho kyoikukyoku, Shiso kyoiku shiryo 24 (October 1929). 53The author would like to point out that history during his lifetime apparently excluded many aspects of the past which now concern academic historians in 2008, although such a retrospective assessment might not be appropriate in the study of history. 54 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Bushido no fukkatsu" in Dai Ajia shugi 5 (September 1933). Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Historical Background 57 mission.55

Hiraizumi was able to assume this role because of his Shinto religious faith. The interests of the state and his personal interests coincided in the realm of the faith. He practiced the Southern court view of history as part of the national worship (Kokumin teki shukyo) that would sustain "the Imperial nation" (K5koku), and he resolved to spread one

Geist (J: Seishin) to consolidate the nation under the Emperor in 20th century Japan. For him, this was the solution to the nation's problems.56

55 Kami # can be translated as god or deity. 56 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980), P.451 Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 58

CHAPTER TWO

Early Years: 1895-1915

This chapter discusses Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's early years.1 A historian is a product of the environment and period in which he or she grows up, and Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, who became a pre-eminent historian of Japanese medieval history, was no exception to this rule. His particular approach to the history of Japan, namely, the southern court view of history

(Nancho seito ron), was already an integral part of this Japanese intellectual's view of history long before he began to study at Tokyo Imperial University. This chapter seeks to understand his intellectual development by looking at his formative years.

The chapter begins by looking at the first thirteen years of his life, when he lived at

Hakusan Shrine in the mountains of Hakusan in Fukui prefecture. Even though Han

(domain) was abolished and Ken (prefecture) was adopted as part of the Meiji Restoration of the 19th century, the imperial loyalism (Sonno shugi) of the Matsudaira family, the hereditary lord (Daimyo) of the Fukui-Echizen domain, and its culture of imperial loyalism, including "the scholarship for the warrior" (Bushi no gakumon), survived in the traditional elite of the Fukui prefecture where Hiraizumi grew up and had a tremendous impact on his intellectual formation. In fact, as a result of this cultural influence, he evolved into a modern imperial loyalist, a major proponent of the southern court view of history in the

1 Wakai Toshiaki of Kansai University in Osaka prefecture has previously studied the early years of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. See, Wakai Toshiaki, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ni okeru ningen keisei", Seiji keizai shigaku, 397 (Machida: Nihon seiji keizai shigaku kenkyujo, September 1999)

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 59

20th century.2

The chapter goes on to show that his views of history and the state were shaped during the five years he spent at Ono Junior High School in Fukui prefecture. As a teenager, he read books such as Jinno Shotoki (1339), which he later treated as a Bible for the southern court view of history; the complete works of Fujita Toko (1806-1855), from the late-Mito school of history; and the complete works of Hashimoto Sanai (1834-59), from the school of the study of Kimon. All supported the legitimacy of the southern court view of history. Finally, the chapter suggests that Hiraizumi likely encountered Western scholarship during the four years he spent at 4th High School (Daiyon koto gakko) in Kanazawa City, Ishikawa prefecture. Having acquired such knowledge, he was able to excel in the study of the

Nation's History (Kokushigaku) [of Japan] at Tokyo Imperial University in following years.

Born into the Southern Court View of History and the Shinto Faith 3

As the only son of a priest at Heisenji-Hakusan Shrine, Hiraizumi was born into a particular tradition.4 He was proud to be part of this tradition;5 he grew up within it, and later in life, he took part in continuing it. Heisenji-Hakusan Shrine was founded in 717 by

This is an original contribution, which the author is making in this chapter and throughout the work. 3 The author visited the Hakusan Shrine in Katsumaya, Fukui prefecture and interviewed Hiraizumi Takafusa, a grandson of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi in August 2005. 4 Knowledge on his up-bringing and the environment in which he grew up in the MtHakusan of Fukui prefecture is vital to understanding the formation of Hiraizumi's views of history, tradition, nature, and religion as one. Hiraizumi held that these are not separable entities. He came to possess this view in his early years in Heisenji Village, and his attitude did not change throughout his life. 5 Hiraizumi's description of a long history of Heisenji, see, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Heisenji ni tsuite," Nihon. 42. (Tokyo: Nihon gaku kyokai, February 1992.) This is a lecture which Hiraizumi delivered at Hakusan shrine (Heisenji) on August 1948. A team of Hiraizumi's students led by Tanaka Takashi wrote the book on Hakusan shrine in the postwar period. See, Hakusan jinja shi hensan iinkai, ed., Hakusan jinja shi (Katsuyama: Hakusan jinja, 1992.)

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 60 the Buddhist monk Taicho (682-758). In fact, the name Kiyoshi was taken from cho M of

Taicho.6 With the Meiji Restoration of the 19th century, the government policy of separating the Gods (Kami) and the Buddha (Shinbutsu bunri) was strictly implemented in

Heisenji Temple and elsewhere. When Heisenji Temple reverted to being Hakusan Shrine,

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's grandfather became its chief priest, and the Hiraizumi family came to serve the shrine. Hakusan Shrine had 600 years of history as a Shinto institution, and in that sense, it was a medieval institution; Hiraizumi was born into the continuity of this institution, taking it into the 20th century. However, Hakusan Shrine was also a product of the policy on religion taken by the Meiji State in the 19th century. It emerged as part of

State Shinto; it was promoted as a source of national consolidation and was the basis for the modern imperial system.

Hakusan Shrine was closely linked with the southern court (Nancho) of the 14th century. In the precinct of the shrine, there was a stone tower for the repose of the soul of

Kusunoki Masashige (-1336), the most revered Imperial Loyalist in the southern court. The local school textbook Heisenjison kyodo dokuhon (1935) says that Kusunoki Masatoshi, the nephew of Kusunoki Masashige, entered Heisenji Temple to become a Buddhist monk.

It was said that while praying, he wondered about the well-being of his Uncle Masashige, who was fighting in the battle of Minatogawa. When he sent a man to find out what was happening, he learned of Masahige's death. As a result, he built a tomb for his uncle in the precinct of Heisenji. When Kusunoki Masatsura (-1348), the son of Masashige, heard the story, he sent some of Masashige's effects to the temple. The same textbook said that a

6 Hiraizumi wrote on Taicho and published as a short book on November 1953, one year after Japan restored its independence after seven years of the American occupation. See, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, ed. Taicho osho denki (a version of the Hakusan shrine) (Onogun Heisenjison Heisenji: Hakusan jinj a, November 1953).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 61 sword of Masashige was buried under the stone tower at Heisenji.

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi was born on February 16, 1895. Hiraizumi Kakko, Kiyoshi's father, was chief priest of Hakusan Shrine. Kakko, who was educated at Meirinkan of the

Ono domain, was well versed in literature and enjoyed writing poetry. He served as a member of the Konoe guard at the Imperial Palace in Kyoto during the Seinan War of 1877.

Hiraisumi Kiyoshi's mother, Sadako, was a daughter of a samurai family in the Katsuyama domain; her father took part in the governance of the Ono domain and was later appointed judge of the Ono county court.9 The family was in the upper echelons of the local elite in

Heisenji Village and Katsuyama-City, and had been since the Meiji period.

Growing up in the shadow of Mt. Hakusan, Hiraizumi was surrounded by great natural beauty. At the same time, he certainly learned that nature could be harmful if one were not careful. The Hokuriku region was widely known for its heavy snowfall during winter, and snow could accumulate as high as five meters. Houses sank under the weight of snow,10 and the shrine was isolated, even from the nearest villages, from time to time throughout the long winters. Because of the snow, the people of Heisenji Village were often unable to reach the nearest train station at Katsuyama. Hiraizumi, like all residents of the area, knew how small and powerless human beings are in the face of a relentless nature.

He learned that he could not change, challenge, or conquer the vast nature around him.

7 Heisenji joto koto shogakko,ed., Heisenjison kyodo dokuhon. (Not for sale) (Katsuyama-cho: Takaki insatsujo, May 1935), p. 84. 8 The historian Imatani Akira, one of Japanese historians who studies Hiraizumi Kiyoshi as a scholarly subject, pointed out that Heisenji switched from the southern court to the northern court and its monk-soldiers fought against Nitta Yoshisada in Fujishima (currently Fukui-city) as described in "Shinpojiumu: Nihon rekishigaku no hansei," Sozo no sekai, 95. (Tokyo: 1995). P.32. 9 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964). P.l. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi wrote about his mother in postwar period. See, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Haha", Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Zokuzoku sanga ari (Tokyo: Tachibana shobo, 1961.) 10 Hiraizumi mentioned about the snow falling in Heisenji, in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Shukyo no hito," in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Shukyo no hito: Dai Saigo. (Tokyo: Hara shobo, 1986). P.4-5.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 62

At the same time, he probably developed a religious admiration for Mt. Hakusan.

In fact, even before the Shrine was built, people came to worship the mountain itself

(Sangaku Shinko), and over the centuries, Mt. Hakusan attracted many religious men.

When the Buddhist monk Dogen (1200-1253), founder of the Soto sect, visited the area for the first time, he was immensely impressed by Mt. Hakusan and decided to build a temple

in a location from which he could see the mountain. The temple was named Eiheiji and

still exists today. Dogen remained neutral to both the imperial court in Kyoto and the

Bakufu, the government of Shogun; he devoted his life to educating young monks in this

isolated place. As a young man, Hiraizumi romanticized Dogen and wrote a short article

for the school journal of 4th High School in Kanazawa City, Ishikawa prefecture.11 A

nephew of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi told the author that Dogen's religious admiration of the

mountain might have influenced Hiraizumi's own attitude towards it (and to nature,

generally), not to mention the development of his religious faith.12 Dogen appeared in the journal articles of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi on numerous occasions in both the prewar and

postwar periods.

When he was young, Hiraizumi was known as "Hakusan no moshigo" (a child sent

by Mt. Hakusan) among the people in the surrounding villages.13 He went to Ryuike

Elementary School in 1902. (The name of the school is derived from the name of the holy

pond in the precinct of Hakusan Shrine.) In the same year, the Russo-Japanese War broke

out. Even though he was only ten years old, Hiraizumi felt a sense of crisis and wrote a

11 See, Hokushinkai zasshi, the official student journal of the 4* High School in Kanazawa city, Ishikawa prefecture. (This is the property of the Central Library of Kanazawa University, Ishikawa prefecture.) 12 From a discussion with a nephew of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi during a research trip to Hakusan Shrine in Fukui prefecture, August 2005. 13 From a discussion with a nephew of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi during a research trip to Hakusan Shrine in Fukui prefecture, August 2005. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 63 short piece "Must defeat Russia."14 Clearly, even as a small child, Hiraizumi had a keen sense of the Japanese nation and a critical view of Russia.

Although he was known for his intelligence, Hiraizumi was physically weak as a child and as a young man. In fact, when he was entering the 4th High School from Ono

Junior High School, a school doctor told him that he might not make it to university because of his weak health.15 He spent a great deal of time reading; thus, although he was physically confined to his house in the precincts of the Shrine, his mind was cultivated.16

He later likened himself to the German philosopher Emmanuel Kant (1724-1804) who did not travel outside his home-town, but whose intellect and internal world grew tremendously as a result of his reading.17

As a son of Hakusan Shrine's priest, Hiraizumi had access to a wealth of old books and scriptures kept in the shrine's storage. Such early access to primary sources helped prepare him for his career as a historian, and it became the norm for this scholar to base his historical inquiries on primary sources. Based on his knowledge and background reading, in 1912, at the age of 18, he published three volumes of The History of the Gods of

Mt.Hakusan (Hakusan jinshi); in his second year at the 4th High School in Kanazawa-City, in 1913, he published five volumes of The History of Heisenji at Hakusan {Hakusan

Heisenji shi). Long before he enrolled in Tokyo Imperial University, he had established his credentials as a respectable local historian.

14 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin Nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964), p.2. 15 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. Higeki Juso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980.) P.316. The book is the postwar autobiography of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. It is crucial to examine its content in comparison to what other sources indicate. 16 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Dokusho no gaku," in Tanaka Takashi, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi shironsho: Rekishikan wo shu to shite. (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 1998). It was originally published in Koyukai zasshi, the school journal of the Ono junior high school of Fukui prefecture in November 1909. 17 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. "Kokushigaku no kotsuzui", Shigaku zasshi 38.8 (Tokyo: Shigakukai, August 1927) 18 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin Nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1962), p. 6. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 64

History was not just something he learned when he opened books. As son of a family serving a prestigious shrine, Hiraizumi shared the shrine's long legacy. Hiraizumi

Takafusa, the present chief priest of Hakusan Shrine and the grandson of Hiraizumi

Kiyoshi told the author that, even today, villagers in surrounding areas remember how their villages played a part in history, and Hakusan Shrine (or Heisenji Temple, depending on the period) was a considerable part of this history. Relations were not always harmonious: during the medieval period, some villages attacked the temple, and in turn, the monk

soldiers of the Heisenji attacked the villages.19 It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that

Hiraizumi was conscious of the historical responsibility he inherited from his family and

from the medieval religious institution that his family had served since the Meiji period.

For Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, the past shaped the present. Such a view of history was reinforced when he read the works of Benedetto Croce (1866-1952), an Italian philosopher and

historian, later in his life.

The community in which Hiraizumi Kiyoshi grew up shaped his view of the state

as a community. Hakusan Shrine was not only for the practice of the Shinto worship; it

also served as the centre for the area's religious festivals and social functions, including

weddings and funerals. As a chief priest of the shrine, his father was involved in many

aspects of the lives of the villagers and acted as a community leader. In return, the shrine

was supported by the people of the surrounding villages; it enjoyed the patronage of the

Ogasawara family of the Katsuyama domain and the Matsudaira family of the

Fukui-Echizen domain. The villagers brought agricultural products such as rice and Sake

19 See, Hiraizumi Akira, "Hakusan jinja sanju san nen shikinen sai wo mukaeru ni atatte," Nihon. 42. (Tokyo: Nihongaku kyokai, February 1992.) P.16. Akira is the first son of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and was priest of Hakusan shrine when he wrote this article. He inherited priesthood of the shrine from his father.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 65

(Japanese rice wine) to the shrine for annual religious and community events. They voluntarily cleaned the shrine's precincts. This traditional form of community had a significant impact upon the formation of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's image of ideal community; the relationship represented the concept of Bun (one's own societal position from ethical and moral points of view). In the preface to Tradition (Dento) (1940), Hiraizumi favorably described the almost feudal relations between landlord and tenant which existed in his home prefecture.21 He likely saw the imperial nation as an extension of such a community with a Shinto shrine at its centre.22 This image of community remained with him after he left the village for Kanazawa-City and Tokyo. In following years, Hiraizumi may have dreamt of bringing the nation "back" to how it was in the community where the

Shinto shrine was the centre of politics (Sei) and religious ceremony (Sai), where these were one and the same thing, namely, the concept of Seisai itchi.

Most importantly, his view of the ideal community inspired his historical scholarship. He was consistently interested in the relationship between society and Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples. At university, for example, he finished his undergraduate thesis, The Social Activities of the Buddhist Temples and the Shinto Shrines during the

Medieval Period, on July 9 1918.23 He developed this undergraduate thesis into a doctoral dissertation and submitted it to the Department of History at Tokyo Imperial University, which granted him a Doctorate of Literature on April 20, 1925.24 The dissertation was published in 1925 as The Relationship between the Society and the Buddhist Temples and

20 Bun ft 21 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "josetsu," in Dento (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1940). P. 2-3. 22 He brought this image of an ideal community with him from the community of the Heisenji village with the Hakusan shrine as the centre of its community. 23 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1962), P. 8. 24 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1962), P. 19. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 66 the Shinto Shrines during the Medieval Period?5 He also wrote a journal article "The

Unity and Regulation of Autonomous Organizations with the Shinto Shrine as their

Center" in 1930.26 It is noteworthy that Hiraizumi's academic career began with a topic that traced its origins to the environment in which he grew up, Heisenji Village on Mt.

Hakusan, in Fukui prefecture. Nor is it surprising that he postulated this community as the model for an ideal form of the Japanese state during the 1930s and 1940s.

The Fukui-Echizen Han (domain) and the Matsudaira family27

After the Meiji Restoration, the feudal system of the Tokugawa regime was abolished and the ancient imperial system was "restored." As part of this major political change, Han

(feudal domain) was transformed into Ken (prefecture) under the policy of the abolition of domains (i.e., clans) and the establishment of prefectures (Haihan chiken), which the Meiji

government implemented nationwide in July 1871.28 However, many aspects of the culture of Han remained in effect and lived on as part of the local character (Tochi gara). In this context, the political culture which Fukui prefecture inherited from the Fukui-Echizen

domain (Han) was another significant influence on the early intellectual formation of

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. In fact, imperial loyalism, the major component of the political culture

of the former domain, influenced his views of history and the nation throughout his life.

During 300 years of the Tokugawa rule, each Han (domain) was an autonomous

political entity in the same way a country has sovereignty.29 As a result, each domain

25 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Chusei ni okeru shaji to shakai no kankei (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1925). 26 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Jinja wo chushin to sum Jichi dantai no ketsugo to tosei", in Shinto koza, 4. 27 I express my gratitude to Nishimura, research fellow at the History and Home Province Museum of the City of Fukui (Fukui shi rekishi kyodo hakubutsukan), for his assistance during my research trip to Fukui-city, Fukui prefecture in July-August 2005. 28 The Fukui-Echizen domain became Fukui prefecture in the new system. 29 The same point is made by Luke Roberts in his study of Tosa domain. See, Luke S. Roberts, Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 67 developed a distinctive culture. Politically, each had its own views of the imperial court in

Kyoto, as well as of the Bakufu, over which the Shogun presided in Edo. Some felt close to Shogun; others did not. Some had a stronger sense of loyalty towards the imperial house and were more committed to the restoration of Kokutai (the National Polity). Partly for this reason, some feudal lords were proponents of the southern court view of history, whereas others were not.

By the end of the Tokugawa rule in the 18th and 19th centuries, a feudal lord's view of history was a significant factor in determining the role his domain played in the defeat of the Tokugawa Bakufu and "the Great Accomplishment of the Meiji Restoration." Since the restoration of the ancient imperial system was a crucial part of the "spiritual" history that Hiraizumi promoted later in his life, we must examine the view of history held by the

feudal lord of the domain from which he came, as well as the role played by this domain

before and during the Meiji Restoration.

Before the "great accomplishment" of the Meiji Restoration, the Fukui-Echizen

domain held to the culture of imperial loyalism (Sonno shugi). The political culture of the

domain was strengthened by Matsudaira Shungaku (1828-90), the last feudal lord of the

Fukui-Echizen domain, whose ethical and moral principles and view of history were

shaped by the philosophies of the Kimon school (of Yamazaki Ansai) and the late-Mito

school of history, founded by Tokugawa Mitsukuni (1628-1700). Mitsukuni, who hired a

scholar of the Song studies (Sogaku), which originated in the Song dynasty in China, first

studied Neo-Confucianism, and embraced the concept of Taigi Meibun. He then launched a

project interpreting the Nation's History of Japan from the standpoint of this concept, in

Mercantilism in a Japanese domain: The merchant origins of economic nationalism in 18'k-century Tosa (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 68 the end compiling 397 volumes, Dai Nihon Shi (1657-1906). Among other things, this project clarified the concept of the National Polity (Kokutai). At the same time, the southern court view of history was systematized according to the concept of Taigi Meibun.

Kusunoki Masashige (7-1336), the imperial loyalist of the southern court of the 14th century, was praised; Mitsukuni built a stone monument for Kusunoki at the site of the battle of Minatogawa (1336), where he fought and died for the southern court.

Although Hakusan Shrine was located within the Katsuyama Han (domain), a branch of the Fukui-Echizen Han (domain), it had a long history of amicable relations with the Matsudaira family, who governed the Fukui-Echizen domain, an amicable relationship which continues today.30 For this reason, the Matsudaira family, Matsudaira Shungaku, and their views of history need to be examined.

The Matsudaira family had a unique position at the end of the Edo period. Although close to the main branch of the Tokugawa family, who had ruled the nation from Edo

(currently Tokyo) for the preceding 300 years, the family took part in the movement for

returning the nation to the emperor in Kyoto. The imperial loyalism of the family grew when Matsudiara Yoshinaga (Hiraizumi preferred to call him Shungaku) (1826-1890)

sought guidance from Tokugawa Yoshinobu (1837-1913) of the Mito domain. Yoshinobu

was the 15th and last Shogun of the Tokugawa Bakufu. With guidance from Shogun

Yoshinobu, the concept of Teigi Meibun influenced Shungaku's philosophy, and the late

Mito school of history shaped his view of history. Shungaku launched a reform of

education in his domain, following the example of the Mito domain. He remained loyal to

the ethical and moral principles he learned from Mitsukuni, the late Mito school of history,

30 Hiraizumi Takafusa. "Kamakura jidai no Hakusan jinja." Hakusan Jinjashi hensan iinkai, ed., Hakusan jinja shi (Not for sale) (Katsuyama: Hakusan jinja shi hensan iinkai, 1992). P.108-9.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 69 and the Mito domain, while remaining open to scientific knowledge from the West.

Under the influence of Neo-Confucianism, Shungaku understood the idea of practical learning (Jitsugaku). He later hired Hashimoto Sanai (Keigaku) (1834-59) to be the head of Meidokan (the school for the illumination of the Way), the official school of the domain, in 1855. Hashimoto studied medicine from Dutch studies (Rangaku). His ability to read Dutch allowed him to learn what was happening in the West and the presence of Western powers in Asia. He had a tremendous influence on Hiraizumi, who repeatedly cited Hashimoto to describe Japan's situation internationally. Hashimoto was interested in both scientific inquiry and the spiritualism that derived from the study of the

Nation's History (the southern court view of history).

Shungaku also studied the scholarship of the Kimon school, founded by Yamazaki

Ansai (1618-82) in the 17th century, under his mentor Yoshida Toko, a local scholar and a student of the Kimon school. In his views, Yamazaki Ansai combined Neo-Confucianism with Shinto, founding Suika Shinto; he also studied the Nation's History of Japan according to the values of the Neo-Confucianism. Finally, Yamazaki clarified the moral principle of CM (absolute loyalty to one's master; in this context, the Emperor.) Following this principle, students of the Kimon school, such as Kuriyama Senpo (1671-1706), compiled Dai Nihon shi, which systematized the concept of National Polity (Kokutai) of

Japan and the southern court view of history.

Hashimoto and Yamazaki were both absolute imperial loyalists, keen to pursue knowledge from abroad. Hashimoto was open to scientific studies, primarily from the West.

Yamazaki learned a great deal about the Buddhism of India and Neo-Confucianism of

China before he returned to Shinto of "the Imperial nation." Matsudaira Yoshitami,

Shungaku's son, studied at the University of Oxford and lived in Britain for eleven years

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 70 before his return to Japan.

Shugaku hired American William Elliot Griffis (1843-1928) as a teacher at the domain school in 1871. In this way, the Fukui-Echizen domain learned of the West and adopted various Western sciences. Griffis stayed in Fukui for a year, before moving to

Tokyo where he lectured at Tokyo Imperial University. He later wrote The Mikado's

Empire32md was a key figure in introducing Japan to the West. Interestingly, Griffis described imperial loyalism as a major characteristic of the Japanese people and said that the Japanese showed tremendous respect for Nanko (Kusunoki Masashige), the leading imperial loyalist of the southern court. This strongly suggests that the southern court view of history was prevalent in Fukui-Echizen domain and possibly in Edo (Tokyo) when

Griffis was in Japan.

The Fukui-Echizen domain often sent its promising youth abroad. Shungaku founded a program to send bright students to the West, expecting them to acquire new types of knowledge. Takarabe was one such student; he was sent to Rutgers University in

New Jersey, where he studied hard and was expected to graduate at the top of his class.

Unfortunately, he died before his graduation. Takarabe's story lives on in the local history of Fukui prefecture, however, as the story line is evocative of the southern court view of history. In this way, the pre-modern history of the Fukui-Echizen domain was integrated into the "spiritual" history which Hiraizumi promoted in the 1930s and 1940s. He encouraged his students to follow such aspiring talented young men, even if they were to

31 I mention this here because Yoshitami played a crucial role in national politics in relation to the Imperial Court during the 1930s and 1940s. The Seishin of Shungaku was "inherited" by Nagayoshi, his grandson, who played a controversial role in the postwar period (see Chapter Eight). 32 Willian Elliot Griffis. The Mikado's Empire: Bookl: History of Japan, from 660 B.C. to 1872 A.D., Book 2, Personal Experiences, Observations, and Studies in Japan, 1870-1874; With supplementary chapters; Japan in 1883 and Japan in 1886. (New York: Harper, 1883.) Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 71 die before achieving their goals.

Last, but by no means least, the legacy of the imperial loyalism of the

Fukui-Echizen domain likely influenced the way the leaders of Fukui prefecture became involved in state affairs during the Showa (1926-1989) and Heisei (1989-) periods. This topic will be discussed in more detail later.33 But for now, we should note that the members of the Matsudaira family, such as Matsudaira Masayasu (the main branch of the

Matsudaira family of the Fukui-Echizen), Matsudaira Yoshitami (the second branch), and

Hiraizumi proudly continued the tradition of contributing to the restoration of the ancient imperial system and the defense of the existing imperial system under the Meiji constitution until Japan's defeat on August 15, 1945 and beyond. Not surprisingly, then,

Hiraizumi maintained a strong consciousness of his "country" (Okuni ishiki), in other words, the Fukui prefecture, throughout his life. However, such an emotional tie and moral commitment to his home prefecture was nothing special. In fact, many Japanese held this view in prewar Japan. But when we examine the intellectual formation of Hiraizumi

Kiyoshi, it is vital to understand that he held this consciousness of his home domain throughout the Meiji (1868-1912), Taisho (1912-1926), and Showa periods (both the prewar and postwar periods: 1926-1989). He continued to work for organizations of the

Fukui-Echizen domain and the Matsudaira family while he was in Tokyo,34 as well as in their home prefecture of Fukui. Hiraizumi remained loyal to them during both prewar and postwar periods.35

33 The Fukui-Echizen domain and the Matsudaira family had a tradition of supporting the southern court view of history. Some key figures of the domain played crucial roles in "the Great Accomplishment" of the Meiji Restoration (Meiji ishin no taigyo). 34 All feudal lords of former domains moved to Tokyo after the Meiji Restoration and lived in private residences in Tokyo. 35 In return, some people in the prefecture welcomed Hiraizumi with open arms, even when the Japanese society as a whole severely criticized him in the postwar period for the role he played in Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 72

Learning about the Southern Court View of History as a Young Man

Hiraizumi moved away from Hakusan Shrine when he attended the Ono Junior High

School. He stayed with relatives in Ono city, Fukui prefecture. During his junior high

school years (1907-12), Hiraizumi began to learn more about the southern court view of

history through his reading.36 Shimada Gotaro, Hiraizumi's uncle and later Governor of

the Gifu prefecture, gave Hiraizumi a copy of Jinno Shotoki (1339) by Kitabatake

Chikafusa (1293-1354).37 Written during the 14th century, the book became a revered

medieval literary work among the proponents of the southern court view of history in

following centuries and constituted a significant part of Hiraizumi's concept of history; in

fact, the study of Jinno Shotoki became his life's work. Hiraizumi also read the complete

works of Fujita Toko (1806-1855). A leading scholar of the late Mito school of history,

Fujita Toko educated others, including Aizawa Seishisai (1781-1863), who published the

two volumes of Shimon (The New Thesis) in 1825. Fujita's works included Kodokan jitsugi, which Hiraizumi later discussed in front of his students.38 Finally, the school

president gave Hiraizumi the Complete Works of Hashimoto Sanai (Hashimoto Sanai

zenshu)39 as a prize for being an honour student at his convocation in March 1912.40 At

the prewar period. 6 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1962). P.3-4. 37 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964). P.3. 38 For a study of the Mito school of history in English, see, J.Victor Koschmann. The Mito Ideology: Discourse, Reform, and Insurrection in Late Tokugawa Japan, 1790-1864 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987). Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, Anti-Foreignism and Western Learning in Early-Modern Japan: The New Thesis of 1825 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986). 39 Keigakukai, ed., Hashimoto Sanai zenshu (Tokyo: Kaigakukai, 1908). This is a collection of his chronology, writings, letters, and other personal materials. It is published by Keigakukai, the organization for the manifestation of the Seishin of Hashimoto Sanai. The organization was originally formed in Fukui prefecture. Hiraizumi later became its president and revitalized it in Tokyo.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 73 this time, Hiraizumi began to read Hashimoto, the Bakumatsu shishi and a key figure in the local history of the Fukui-Echizen domain.41 As early as the final year of junior high school, Hiraizumi understood the influence of the Kimon school on imperial loyalism in the Fukui-Echizen domain through the writings of Hashimoto Sanai, who, it is important to remember, acted according to his beliefs.

All three authors were instrumental in the development of the southern court view of history as a valid system of ethical and moral principles. But it is equally important to note that Jinno Shotoki and the Complete Works of Hashimoto Sanai were presented to

Hiraizumi by his uncle and the school president. This indicates that Hiraizumi was surrounded by adults who embraced the southern court view of history, part of the tradition of the imperial loyalism of the Fukui-Echizen domain under the leadership of the

Matsudaira family.

Sensitive to the development of state affairs both at home and abroad, Hiraizumi clearly expressed his political views during his junior high school years. Russia presents a case in point. On the one hand, he always saw Russia as a potential enemy of imperial

Japan. On the other hand, he was upset to hear that in Russia, revolutionaries openly challenged and defeated an imperial system. He was particularly shocked by the assassination of Russian Emperor Nicholas. This international incident was followed at home by the Kotoku Shusui incident in 1910 and the Nanbokucho debate in 1911.42

Hiraizumi later recalled that this was when he determined to devote his life to serving the

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964). P.5. 41 At this point, Hiraizumi was not yet acquainted with the works of Yamazaki Ansai, although Hashimoto was a student of the Kimon school of Yamazaki. The late Mito school of history was directed by some students of the Kimon school as well. 42 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higeki Jyuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu), pp. 427-39. Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 74 imperial nation.

At junior high school Hiraizumi met Uchiyama Susumu, who remained his best friend throughout junior high and high school.44 The two boys acted on their shared beliefs. On one occasion, they wrote to the president of Ono Junior High School, asking him to dismiss a teacher who was openly critical of the imperial system.45

Keep in mind that Hiraizumi was born in the Meiji period. He could still meet the

Shishi of the Meiji Restoration, and as a young man, he was inspired by the Shinto-based religiosity of some of those men. When Emperor Meiji was ill in July 1912, the head of

Ono county visited Hakusan Shrine and prostrated himself on the ground, praying for

Emperor Meiji (1852-1912), who died later the same month. Hiraizumi was moved by the man's sincere religious feelings.46 Such religiosity was an excellent example of the oneness of a man, religion, history, and nation. Such "oneness" became a basis for (and the objective of) the "spiritual" history that Hiraizumi promoted in the following years.

While Hiraizumi's personal views of history and the state were shaped before and during his junior high school years, his intellectual formation was enhanced when these views were stimulated (and challenged) by a new academic environment when he attended high school in Kanazawa City, Ishikawa prefecture.

The Encounter with Western Scholarship in Kanazawa City

43 Hiraizumi Kiysohi, Kanai no omoide (not for sale) (Tokyo: Kajima shuppan sha, 1983), p. 17. 44 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Bakugyaku Uchiyama ani wo omou", in Uchiyama Susumu Sensei kenshkai, ed., Tsuibo: Uchiyama Susumu Sensei (Ono-shi: Uchiyama Susumu Sensei kenshokai, 1991.) P.374-6, This short article first appeared in Ono chugakko koyushi 32 (Ono: Ono chugakko, December 1937). 45 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. r$(ftV\i Tanaka Takashi, ed., Hiraizumi hakushi shironsho.rekishikan wo shu to shite. (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 1998), pp. 11-16. 46 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964). P.5.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 75

Some studies of Hiraizumi in Japan tend to overemphasize the impact of his trip to the

West in 1930-1931 upon his intellectual formation. This study argues that Hiraizumi encountered Western ideas in depth during his high school years, the first four years of the

Taisho period when the TaishS democracy was on the rise. Hiraizumi entered the 4th High

School in Kanazawa City, the capital of Ishikawa prefecture in September 1913.47

Although Ishikawa was located next to Fukui (they were separated by Mt. Hakusan), these two places were different in many ways. Ishikawa prefecture was formerly governed as the

Kaga domain by the Maeda family, and its hereditary lord was sympathetic to the southern court view of history. The Maeda family promoted high culture in the city of Kanazawa over the centuries. Known as "little Kyoto" (Sho Kyoto), the city has always been the largest metropolis of the Hokuriku region.

The 4th High School was one of the elite high schools (Kyusei koto gakko) founded by the Meiji State. These schools were known for their high quality of education. The 4th

High School's faculty included Nishida Kitaro (1870-1945), a leading philosopher of Japan, and Suzuki Daisetsu (1870-1966), who later became a world authority in the study of

Buddhism in the West. Starting in the Meiji period and increasingly in the Taisho period, there was a sense that modern scholarship meant Western scholarship. But the 4th High

School had excellent collections of Japanese and Chinese books as well as Western ones. It was said that its library impressed the educational officers of SCAP during the American occupation of Japan from 1945 to 1952.48 The school encouraged its students to read books on all systems of thought in their original languages.

47 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964) P. 5. 48 The author confirmed the library collection of the 4th High School, which is now preserved in the central library of Kanazawa University in Ishikawa prefecture, during a research trip to Fukui and Ishikawa prefectures in August 2005.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 76

The students who graduated from this or any other elite high school were automatically allowed to enter one of the imperial universities. By design, the schools were intended to produce future leaders who would loyally serve the state. In practice, however, students were given an exceptional degree of freedom to pursue their own academic interests, and in general, they were attracted to liberalism, socialism, and Marxism.4

Some became involved in student activism, promoting these ideologies on and off campus; they were highly critical of the Meiji State and its "constitutional" monarchy.50 This intellectual trend may well have alarmed Hiraizumi, who had just come from the relatively protected intellectual and religious environment of Heisenji Village and Ono City.

Students came from all parts of the Hokuriku region to attend the 4th High School

and were housed in dormitories. Hiraizumi stayed at Jishuryo, an autonomous dormitory with a liberal spirit at its core. He seemed to fit into this community and was elected a member of the dormitory's student committee in his third year.51 In Ryomushi (an official

diary of a don), the name Hiraizumi appears numerous times. Records show that Hiraizumi

once went out to buy textbooks for the residents of the dormitory and stayed out after

closing time. On another occasion, his sister visited him; he asked for a leave permit, and

they went to the Awazu hot springs for three days. Records also show that Hiraizumi and

other students often visited the residence of Professor Ishikawa, Professor of Religion at

the school. Given this information, it is reasonable to assume that Ishikawa had some

49 Shiryo Daiyon koto gakko gakusei undo shi kanko kai, ed., Shiryo daiyon koto gakko gakusei undo shi (Tokyo: Sogo tosho, November 1976). 50 Many things opened Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's eyes when he arrived at Kanazawa City from Ono City. 51 Daiyon Koto gakko jishuryo ryoshi hensan iin kai, ed., Daiyon koto gakko jishuryo shi (Kanazawa: Daiyon koto gakko jishuryo, 1948), p. 23. 52 Ryomu nisshi Jishuryo:Ji taisho ni nen kugatsu tei san nen hachigatsu, September 13, 1913. This is the property of the Library of Kanazawa University in Ishikawa prefecture. The author visited the library during his research trip to the region in August 2005. He expresses his Kiyoshi Ueda Part One: Intellectual Formation 77 impact on the intellectual formation of Hiraizumi.

How did Hiraizumi see the elite high school's intellectual climate? He likely had little chance to share his developing views of history and the state with his follow students.

It is even possible that he became introverted and quietly assessed modern society by

comparing it with his personal view of an ideal society where a Shinto shrine was the centre of the community. While there is no record of his involvement in patriotic activities

either on campus or at the dormitory,53 during this period Hiraizumi may well have turned

his thoughts to the relationship between individuals and the state. We can assume that he

likely had many private discussions on the subject with Uchiyama Susumu, his friend from

Ono Junior High School. Given the school's mandate, not to mention its extensive library,

Hiraizumi certainly accumulated knowledge of Western scholarship while he was at high

school. Although he might not always have felt comfortable in the school's liberal

environment, his academic training allowed him to excel when he entered the History

Department (Shigakuka) at Tokyo Imperial University in 1915. Here, he applied his

knowledge of Western scholarship to the study of the Nation's History, while mastering the

Rankian positivist method of history.

appreciation to the Research Section of the library for use of this material. 53 As a proponent of the southern court view of history and a devout Shinto follower, Hiraizumi was probably part of an intellectual minority at the high school. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 78

CHAPTER THREE

Intellectual Formation at Tokyo Imperial University: 1915-1929

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi was a religious young man with a strong sense of history who had already acquired a considerable amount of Western scholarship when he arrived at Tokyo

Imperial University in the summer of 1915. This chapter traces his intellectual formation over the next fourteen years. At Tokyo Imperial University, Hiraizumi was first trained in

Rankian positivism (empiricism). Not fully content with this approach to history, he ultimately chose to pursue cultural history; this, in fact, became popular among many

Japanese students of history during the Taisho period (1912-1926). From cultural history, he learned that each era held its own set of ideals, but he was more interested in the clarification of Seishin of the Nation's History. Thus, perhaps paradoxically, he became a

"spiritual" historian in a positivist environment during the period regarded as the most liberal era in modern Japanese history before 1945.1 In his role as spiritual historian,

Hiraizumi was instrumental in integrating the Shinto faith into historical scholarship at

Tokyo Imperial University during the 1920s. However, he did not act alone in the development of spiritual history as a branch of historical scholarship. Professor Kuroita

Katsumi, his mentor, was a major proponent of the southern court view of history (part of spiritual history) as a foundation of the national moral education (Kokumin dotoku kyoiku)

1 Hiraizumi was critical of the medieval period in the same way as he was critical of the Taisho period. He essentially sought a solution for the problems of Taisho Japan from the historical examples of the medieval period. Here, his study of medieval history had a pragmatic purpose: he confirmed his view of history based on the Shinto faith, which he held long before his arrival in Tokyo. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 79 that had begun in the Meiji period. Hiraizumi also closely worked with the Fukui-Echizen group in Tokyo and the spiritualist faction of the Imperial Navy in the late 1920s. In fact,

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi was already a proponent of "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon Seishin) before his departure to the West in March 1930.

A Positivist Student of Medieval History at Tokyo Imperial University

Hiraizumi graduated from 4th High School on June 29, 1915, and was automatically admitted to the Department of History in Cultural University at Tokyo Imperial University

(Tokyo Teikoku Daigaku Bunka Daigaku Shigaku Ka). As the preceding chapter has made clear, he acquired Western scholarship at the high school in Kanazawa City, while preserving his personal views of history (the southern court view of history) and religion

(his faith in Shinto). Not surprisingly, perhaps, he elected to pursue the Nation's History of

Japan and the positivist method of history at university.

Tokyo Imperial University was founded 1892 as part of the education policy of the

Meiji government. It was originally designed to provide courses in various fields of

Western scholarship, and to this end, it hired a number of scholars from the West. In the field of history, the focus was on early Western history. As its chief professor, the university hired Ludwig Riess (1861-1928) from the University of Berlin. Riess was a student of Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886), the leading German historian of the time, but because he was Jewish, he had not been promoted to full professorship at Berlin. When the

Government of Japan offered him a position at Tokyo Imperial University, he readily accepted. Riess became one of the key figures who introduced the Rankian positivist method of history to Tokyo Imperial University. He published his view and method of

2 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964). P.6 Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 80 history in Methodology of History, which is still in the Central Library at the University of

Tokyo in Hongo.34 It could be argued that he decisively shaped the characteristics of historical scholarship in Japan. He was also popular among his students who favourably remembered their mentor from Germany in an article written for Shigaku zasshi.

When Hiraizumi entered the university, Ueda Toshikazu (1867-1937), Professor of

Japanese Linguistics, was head of the Faculty of Literature. Mikami Sanji (1865-1939),

Tsuji Zennosuke (1877-1955), and Hagino Yoshiyuki (1860-1924) were teaching at the rank of professor. And Kuroita Katsumi was an associate professor in the History

Department.6 Like Riess, these professors advocated positivism. From the start, despite his reservations, Hiraizumi probably understood that to be recognized as a historian, a student must learn the positivist view of history and carry out research according to this method.7

While Western history was being pursued, Japanese history (the Nation's History of

Japan) was neglected. In the eyes of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, only a few years after the

Restoration, Meiji Japan began to neglect its past while striving to catch up with the scientific and material progress of Western nations. The Meiji intellectuals believed that the study of history should become a way to understand their present success. Although the university had neglected the study of Japanese history, it was an excellent place to study.

For one thing, the main library had an excellent collection of Japanese, Oriental (Toyo), and Occidental (Seiyo) books. There was also a valuable collection of historical documents

Ludwig Riess, Methodology of History. Professor emeritus John S. Brownlee of Department of History at the University of Toronto kindly shared a copy of the book during his seminar. For his analysis of the book, see John S. Brownlee, "German Influence: Ludwig Riess (1861-1928)" and "Riess's Methodology of History," in Japanese Historians and the National Myths, 1600-1945: The Age of the Gods and Emperor Jinmu (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1997). 4 After that time, the history department carried on the tradition of positivism. 5 Also found in John S. Brownlee's Japanese Historians and the National Myths, 1600-1945. 6 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964). 7 In the early stages of his study at the university, Hiraizumi worked closely with Professors Mikami Sanji, Tanaka Yoshinari, and Tsuji Zennosuke.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 81 dating from the end of the Tokugawa period (the Bakumatsu period). Hiraizumi later recalled that during his student years, all he did was go back and forth between his apartment near the campus, the classrooms, and the libraries. He diligently took notes and made indexes and bibliographies on the subjects in which he was interested. His efforts led to his undergraduate thesis four years later.

While Hiraizumi was being educated in the Rankian historical scholarship, his study topics reflected the environment in which he had grown up - the Hakusan Shrine. He was keenly interested in the relationship between religious institutions, mainly Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples, and the society that surrounded them, during the medieval period (Chusei). It seemed that he was seeking a model for a cohesive society (community), something he found lacking in modern society.

Even during his undergraduate years, Hiraizumi began to publish in academic journals. This was not surprising considering he was already an accomplished local historian at home in Heisenji Village and at junior high school in Ono-City.8 In his second year at university, Hiraizumi wrote "Yoritomo and Nengo" for Shigaku zasshi (1917).9

Kuroita Katsumi had directed Hiraizumi to take up the topic, and Professor Mikami Sanji gave him advice. This article was his first scholarly writing published in Shigaku zasshi.

Hiraizumi wrote two journal articles on "The Study of Za"10 for Shigaku zasshi in 1917 and 1918." As an undergraduate, he bravely challenged Professor Miura Hiroyuki

(1871-1931) of Kyoto Imperial University and his theory on Za. Professor Miura was

8 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964). 9 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Yoritomo to nengo," Shigaku zasshi 28.10 (Tokyo: Shigakukai, 1917). 10 The meaning of "za" 1' In these two articles, Hiraizumi demonstrated his ability to conduct research and to write from the positivist view of history in the early stage of his university years. See, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Zakanken," Shigaku zasshi 28.12 (1917); Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Futatabi zani tsuite guken wo tsugu," Shigaku zasshi 29.3 (1918). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 82 considered the authority in the field at the time. In 1927, Hiraizumi concluded a journal article by saying that Za was the most valuable material to study the most primitive social structure in the Nation's History, as well as the changes that took place in each period. It includes hints for thinking about the future.12

During the four years of his undergraduate studies, he produced nothing indicating he was a "spiritualist." However, this does not mean he did not value the "spiritualism" he brought with him from Heisenji Village, Ono City, and Kanazawa City. In fact, since his junior high school years in Fukui prefecture, Hiraizumi had resolved to defend the imperial nation. As noted in the previous chapter, he held a series of private talks about the future of the nation with Uchiyama Susumu, his best friend, while at Ono Junior High School and

4th High School. And he carried on the same interests and concerns at Tokyo Imperial

University. While conducting positivist research, he remained a proponent of the southern court view of history outside the university. He was also involved in student activism on campus. As an undergraduate, Hiraizumi joined Kokoku Doshikai, a patriotic student organization, founded by Uesugi Shinkichi (1878-1929), Professor of the Constitution in the Faculty of Law, in September 1919.13 When the Morito Tatsuo Incident occurred in

January 1920, the members of the organization criticized Professor Morito for what he wrote in a journal article. It was said that Hiraizumi was one of the members who took action against him. Kishi Nobusuke (1896-1987), the future Prime Minister and grandfather of Abe Shinz5 (1954-), Prime Minister in 2007, was another member of this organization. However, he decided to leave the organization after the incident because he

12 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Jinja no za ni tsuite," Shintogaku zasshi 2 (April 1927). 13 Tokyo daigaku hyakunenshi hensan iinkai, ed., Tokyo daigaku hyakunenshi: Tsushi 2 (Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku shuppankai, 1985). P.489. It originally appeared in Showa nana nen ni okeru hongakunai no gakusei undo no gaikyo, P. 5.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 83 did not fully agree with its values. In an autobiographical book published in the postwar period, Kishi remembered that Hiraizumi tried to persuade him not to leave.14 While

Hiraizumi was involved in student activism, however, his political view of the state did not appear in his scholarly writing before 1920.

Hiraizumi studied under one of the most eminent positivist scholars in the History

Department, Professor Tanaka Yoshinari (1960-1919). Based upon the results of the positivist method of history, Professor Tanaka's scholarship was highly regarded by his colleagues; his work on the northern and southern courts of the 14th century is still respected today. Professor Tanaka passed away in 1919. In January 1920, Hiraizumi took part in the editing of Tanaka's unpublished manuscripts of Nanbokucho jidaishi (1922),15 which advocated the view that the northern court and southern court were both legitimate lines of the imperial reign (Ryocho ryoritsu ron). Hiraizumi wrote a review of the book in

1922.16

How do contemporary historians understand Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's debt to Professor

Tanaka? The link is especially interesting, as the former was a "spiritualist," and the latter a positivist. In 1991, historian Sato Kazuhiko commented that Tanaka's Nanbokucho jidaishi is the only respectable piece of scholarship on the period of the northern and southern courts written during the prewar period. But the historian Sato Shin'ichi pointed out in

1965 that it was ironic that the "spiritualist" (Seishin shugi sha) Hiraizumi Kiyoshi was

14 Kishi Nobusuke, Kaisoroku: Waga seishun. (Tokyo: Kosaido, Noevmber 1983). This has already been quoted in Imatani Akira, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi no hensetsu ni tsuite: Showa shigakushi no ichi danmen." Yokohama shiritsu daigaku ronsan. 40.1 (Yokohama: Yokohama shiritsu daigaku, March 1989). P. 172. Imatani has not indicated the page number from which he had taken the quotation in Kishi's reminiscence. 15 Tanaka Yoshinari, Nanbokucho jidaishi (Tokyo: Meiji Shoin, 1922). 16 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Ko Tanaka hakushi iko no shuppan," Shigaku zasshi 33.12 (December 1922). 17 Sato Kazuhiko, Taiheiki woyomu: Doran nojidai to hitobito (Tokyo: Gakuseisha, 1991).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 84 mentored by Tanaka Yoshinari.18 Essentially, Hiraizumi respected him, even though he did not share his views. While Tanaka's historical scholarship did not satisfy Hiraizumi's pursuit of a philosophy of history and a method of history, he called Professor Tanaka

Onshi (the teacher to whom he was indebted) in his postwar writing.

A Challenge to Positivist History: 1924-1929

Although Hiraizumi learned the positivist method from Professor Tanaka and was inspired by Professor Kuroita in the area of history education as part of national education,

Hiraizumi was not content with the methods he learned from these professors.19 He strove to refine "spiritual history" by studying the ideas and methods of other schools of history, and he began to produce a series of publications on the philosophy and methods of history.

He was a bright young scholar who, as an insider, challenged the positivist method of history then dominant in mainstream historical scholarship.

While he was pursuing his academic interests, Hiraizumi was actively involved in the student committee of Shigakukai, the official society for the scholars of history at

Tokyo Imperial University. He helped edit its official journal, Shigaku zasshi, and frequently wrote about research trips and book reviews for the journal.20 Although

Hiraizumi was still searching for his method and view of history, he was critical of various historical methods. We see his stance in book reviews which appeared in Shigaku zasshi, particularly during his years as a graduate student. In numerous journal articles, Hiraizumi

criticized the recent trend towards the fusion of traditional methods of history with the

18 Sato Shin'ichi, Nanbokucho no doran. Nihon no reksihi (vol. 9; Tokyo: Chuo Koron Sha, 1965), p. 8. 19 He was not convinced of the methods he learned from them. 20 There were many articles by Hiraizumi in Shigaku zasshi during this period. His name appeared in some journal articles as well. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 85 methods of other disciplines in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences, such as literature (Japanese classics), economics, social psychology, and anthropology. He also expressed his opposition to the rise of "world history" (Sekaishi) which transcended national boundaries in both a physical and an intellectual sense. Hiraizumi wrote a short article, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: A Study on the National Spirit" that appeared in Shigaku zasshi (January 1919). 21 Another article, "Lamprecht Modern Historical Study"

(Lanpurihito Kindai rekishigaku), discussed a Japanese translation of Karl Lamprecht's

Moderne Geschichtswissenschaft by Watsuji Tetsuro (1889-1960), the ethicist and cultural historian, at Kyoto Imperial University; it too appeared in Shigaku zasshi?2 In a short review article, "Read Cultural Anthropology by Professor Nishimura Shinji" ("Bunka

Jinrui gaku by Professor Nishimura Shinji"), which appeared in February 1924, he opposed the fusion of the methods of history and anthropology.23

He made his opinions known elsewhere as well, delivering a lecture called "Prince

Gotsuji who was about to fade away in history" (Shijo ni enmetsu seshi Gotsuji no miya) at the Imperial Academy (Teikoku gakushi in); it was later published in Taiyo (1922).24 In it, he emphasizes "history" over "the state" (Kokka) and "culture" (Bunka), with regards to the search for the reason for individuals to exist. He addresses "the nationalists" (Kokka shugi sha), who seek "the reason for the existence of individuals in the state" and "the culturalists"(Bunka shugi sha), who seek "the reason for the existence of individuals in culture" by presenting the view that the state (kokka) and culture/civilization (bunka) rose, declined, and disappeared; however, "history (Rekishi), which the Japanese possess never

21 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Bungaku ni arawaretaru waga kokumin shiso no kenkyu:heimin bungaku no jidai (j°)>" Shigaku zasshi 30.1 (January 1919). 22 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Ranpurehito kindai rekishigaku," Shigaku zasshi 31.2 (February 1920). 23 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Bunka jinrui gaku" wo yomu," Shigaku zasshi 36.1 (February 1924). 24 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Shijo ni enmetsu seshi Gotsuji no miya," Taiyo 28.11 (September 1922). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 86 became extinct before." This statement suggests that as early as 1922, Hiraizumi was a historicist (Rekishi shugi sha) who believed in the role (Seishin) of those who sacrifice their lives for the defense of the nation.

In 1926, Hiraizumi wrote a series of journal articles to present his philosophy of history as well as his philosophy of the method of history education. In them, he declared his abandonment of the study of history in a purely objective manner and called for subjectivity. He explained his concept of history, introduced the methodology of history, mainly from the West, and criticized the fusion of the traditional method of history and various "scientific methods" of other disciplines, calling for the autonomy of the study of history from the social sciences. Most significantly, he opposed the application of the latter to the former. In 1926, Hani Goro (1901-1983) published Rekishi chojitsu no riron oyobi rekishi?5 a translation of Filosofia come scienza dello spirito, IV, teoria e storia della storiografia by Benedetto Croce (1866-1952), the Italian philosopher and historian.

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi wrote a short article for Shigaku zasshi in which he said Hani had to tread a thorny path (ibara no michi) to find the right approach to the study of history and a solution for the "struggle of modern historians" (Gendai shika no kuno), a view which

Hiraizumi and Hani shared in the 1920s.

Hiraizumi explained the essential characteristics of his view of history in "The

Reflection of history and the power of reformation" (Rekishi no kaiko to kakushin no chikara), an article published in Rekishi chiri (October 1926). Here, he criticized an aspect of the intellectual trend of the time: namely, the tension between "the reflection of history"

(Rekishi no kaiko) and "the power of reformation" (Kakushin no chikara). He argued that

25 Hani Goro, Rekishi jojitsu no ronri oyobi rekishi (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1926). 26 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Croce Rekishi jujitsu no ronri oyobi rekishi hoyaku wo ete," Shigaku zasshi (December 1926). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 87 the two must coexist as one entity. Only by so doing, would they possess historical significance. Drawing on examples from the Nation's History, he discussed the significance of the Taika reform (kaishin), the Jokyu war (ran), and the Kenmu Restoration

(chuk5); he noted that sympathy and respect for the southern court became popular in the early modern period and was expressed in the 397 volumes of Dai Nihon shi (1657-1906) and the 22 volumes of Nihon gaishi (1827). Those who assumed the leadership in these reforms, he said, saw the governance of the Engi and Tenryaku (Engi Tenryoku no chi) as their ideal periods and looked for the restoration of the Imperial rule (Osei fukko). He concluded by saying that at present some were calling for "nationalism" (Kokusui) and

"reconstruction" (Kaizo). But he wondered whether they correctly grasped "the marrow bone of history" (Rekishi no kotsuzui) or understood the true mission of the Japanese.27

Hiraizumi also expressed his views of history in a series of chapters published in My View of History (1926). Significantly, these pieces which reflect the "spiritualist" view of history were written before 1926, showing that his view of history was already fully formed and that he had managed to hold on to the "spiritualist" view of history while pursuing positivist scholarship.

At Tokyo Imperial University, Hiraizumi was introduced to pure historical scholarship (Junsei shigaku) and applied historical scholarship (Oyo shigaku). The former was an academic pursuit of historical facts and truth. In the latter, history was applied to history education as part of the national education after the Meiji period. According to the historian Sakamoto Taro (1901-), an authority in the ancient history of Japan, academic historians at Tokyo Imperial University accepted this distinction and continued their

27 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Rekishi no kaiko to kakushin no chikara," Rekishi chiri 48.4 (October 1925). 28 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Waga rekishikan (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1926.) Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 88 pursuit of pure historical scholarship during the prewar period.29 In this context, the southern court view of history, a product of the early modern period, was adopted as a core part of national education.

Hiraizumi became integrated into the Meiji tradition in the national education

(Kokumin kyoiku) while in Tokyo. Professor Kuroita Katsumi (1874-1946), a proponent of the southern court view of history, played a crucial part in introducing Hiraizumi to the role of university historian; as a state bureaucrat, he later assumed a leadership role in the promotion of the applied historical scholarship in society. Kuroita was a pioneer in the study of old documents (Komonjo gaku) and a pioneer in the promotion of Esperanto in

Japan.30 Like other professors, Kuroita trained Hiraizumi in the positivist research method.

Kuroita conducted his historical research on his feet and energetically visited Shinto shrines, Buddhist temples, and eminent local families all over the nation; he copied all types of original documents, collected them, and analyzed them. Upon Kuroita's request in

1918, Hiraizumi joined a project on the compilation of the history of the Nikko Toshogu

Shrine in Tochigi prefecture. Tokugawa Ieyasu (1542-1616), the founder of the Tokugawa

Bakufu which had ruled Japan for over 300 years, was enshrined here. Hiraizumi wrote four journal articles on the shrine, publishing them in various journals in 1921.31

Kuroita Katsumi was a major figure in the promotion of the national morality education (Kokumin dotoku kyoiku); to this end, he promoted history education (Rekishi kyoiku) and the southern court view of history (Nancho seito ron). Kuroita had been a

29 Sakamoto Taro, Nihon no shushi to shigaku (Nihon rekishi shinsho no. 42) (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1966), p. 260 30 For more about the contributions which Kuroita made, see Kuroita Hakushi kinenkai, ed., Kobunka no hozon to kenkyu (Tokyo: Kuroita hakushi kinen kai, 1953). 31 Hiraizumi published "Tokugawa Ieyasu no ikin," Shigaku zasshi (1921); "Ayamararetaru Nikkoro," Shigaku zasshi (1921); "Nikko Toshogu no tsukurikae ni tsuite," Meiji Shotoku kinen gakkai kiyo (1921); and "Nikko no seisui to Toshogu," Shintogaku zasshi (May 1928). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 89 loyal supporter of the southern court view of history since his boyhood, when he read about Kusunoki Masashige in Nihon Gaishi (1827) by Rai Sanyo (1780-1832).32 When the Nanbokucho debate (Nanbokucho ronso) took place in 1911, he joined the Group for the Defense of the National Polity of Great Japan (Dai Nihon kokutai engodan), the organization for the defence of the southern court view of history, writing the article "A

Discussion of the Origin of both Courts and their Legitimacy and Illegitimacy."33

Kuroita's sympathy towards the southern court did not, however, mean that he challenged the legitimacy of the current imperial house, which was the descendant of the northern court. He was sympathetic to the theory of the southern court as a legitimate imperial line, as developed in the compilation of Dai Nihon Shi by the late Mito school of history under the patronage of Tokugawa Mitsukuni (1628-1700). But Kuroita sincerely hoped the

division would gradually cease; in his view, the current imperial house, the descendant of the northern court, was by no means insignificant.34

Kuroita not only understood the significance of the southern court view of history

as the basis for the education of the national morality (Kokumin dotoku kyoiku) but was

also a loyal supporter of the concept of the National Polity (Kokutai) from the standpoint

of the southern court view of history, publishing Kokutai Shimon in 192535 Later in the

same year, he delivered a lecture on Kokutai at the Officers' Academy of the Imperial

Army.36 It seemed that, for Kuroita, the southern court view of history was an instrument

32 Kuroita Katsumi, "Kenmu no chuko no seishin," in Kenmu gikai, ed., Kenmu 1.3 (Tokyo: Kenmu gikai, November 1936). 33 Kuroita Katsumi, "Nanbokuryocho no yurai to sono seijun wo ronzu," in Yuseikai, ed. Seijun dan 'an: Kokutai no engo (Tokyo: Tokyodo, 1911). 34 Kuroita Katsumi, "Nanbokuryocho no yurai to sono seijun wo ronzu," in Yuseikai, ed., Seijun dan 'an: Kokutai no engo (Tokyo: Tokyodo, 1911), p. 41. 35 Kurotia Katsumi, Kokutai Shinron (Tokyo: Hakubundo, 1925). 36 Kuroita Katsumi, "Rekishijo no kenchi yori katsu kokutai kannen (ge)," in Inoue Tetsujiro and Kuroita Katsumi, eds., Waga Kokutai kannen (Rekugun shikan gakko seito kagai koenshu dai kyu Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 90

IT to be used in the clarification and preservation of the National Polity.

Taking Part in History Education (Rekishi Kyoiku) after 1920

In the early 1920s Hiraizumi was on well on his way to establishing himself as a reputable historian, scholar, and university lecturer. At the same time, he was closely involved in the study of history education as the core of the national education and was frequently invited to deliver lectures to elementary schools (Shoto kyoiku). As early as 1920, people taking part in the editing of the official history textbook (Kokutei kyokasho) in the Ministry of

in Education approached Hiraizumi for his opinion on historical interpretation.

In an article "Kameyama joko jukoku no gokinen" published in Shigaku zasshi

(December 1920), Hiraizumi described the emergence of diverse interpretations of the

Mongolian attacks on Japan, known as the Bunei Incident and the Koan Incident in 1274 and 1281, respectively. In his view, the orthodox view of history was the Nation's History; he would not accept other interpretations that were contrary to or critical of this orthodoxy, partly because he worried that a diversification in historical interpretation would lead to confusion. Moreover, in his opinion, the study of the Nation's History was the foundation of national education and would lead to the stabilization (uniformity) of political views.

Also in the area of the method of history education, an organization called the Group for

History Education (Rekishi kenkyu kai) sought to promote the nurturing of the National go) (Tokyo; Rikugun shikan gakko shoko shukaijo, 1925). 37 Hiraizumi's meeting with Kuroita was a crucial event in the former's intellectual formation. Kuroita resolved to groom Hiraizumi to be a leading proponent of the southern court view of history. He gave advice to Hiraizumi who was at a critical juncture in his life. When Hiraizumi received his undergraduate degree, various ministries of the government offered him a position, but Kuroita advised Hiraizumi to remain at graduate school and continue his research. Hiraizumi followed his mentor's advice and became associated with the research project on Nikko Toshogu. 38 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi "Kameyama joko jukoku no gokinen," Shigaku zasshi 31.12 (December 1920): 1011-12. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 91

Spirit (Kokumin seishin no shuyo). To this end, they began to publish the journal Rekishi

Kyoiku (History Education). Hiraizumi played a significant part in the founding of the

Group and was a member of the editorial board of the journal. To the first volume which appeared in 1925, he contributed "How Should We Study History,"39 an article that represented the beginning of the process of integrating his concept of history into the moral education of the nation. This same year, Hiraizumi began to discuss education in the

Nation's History in his own terms. Until this point, he had merely noted the encroachment of the methods of other fields on the study of history and the growth of various types of world history (Sekaishi) since the end of World War I. In response to these trends, he now presented his definition of the study of history, namely, the study of the Nation's History

(Kokushigaku). In "The Marrow Bone of the Study of the Nation's History" which appeared in Shigaku zasshi (August 1927),40 for example, he declared that "history is about revival (Rekishi towa fukkatsu nari)" and discussed the significance of "revival"

(fukkatsu) in "history." This article inspired a number of people to take up his concept of history; many later joined his private academy. Aware of the significance of this article,

Hiraizumi sent it to Okawa Shumei (1886-1957), a leading nationalistic intellectual and activist of the Showa period, thereby establishing a personal tie with him.

Hiraizumi also wrote "The invisible power that runs through history" (Rekishi wo tsuranuku meimei no chikara) for Gakushu kenkyu (Research on Learning)41 and delivered a lecture on the same topic at the municipal hall of Fukui-city, Fukui prefecture, on April 8,

39 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Rekishi wo ikani manabuka," Rekishi kyoiku, 1.1. (Tokyo: Rekishi kyoiku kenkyukai, October 1925). 40 Hiraizumi publicly declared that "the Study of the Nation's History" (Kokushi gaku) was a scholarly branch. 41 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Rekishi wo tsuranuku meimei no chikara," in Nara koto shihan gakko fuzoku shogakko gakushu kenkyukai, ed., Gakushu kenkyu 7.6 (Tokyo:Mekugo shoten, June 1928).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 92

1928. The lecture later appeared in Fukui hyoron (Fukui Critics).42 Here, Hiraizumi discussed Yamazaki Ansai and his school of Kimon, praising the school's students for continuing the teaching of Yamazaki without altering it over the centuries. This unchanged spirit of the school and its students inspired Hiraizumi, who was looking for a way of solving the ideological diversification in education and academia. In the same vein,

Hiraizumi delivered a lecture "Lacking One Spirit" (Ichi no seishin wo kaku) for Kyoiku kenkyu (Research on Education) in January 1929. He argued that in modern elementary education, the various independent disciplines should share a common spirit.43 He resolved to promote this one spirit (Ichi no seishin) in the field of education, partly by disseminating the Seishin of the Kimon.44

Hiraizumi not only discussed the philosophy and method of history on a theoretical level. He also wrote history for children, "the future of the nation." His active participation in writing history for children helped establish his pre-eminence in the promotion of history as a core part of national education in ethics and morality. Hiraizumi wrote the second volume of The Story of the History of Japan (Chu) in 1928.45 The volume covers the medieval period (Chusei) from the Hogen war (1156) to the rise of Oda Nobunaga

(1532-82), and it became the basis for The History of Japan for the Youth (Shonen Nihon shi) in the postwar period. In 1927, Hiraizumi wrote "The Outline of the Nation's History"

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Rekishi wo tsuranuku meimei no chikara," Fukui hyoron 4.5 (May 1928); Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Rekishi wo tsuranuku meimei no chikara (Shozen)," Fukui hyoron 4.6 (June 1928). 43 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Ichi no seishin wo kaku," in Kyoiku kenkyu, 337 (Tokyo: January 1929). 44 Note: in the summer of 1932 Hiraizumi expressed his determination to spread the Seishin of the Kimon at Tokyo Imperial University and Kyoto Imperial University in his letter to Okawa Shumei. See Chapter Five. 45 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon reksihi monogatari (Chu) [Nihon Jido bunko] (Tokyo: Arusu, 1928). Kita Sadakichi (1871-1939) wrote volume one. Nakamura Koya of Tokyo Imperial University wrote volume three. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 93

(Kokushi gaisetsu); this article on history education was included in Education: Lecture on ethics (Kyoiku rinri koza) (1927). The book's editor commented that it was appropriate to include Hiraizumi's article because history textbooks were about to be revised,47 thereby suggesting that the Nation's History was a crucial part of school education in

general, and that Hiraizumi's views were already widely known and accepted.

Scholarly Achievement and Recognition: 1926

Hiraizumi had established himself as an authority in Japanese medieval history by 1926.

During this year, he published three major books: Spiritual Life during the Medieval

Period 48 (April 1926), My View of History49 (May 1926), and The Relationship between

the Shinto Shrine and the Buddhist Temples and the Society during the Medieval Period1

(November 1926). Spiritual Life during the Medieval Period was his first complete work

on the spiritual life of the medieval period. Although he specialized in medieval history

(Chuseishi), he had a critical view of it (Chusei). He was also critical of the modern period

(Gendai). In fact, Hiraizumi chose medieval history as his academic discipline at Tokyo

Imperial University because he found similarities between the medieval period and the

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokushi gaisetsu," in Tamura Hajime, ed. Kyoiku rinri koza (Tokyo: Nihon Gakujitsu shoin, 1927). 47 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Hengo goki," in Tamura Hajime, ed., Kyoiku Rinri koza (Tokyo: Nihon Gakujitsu shoin, 1927). 48 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Chusei ni okeru seishin seikatsu (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1926). 49 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Waga rekishikan (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1926). 50 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Chusei ni okeru shaji to shakai to no kankei (Tokyo:Shibundo, 1926). Although Spiritual Life during the Medieval Period and The Relationship between the Shinto Shrine and the Buddhist Temples and the Society during the Medieval Period were written according to the positivist method of history, Hiraizumi's interest remained the internal (spiritual) life of the medieval society. 51 Hiraizumi wrote about his attitude in writing this book for the Imperial University Newspaper (Teikoku daigaku shinbun); Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Sogo soshiki to shinsetsu: Chusei ni okeru seishin seikatsu wo kaita taido," Teikoku daigaku shinbun 165 (May 10, 1926).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 94 present.52 In studying "the problems" of the past, he hoped to find solutions for present problems. In order to light up the "darkness" of the Taisho period, Hiraizumi promoted the

Spirit of the Way of Bushi (Bushido seishin), which he had probably learned from his father who read Genpei seisui ki (48 vols; 1247-1249) when he was five or six years old in

Hakusan.53 He later began to promote the Seishin of Bushido widely and systemically in the fall of 1933.

In The Relationship between the Shinto Shrine and the Buddhist Temples and

Society during the Medieval Period (1926), which was based upon his doctoral dissertation, he demonstrated his ability to produce a respectable piece of historical scholarship. The book is still given top rating by Japanese medievalists. Here, he examined the topic of asylum in European history and applied the same methods to his empirical studies on

Japanese medieval history, proving the notion of asylum and its practice in shrines and temples in medieval Japan in Chapter Three. The young historian also integrated the study of medieval Japanese history into western historical scholarship. Hiraizumi was on the way to establishing himself as one of eminent historians of the Showa period.

However, his true interest lay in the clarification of the Seishin that runs through the

Nation's History. He was involved in the dissemination of this Seishin by the late 1920s, as

demonstrated by the publication My View of History, a collection of journal articles and

lectures Hiraizumi wrote and delivered before 1926. Many were about Seishin and

"Japanese Spirit." Evidently, while he was searching for a historical method and

philosophy of history, his spiritualism was sharpened at Tokyo Imperial University.

Hiraizumi criticized the education provided by Buddhist monks in the medieval

52 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Chusei ni okeru seishin seikatsu. (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1926), pp. 17-19. 53 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 95 period; he said they lacked knowledge of "history" and fused various branches of thought together. Shinto eventually became subjugated to Buddhism because people were "poorly educated," as he put it, in terms of understanding the Nation's History. Not surprisingly, then, in a journal article published in 1927 Hiraizumi justified the Meiji government's policy of separating the Kami from Buddha (Shinbutsu bunri).54 He praised the rise of the

Seishin of Bushi (Samurai), together with Zen Buddhism, promoted by Dogen (1200-1253) of the Eiheiji temple, located near Heisenji, Hiraizumi's home village in Fukui prefecture, which, he said, was "a light in the darkness (Ankoku) of the medieval period."55 As mentioned in Chapter One, the Hakusan shrine, which the Hiraizumi family began to serve

during the Meiji period, was a product of the policy of separating Kami and Buddha.56

From 1926 to 1928, Hiraizumi wrote a series of articles regarding the separation of

Kami (gods or deities in the context of Shinto) and Buddha (Shinbutsu bunri), which the

government had strictly implemented since March 17, 1868, and during the Meiji period.

Hiraizumi worked with Professor Tsuji Zennosuke, who had a keen interest in the history

of Buddhism in Japan, and wrote "the Separation of Kami and Buddha" (Nikko ni okeru

shinbutsu bunri) for the second volume of The Historical Materials on the Separation of

Kami and Buddha during the Meiji Restoration (Meiji ishin shinbutsu bunri shiryo)

(1926).57 Hiraizumi wrote three more journal articles in which he was critical of the theory

of Shinbutsu shugo (the fusion of the gods in Shinto and Buddha), which began in the Nara

period; he also criticized the theory of Honchi Suijaku (the Theory of the Unity of the

54 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Shinbutsu kankei no gyakuten," Rekishi kyoiku 2.4 (1927). 55 Finally, Mongolian attempts to conquer Japan raised the national awareness (Kokumin teki jikaku) of the Japanese people. Hiraizumi respected the Buddhist monk Nichiren (1222-1282) for the role he played in awakening national consciousness during this crisis. 56 Hiraizumi Takafusa, the grandson of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, told the author that Tsuji had a critical attitude towards the Shinto community while conducting his research on the topic. 57 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nikko ni okeru shinbutsu bunri," Tsuji Zennosuke, ed., Meiji ishin Shinbutsu bunri shiryo. (chukan) (November 1925). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 96

Buddha and the Kami).

Cultural History for the Study of "Japanese Spirit": 1927-1929

It is significant to point out that this "spiritualistic" view of history flourished in the positivist environment of the Division of the Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University during the Taisho period (1912-1926), the most liberal time in the prewar era. Cultural history (Bunka shi),58 which derived from the history of popular culture (Fuzoku shi) was gaining popularity, and as has been noted, Hiraizumi quickly established himself as "a rising star in Taisho cultural history." But he pushed his work a step further, becoming critical of the rivalry between political history (Seiji shi) and cultural history (Bunka shi), suggesting the unification of two branches. As Hiraizumi saw it, the combination of the two views of history would lead to the pursuit of historicism (Rekishi shugi) and spiritualism (Seishin shugi).59 In this way, "history" and "spirit" (G: Geisf) prevailed over

"politics" (the state) and "culture" as significant factors in history, as well as in the interpretation of history. For this reason, Hiraizumi studied cultural history, using it to illuminate the continuity of Seishin (Nihon seishin) throughout the course of Japanese history.

Between 1927 and 1929, as Associate Professor, he published a series of journal articles on the cultural history (Bunkashi) of Japan. In "The Stages in the Development of

Japanese Spirit" (Nihon seishin hatten no dankai), in Shigaku zasshi (1928),60 he voiced

58 This is a Japanese translation of the German term. 59 The co-existence of empiricism (Jissho shugi), political history (Seiji shi), nationalism (Kokka shugi), cultural history (Bunkashi), historicism (Rekishi shugi), and spiritualism (Seishin shugi), was evident in some of Hiraizumi's major works on Japanese medieval history from the mid to late Taisho period. 60 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi "Nihon seishin hatten no dankai," Shigaku zasshi. Rpt. Nihon (July 1928).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two; Intellectual Formation 97 his opposition to dividing the Nation's History into periods based on the rise and fall of political regimes. Instead, he identified five periods: Kodai, Kamiyo, Chusei, Kinsei, and

Gendai. He argued each period had its own ideal; thus, change was inevitable. For instance, the concept of Junsui (Purity) (J$LW) represented Kodai (the ancient). The concept of Bi

(Beauty) (H) [RfiHifeii] represented Kamiyo (the ages of the gods). The concept of Sei

(Holiness) (I§)[^?|$t] represented Chusei (the medieval). The concept of Zen (Good)

(#)[fraS3SfS] represented Kinsei (the early modern). Finally, the concept of the pursuit of Shin (Truth) (R) [f4#^WW] represented Gendai (the modern).61

But why did Hiraizumi consider the study of the core value of each period in

history significant? In 1928, he said: When one has a grasp of the particularities of a state and perceives the particularities of each period, the man would reach the deepest in terms of historical consciousness. Furthermore, regardless of the changes from one period to the next, one will become the man who will truly live inside history by becoming able to inherit the Seishin that absolutely runs through from the beginning to the end (of history).62

As this comment makes clear, there was no contradiction, dilemma, or paradox in the study

of the core value of each period in the eyes of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi; his ultimate objective

was the clarification of the Seishin that unchangeably ran throughout the course of the

history of Japan. This quotation summarizes Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's attitude towards the

study of history and explains the harmonious co-existence of Rankain positivism, cultural

history, and "spiritual" history.

61 Hiraizumi also wrote two journal articles on the flower of Sakura (cherry blossoms) from the standpoint of cultural history in 1928. See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Rekishijo no ue yori mitaru sakura," Sakura 10 (April 1928); Hiraizumi Kyoshi,"Bunkashijo yori miru sakura," Kokoku 153 (May 1928). 62 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon seishin hatten no dankai," in Shigaku zasshi, 39.4 (Tokyo: Shigakukai, 1928). P.351 (P.41).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 98

Hiraizumi continued to publish articles on cultural history until the end of 1929. He promoted cultural history to schoolteachers in some prefectures, including Toyama

Prefecture and Hiroshima Prefecture. "The General Introduction to the Cultural History of

Japan" (Nihon bunka shi gairon), which he wrote for Toyama Education (Toyama kyoiku)

(1929), was his most comprehensive work on Japanese cultural history.63 He also delivered a lecture, "Koza: Nihon bunka no hatten," at the summer teacher's university, sponsored by the Meeting for the Encouragement of the National Education (Kokumin kyoiku shoreikai) in Matsumae City.64 In these works, he began to promote the clarification of Seishin, making a scholarly effort to encourage the study of history according to Rankian positivism and cultural history. Hiraizumi also focused on "Japanese

Spirit" (Nihon Seishin). He used cultural history to illuminate the immutability and the continuity of "Japanese Spirit," emphasizing the significance of those who sacrificed their

lives for the defence of "history."

What is significant here, however, is Hiraizumi's use of cultural history to define the significance of Seishin in the Nation's History of Japan. In the journal articles, he

accepted that each period changes according to the main values of the time - this was a

historical reality. At the same time, he emphasized the significance of the Seishin, a

consistently unifying thread in the Nation's History. Hiraizumi extensively studied the

differences between periods, while also looking at the consistency of the Seishin. By

seeking to overcome the gap between an aspect of history that constantly changes and one

that remains unchanged, he tried to negate the contradictory, inconsistent, and dichotomous

nature of history. Hiraizumi explained the dilemma by arguing that the "Japanese Spirit"

63 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon bunka shi gairon," Toyama Kyoiku (September 1929). 64 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Koza: Nihon bunka no hatten," Gakko kyoiku 197 (November 1929); Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Koza: Nihon bunka no hatten (Sh5zen)," Gakko kyoiku 198 (December 1929).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 99

(Nihon seishin) continued to exist by surpassing the major values (ideals) peculiar to each period. He claimed the continuity of Seishin was the main characteristic of the Nation's

History. In this way, he concluded, history in its truest sense, existed only in Japan.

For proponents of the Nation's History, Hiraizumi's analysis of the Nation's History from the standpoints of cultural history and spiritual history was his most significant scholarly contribution. The historian Okubo Toshiaki, a grandson of Okubo Toshimichi

(1830-1878), an elder statesman of Meiji (Meiji no genro), called Hiraizumi "a rising star

in the Taisho cultural history."65 What people did not realize, however, was that Hiraizumi used cultural history to emphasize the significance of Seishin as a factor in the Nation's

History. In this sense, he pragmatically strengthened the "spiritualist" view of the Nation's

History.

Within the same context, Hiraizumi identified the cause of the Meiji Restoration.

He was associated with a study group on the Meiji Restoration at Tokyo Imperial

University and delivered a lecture, "The Meiji Restoration seen from the Standpoint of the

Nation's History" (Kokushijo yori mitaru meiji ishin), to the group in January 1929.66 It

was included in A Study of the History of the Meiji Restoration (Meiji ishinshi kenkyu),

edited by Professor Mikami Sanji and published in November 1929. In the preface,

Mikami said that Ishin was accomplished not by money (Kane) but by spirit {Seishin).

Professor Mikami also supported the spiritualist interpretation of the Meiji Restoration and

underscored the role of economic factors in the major political change known as the Meiji

Restoration. Unlike Hiraizumi, he felt that the northern and southern courts were both

Okubo Toshiaki, Kindaishi kotohajime: ichi rekishika no kaiso (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1996). Shigakukai, Shigakukai hyakunen shoshi (Tokyo: Yamakawa shuppan sha, 1989), p. 28. Implying it was not a revolution caused by economic factors.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 100 legitimate lines of the imperial rule (Nanbokucho ryoritsu ron), but the two men shared similar views of the role of Seishin in the Nation's History in modern times.

In sum, Hiraizumi applied cultural history to illuminate the Seishin running through the Nation's History of Japan and to strengthen spiritual history. Thus, spiritual history came from a legitimate academic field, and cultural history became a branch of history that assisted the rise of "ultra-nationalism" in subsequent years.

"History" to Promote "Seishin" (Geist): 1927-1929

While Hiraizumi was using his scholarly work to illuminate Japanese history, he produced a series of articles on Seishin (Geist) in the history of Japan and delivered lectures on the subject. As early as 1920, he demonstrated his "spiritualism" in the article "Prince Gotsuji,

Who was about to Fade Away in History" (Shijo ni enmetsu seshi Gotsujino miya), where he argued that the Japanese should not underestimate their history, as many people had sacrificed their lives defending it. Hiraizumi also talked about "The Shrine of Nikko that was Misconstrued" (Ayamaretaru Nikkoro) at a meeting of Shigakukai at Tokyo Imperial

University on October 30, 1920. On this occasion, Hiraizumi emphasized the significance of the religious faith (Shinko) of Tokugawa rather than his financial contribution to the

shrine's construction. Hiraizumi delivered a lecture, "Extraordinary power that appears in

History" (Rekishi ni arawaretaru ijo no chikara) on radio in Nagoya City, Aichi prefecture,

in May 1927 and wrote "Seishin that runs through the Nation's History" (Kokushi wo tsuranuku seishin) for Shizuoka ken kyoiku (Education in Shizuoka prefecture) in

68 See, Yamazaki Tokichi and Horie Hideo, ed., Nanbokucho seijun ronsai (Tokyo: 1911). The author expresses his appreciation to Professor Shuzo Uyenaka of the Department of East Asian Studies at University of Toronto for introducing the book to the author in the early stage of his graduate studies. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 101

November 1928. He contribued "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon seishin no) to Jinja kyokai zasshi

(Magazine for the Association of Shinto Shrines), 69 and another radio lecture, "Seishin of

Defending the State" (Kokka goji no seishin), was broadcast on November 16, 1928.70

Through such efforts, the southern court view of history was once again recognized as a

useful instrument for the promotion of the spirit of self-sacrifice for the defence of

"history" and the "Japanese Spirit," which ever changed yet eternally ran through the

"71

course of the Nation's History.

Hiraizumi continued his ties with the Fukui Echizen domain while in Tokyo. For

one thing, as a member of the Fukui-Echizen group, since May 2, 1925, Hiraizumi became

the Dean of Residence (Shakan) of Hojinkai, an organization which assisted students from

Fukui prefecture,72 founded by the Matsudaira family on July 1, 1922. Hiraizumi and his

wife Hayako made sure that residents followed the house rule.73 In fact, Hiraizumi's

association with Hojinkai was significant: Hojinkai brought "the Imperial loyalism (Sonno

shugi) of the Fukui-Echizen domain" into Tokyo, helping preserve and promote it among

city residents as their guiding thought. He openly shared his religious views, as well as his

historical views of the local heroes of the domain who contributed to "the great

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon seishin no," Jinja kyokai zasshi 28.2 (March 1929). 70 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokka goji no seishin," in Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku, ed., Shiso kyoiku shiryo (vol. 24; Tokyo: Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku, 1929). 71 Hiraizumi discussed the book Jinno shotoki by Kitabatake Chikafusa (1293-1354), at the Study Group of Geography and History at the Imperial Capital (Teito chiri rekishi kenkyukai) in 1928. He wrote about Kuriyama Senpo (1671-1706) and Tani Jinzan (1663-1718), the Kimon scholars of the late Mito school of history, in Rekishi kenkyu in February 1929. And he discussed the Seki-Taiho castles in Ibaraki prefecture, where Kitabatake Chikafusa had written Jinno shotoki, for Shiseki in February 1926. In this way, he was a proponent of Rekishi shugi and Seishin shugi in support of rekishi shugi. 72 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964), p. 16. 73 Nakano Shigeharu (1902-1979), who later became an eminent proletariat novelist and a member of the Japanese communist party, was a resident of Hojinkai when Hiraizumi was the Dean of Residence. Nakano vividly describes Hiraizumi in his fictional character Izumo Sensei, in the novel Muragimo. Nakano Shigeharu, Muragimo (Tokyo: Chuo koron sha, 1954).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 102 accomplishment" of the Meiji Restoration. A former resident remembered Hiraizumi

saying it was wrong for people to attempt reform through revolutionary acts without understanding the Seishin of Shishi, such as Yoshida Shoin (1830-59). This suggests

Hiraizumi was exposing the residents to his views of history and revolution (Rekishi to kakumei). It further suggests he was directing them how to act according to this knowledge, something which is evocative of a similarity between Hojinkai and the school of the

Kimon, namely, that both advocated the oneness of knowledge and action.

Hiraizumi walked more than two Ri1A with the residents to the Meiji Shrine in

Harajuku in the early morning of January 1, 1927.75 It took the group a few hours to reach their destination. For Hiraizumi, the walk was a pilgrimage to a holy site; it represented both his faith in Shinto and his commitment to the "restored" imperial nation, as Emperor

Meiji was said to have provided provide strong moral leadership during the restoration.

Hiraizumi demonstrated his humility before the Kami and showed his absolute loyalty

(Chu) to Emperor Meiji, hoping that the young men who accompanied him would learn

from this experience and carry these values with them; he was determined to spread

Seishin which, in his view, had restored the ancient imperial system in the 19th century.

Hiraizumi was particularly enthusiastic about the spread of the Seishin of

Hashimoto Sanai (1834-59) in Tokyo. Inside Hojinkai, Hiraizumi played a significant role

in the restoration of the Keigakukai, the provincial organization to honour and manifest the

Seishin of Hashimoto. For example, in October 1926, Hiraizumi asked Hatta YQjiro of the

Imperial Navy to assume the presidency of the organization. As a young man in the

Fukui-Echizen domain, Hatta had studied directly under Yoshida Toko, from whom

74 A Ri is equivalent to 2.44 miles. 75 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 103

Hashimoto Sanai studied the scholarship of the Kimon school of Yamazaki Ansai. The restoration of the organization reflected the willingness of the leaders of the Fukui prefecture (the Fukui-Echizen domain), including Matsudaira Yoshitami (1882-1948), the hereditary lord, to revitalize Hashimoto as a source of moral education. The organization was financed by donations from and the assistance of local volunteers, such as Shima

Rentaro, who took care of the expenses of publication in order "to preserve the purity of the spiritual unity of the organization."

Hiraizumi was in charge of organizing the lecture meetings of Keigakukai to promote the Seishin of Hashimoto. Speakers included leading intellectuals, for instance, the philosopher Kihira Tadayoshi (1874-1949), who became a leading member of the

Research Center for the National Spirit and Culture (Kokumin seishin bunka kenkyujo), founded by the Ministry of Education on August 25, 1932.76 Hiraizumi himself delivered a

lecture on Hashimoto at the first such meeting.77 In addition, the organization arranged a

festival before the grave of Hashimoto Sanai in Tokyo every year until the end of 1945; a

similar event was held in Fukui City, Fukui prefecture.

Kato Haruhiro (1870-1939), formerly from Fukui prefecture, a member of

Keigakukai, and a prominent leader of the Kantai faction in the Imperial Navy, also

enthusiastically promoted the Seishin of Hashimoto as representative of "Japanese Spirit"

(Nihon Seishin). Kato and Hiraizumi had a shared interest and objective: they resolved to revitalize Hashimoto's Seishin nationwide. To achieve this, they organized an event at

Shirakiya Department in Nihonbashi Tokyo in 1935.79 The topic will be discussed in more

76 "The literary giant" Tokutomi Soho presented lectures on Hashimoto. 77 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, ed., Keigakukai koenshu dai ichigo (Tokyo: Keigakukai, 1928). 78 See, Kato Haruhiro, Gunshuku kaigi to kokumin no kakugo (Tokyo: Nihon seishin kyokai, 1935). P.23-34. 79 For more about the event, see Ishiwara Kitao, ed. Hashimoto Sanai sensei seitan hyakunen kinen Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 104 detail later.

Hiraizumi also established ties with Tokutomi Solid (1863-1957) through the promotion of the Seishin of Hashimoto Sanai. As mentioned, Tokutomi delivered a lecture

at a meeting of Keigakukai. But Tokutomi also organized "The Autographic Festival of

Shishi in Relations to the Mass Execution of the Ansei Era" (of 1858) (Ansei no taigoku kankei shishi ibokusai) to honour and manifest the Seishin of more than 100 Bakumatsu

shishi, including Umeda Unbin (1815-1859) and Hashimoto Sanai, who sacrificed their

lives in their protests against the rule of the Bakufu in the late 18th century. The event was

held at Aoyama Hall in Tokyo and lasted five days. Hiraizumi gave a lecture on Hashimoto

SO • • •

Sanai at the personal request of Tokutomi. Tokutomi, who was twice as old as Hiraizumi, probably saw great potential in the young historian, perceiving as someone who could

interpret the Nation's History and carry its tradition into the next generation. The two men

exchanged letters in the late 1920s; in one letter to Tokutomi, Hiraizumi expressed his

sincere respect for his massive contribution to scholarly work on the Nation's History.81

This friendship and "student mentorship"82 between the two continued into the postwar

period.83 kiyo (Tokyo: Keigakukai, 1939). 0 Hiraizumi later wrote about the event. See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Sentetsu wo aogu (Tokyo: Kinseisha, 1998); Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Onjin," in Zaidan hojin Fukui bijutsukan ed., Idai naru Fukui no sentetsu (Kaikan kinen koenkai kirokushi) (Fukui-City: Zaidan hojin Fukui bijutsukan, 1982). I would like to thank Mr. Nishimura of Fukui City for providing me with a copy of this material. A personal letter from Hiraizumi Kiyoshi to Tokutomi Soho; a possession of Tokutomi Soho kinenkan. 82 Nakano Shigeharu, a former resident of Hojinkai, who later became an eminent proletariat novelist and joined a member of the Japanese communist party, observed the amicable interaction between Hiraizumi and Tokutomi during 1920s. He criticized their application of the Nation's History to the service of the imperial nation.82 Nakano's critical observations suggest that the veteran writer Tokutomi and the young historian Hiraizumi shared similar views on the purpose of historical writings. Moreover, they shared a "spiritualistic" interpretation of history, promoting the Seishin of the Bakumatsu shishi. 83 There were no remaining letters from the wartime period at Tokutomi Soho Museum.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 105

Although he was a key figure in the movement, Hiraizumi did not promote spiritual history by himself. Some key institutions endorsed his efforts in order to accomplish their own institutional goals. For instance, Hiraizumi's arrival on the spiritualist history scene coincided with the rise of "spiritualism" within the Imperial Navy during the late 1920s.

The Kantai faction of the Imperial Navy seemed most receptive to spiritualism, which

Hiraizumi illuminated through his application of Ranke's historical scholarship and cultural history to his study of medieval history and the Nation's History as a whole.85 The faction was discontented with the naval disarmament being imposed upon Japan. Yushukai, a social club for naval officers,86 became a major advocate against the London Naval

Disarmament Treaty of 1930 and called for the abolition of the treaty.87

Arima Ryokitsu (1861-1944), a hero of the Russo-Japanese War (1902-3), president of Yushukai, and later chief priest of the Meiji Shrine between 1931 and 1943,88 became a major supporter and promoter of Hiraizumi. Arima personally asked Hiraizumi to promote the Seishin of Yamazaki Ansai and his school of Kimon after Hiraizumi's return from the

West in July 1931. Their efforts led to a 250-year anniversary event for Yamazaki Ansai, held in October 1932.89

They were unhappy with the trend towards naval disarmament in the Pacific. 85 Such "spiritualistic" interpretations of the Nation's History appealed to the Kantai faction, a new faction in the Imperial Navy. 86 Arai, ed., Nihon bunka dantai nenkan Showajuhachi nen ban (Tokyo: Zaidan hojin Nihon bunka Chuo renmei, 1943). 87 Ikeda Kiyoshi, Kaigun to Nihon, (Chuko shinsho 632) (Tokyo: Chuo koron sha, 1981), P.81. 88 For more about Arima Ryokitsu, see Sato Eisuke, ed., Arima Ryokitsu den (Tokyo: Arima Ryokitsu denki hensan kai, 1974); also see historian Hata Ikuhiko's description of Arima in Kokushi daijiten (Tokyo: Yoshikawa kobunkan). 89 Hiraizumi promoted the seishin of the Kimon school, whose students played significant parts in the compilation of Dai Nihon shi by the late Mito school, which promoted the theory of Taigi Meibun and the southern court view of history. Hiraizumi delivered a lecture on Yamazaki Ansai and the history of his Kimon school (Rekishi wo tsuranuku meimei no chikara) at the Yushukai on December 14, 1928. He discussed the topic within the context of the Seishin of Hashimoto Sanai. He noted that just as the scholarship of the Kimon flourished under the mentorship of Toshida Toko in the Fukui-Echizen domain, so too, Yamazaki and his students inspired people over the centuries.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 106

The Department of Education of the Ministry of the Imperial Navy (Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku) published "The Spirit of Defending the State" (Kokka goji no seishin) in

October 1929. In this article, Hiraizumi clearly defined his view of the relationship

between individuals and the state (Kokka) for the first time. He said that one could become

a sacrifice stone (Haseki) of the state by sacrificing one's life for the defence of the state.90

In this way, individuals were defined as being part of the foundation of the state.91 As will be shown in due course, such views came to the fore during the war years.

Immediately before his departure to the West, Hiraizumi was invited to deliver a

lecture, "The Outline of the Nation's History" (Kokushi no gaiyo), at the University of the

Imperial Navy (Kaigun daigakko).92 He presented his overall view of the Nation's History

to the future leaders of the Imperial Navy. During the lecture, he inspired Ueda Soju, who

became a loyal student in subsequent years.93

Hiraizumi hurried to finish the pamphlet "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon Seishin) on his

way to the West in May 1930, later submitting it to the Imperial Navy from Shanghai. In

the pamphlet, he discussed the Seishin of two Bakumatsu shishi, Yoshida Shoin (1830-59)

These people, who came to be known as Shishi, sacrificed themselves for "the Great Success of the Meiji Restoration" (Meiji no taigyo) of the nineteenth century. They died for their ideas, and as a result, they "eternally live inside history." This logic became a powerful instrument for the spiritual mobilization of the nation during the 1930s and 1940s. 90 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokka goji no seishin," in Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku,ed., Shiso ky5iku shiryo (vol.24; Tokyo: Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku, 1929). 91 Like many scholars of the Taisho period, Hiraizumi was concerned about the relationship between individuals and the state. When he discussed the methodology of history in "A Modern View of History," he began the article with this issue. How do individuals find the meaning of their existence? Do they find it in their relations to "the state"? Do they find it in their relation to "culture?" In the article, Hiraizumi said that "the state" and "culture" decline and disappear in world history, but "history" prevails. 92 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokushi no gaiyo," in Hiraizumi Hakushi shironsho (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 2001). The author found the lecture note "Kokka goji no seishin" at the central library of Meiji University in Tokyo. 93 For more about Ueda Soju, see Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Seijun suko no fukaku," in Kaigun kikan gakko, ed., Ueda Soju chiisho tsuiboroku (Tsurumaki: Kaigun kikan gakko, 1940).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 107 and Hashimoto Sanai (1834-59), as the representatives of "Japanese Spirit." The pamphlet

shows that Hiraizumi was already a proponent of "Japanese Spirit," thereby discounting the view that he experienced an intellectual transformation while in the West. In fact, the intellectual formation of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi was nearly complete by 1930. The young religious man from the Hokuriku region had become a leading spiritualist after taking an

intellectual journey through Rankian positivism and cultural history in the field of the

Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi now began to prepare

for a journey to the West, where, as the following chapter shows, he was able to confirm his intellectual views.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 108

CHAPTER FOUR

His visit to the West: March 1930- July 1931

This chapter describes Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's trip to Europe and the United States from

March 1930 to July 1931.1 In making this trip, he had two purposes: first, to discover how

Western historians viewed the history of their nations; second to find out how national history was taught in the West. To this end, he selectively met Western counterparts and studied their scholarship. As Chapter Three showed, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi was already a

"spiritual" academic historian and a disseminator of "Japanese Spirit" before the end of his university years. His overseas inspection trip confirmed the scholarly legitimacy of what he already understood to be true: he renewed his faith in Shinto and the practice of spiritual history within the context of the Meiji State Shinto (Meiji no kokka Shinto) that had begun in the 19th century. With a sense of conviction based on this reconfirmation and renewal,

Hiraizumi was ready to "revive" the "spiritual" subjecthood (Seishinteki shutaisei) of the imperial nation of Japan when he returned home (as will be discussed in following chapters).

Leaving for Europe: 1930

The Japanese Ministry of Education (Monbusho) had an established practice of sending young associate professors of the imperial universities to the West to learn cutting-edge

1 For this chapter, the author learned of the exact dates of Hiraizumi's activities during his trip to the west from Hiriazumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 109 research in their fields of study. On January 21, 1930, the Ministry gave Associate

Professor Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "a rising star of Taisho cultural history," at Tokyo Imperial

University, instructions to go on an overseas research trip (Zaigai kenkyu) to the West

(mainly Europe) for two years. On March 24, 1930, his family and friends saw him off at

Yokohama port in Kanagawa prefecture, next to Tokyo. He took the ship Katorimaru for

Europe via Asia and through the Suez Canal.

Sailing from Japan to Europe allowed Hiraizumi to observe Asia and the Middle

East under the governance of Western nations.2 While in Paris, Hiraizumi read a French writer's account of his journey to Asia; he agreed with the writer's view that Asia was disappearing as it rapidly became westernized. In this context, Hiraizumi pondered the role that Japan, one of only a few countries remaining sovereign and independent in Asia, must play to awaken "sleeping Asia" and came up with an interesting chain of logic. He concluded that in order to recreate the true Asia, Japan must return to being the true Japan.

For this to occur, the Japanese must return to being true Japanese (Shin no Nihonjin) by reviving first "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon Seishin) and then Bushido (the ethical Way of

Samurai). In other words, the Japanese must return to their traditions to assume a

leadership role in "the awakening of Asia."

Arrival in Europe: Experiences in Germany

Hiraizumi arrived in the port of Marseilles, France, on May 4, 1930; he took the train to

2 This experience led him to become a founding member of the Association of Great Asianism (Dai Ajia shugi) in early 1933. He also wrote an article "The Revival of Bushido" for Dai Ajia Shugi (Great Asianism) in September 1933; in it, he deplored the conditions into which Asia, "the mother of world civilizations," had been placed. See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Bushido no fukkatsu," Dai Ajia Shugi (September 1933). Rpt. in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Bushido no fukkatsu (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1933).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 110

Paris and then Berlin, the capital of Germany, arriving there on May 8, 1930. He began his sojourn by wandering on the University of Berlin campus. Hirauzmi next visited the

University of Leipzig, where he met Professor Siegmund Hellmann, a follower of Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886). Hellmann was known for editing the complete works of the economist Max Weber (1864-1920). Hiraizumi attended seminars given by Hellmann. He also read Deutsche Keiserzeit, translated it, and criticized it, which impressed Professor

Hellmann. He invited Hiraizumi for dinner and asked him what he studied and taught in

Japan. Hiraizumi mentioned the three books he published in 1926 (see Chapter Three). In response, Professor Hellmann recommended that Hiraizumi meet Professor Schramm at the University of Gottingen. Hellmann said that Schramm was a young scholar, but he would soon lead the field of medieval German history. Moreover, his approach was similar to Hiraizumi's "spiritual" history. Hellmann wrote a letter of introduction to Schramm on behalf of Hiraizumi.

Hiraizumi met Professor Schramm in Gottingen, on July 9, 1930. It was probably here where Hiraizumi renewed his faith in "spiritual" history. Hiraizumi was pleased to learn that a leading medieval historian in Germany was using a method of history similar to his. Professor Schramm had already produced a number of academic articles and books:

"Das Herrscherbild in der Kunst des fruhen Mitelalters" in Bibliothek Warburg, Vortrage

(1924), Die Deutschen Kaiser und Konige in Bildern Ihrer Zeit (1928),4 and Kaiser, Rom und Renovatio (1929). The same age as Hiraizumi, Schramm was a rising star in the field of medieval Germany history just as Hiraizumi was in the field of medieval Japanese

3 Vol.1 (Leipzig 1924). 4 Two volumes (Leipzig 1928). 5 Two volumes (Leipzig 1929). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 111 history. The two had much in common.6

Professor Schramm and his students welcomed the Japanese scholar with open arms.7 Hiraizumi was invited to Schramm's office for historical research and to his home for dinner. The students in his seminar and lecture warmly welcomed the scholar from the

Far East, tapping on the floor as a gesture of welcome. A group often students organized a welcome party for Hiraizumi at a small bar in town. Hiraizumi was also invited to

Professor Schramm's seminar in Latin literature. Professor Schramm had two objectives in the seminar. First, in his view, an in-depth understanding of German literature could be accomplished by the study of Latin literature. He lectured on Latin literature to better elucidate German literature, for example, works by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Q (1749-1832) or Schella. Second, he intended to clarify the spiritual history of the nation.

He thought that learning Latin literature was essential to understand the spirit (G.Geist. J:

Seishin) running through German history. Hiraizumi had taught his students to illuminate

"the spirit" that ran through Japan's Nation's History, using the textual analysis of medieval documents. When he discussed the subject with the German historian, he must have been reinforced in his belief that studying "the spirit" was crucial.

However, what he wanted to discover was how to use this approach to history as a means of achieving cohesiveness in the internal world of the Japanese people. After meeting Professor Schramm, Hiraizumi was likely convinced that "spiritual" history was

6 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Getsuchingen no omoide," Gekkan Nihon (Tokyo: Kochisha, February 1932): 112; Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Getsuchingen no omoide," in Bushido no fukkatsu (Tokyo: Teibundo, 1933). Kochisha, the publisher of Gekkan Nihon, was a patriotic organization, which Okawa Shumei had founded. Hiraizumi published the journal under the same name with the permission of Okawa in postwar period. This journal still is in circulation today. 7 He welcomed his Japanese colleague, even though he was in the midst of a change of post (tennin mondai). 8 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Gechingen no omoide," in Bushido no fukkatsu (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1933), p. 109.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 112 an effective way to refute Marxism and its scientific method of history. He was thus confirmed in his view that Japanese spiritual history could disseminate ethical and moral principles, those on which the southern court view of history was based. It would be an effective way to remedy the ideological problems (Shiso mondai) that Japan had experienced in the 1920s. In other words, his encounter with Schramm helped convince

Hiraizumi of the universality of the ethical and moral interpretation of the southern court view of history and its effectiveness in counteracting Marxism. Hiraizumi renewed his determination to revitalize this "Japanese tradition" (Nihon no dento).

After his pleasant stay in Gottingen, Hiraizumi made short visits to Nuremberg and

Rothberg. And then, despite the discouragement of his German colleagues, Hiraizumi decided to go to the University of Munich. He first visited Professor Von Heckel on July 20,

1930, attending his seminar on palaeograpgie and diplomatik. He also visited Professor

Haushofer, who specialized in geopolitics. Hiraizumi explained his spiritualist view of the

Nation's History of Japan to Professor Haushofer, who later wrote about it in one of his books. In Munich, Hiraizumi met Professor Karl Alexander Von Muller, who, Hiraizumi said, enlightened (Keihatsu) him immensely;10 but he never wrote about his discussions with Von Muller, who later worked with the German Nationalist Socialist Party under Adolf

Hitler. In 1935, Von Muller replaced Fredrich Meinecke, whom Hiraizumi respected, as editor of Historische Zeischrift. Von Muller was a prominent academic historian who supported racism, as advocated by the National Socialist Party, and established a section on

9 Hiraizumi did not see any Marxists while in Germany although Marxism was quite popular in the country at that time. However, he seemed to get some reading done on Marxism and the Jewish history while in Europe. He also visited historic sites for the Jews in Europe. More about it, see, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Diary (Not for sell) (Katsuyma: Shikaseiban, 1991). This is part of Hiraizumi's research diary during his stay in Europe. Hiraizumi Akira, his son, presented it to his father's friends and students. 10 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Konomichi woyuku: Kanrinshi kankoroku (Tokyo: Sozosha, 1995), p. 63. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 113 the "Jewish problems" in Historische Zeischrift.n

As described later in this chapter, Hiraizumi closely observed the Jews while studying and traveling in Europe. He was impressed with their uncompromising attitude towards religion, tradition, and language and was sympathetic to their "tragic history." At the same time, Hiraizumi seemed to accept anti-Semitic views, which were prevalent in

Europe, once saying that the Jews could not commit to the state in which they lived or to the history of that state. Although one of Hiraizumi's three sons stated in the postwar period that his father was never interested in the Nazis while he was in Germany,

Hiraizumi made contact with Professor Von Muller at an early stage of his study in the West.

It is reasonable to assume that Von Muller exchanged views with Hiraizumi and influenced

Hiraizumi's views of Jewish history and Marxism. This may well have strengthened

Hiraizumi's determination to reject Marxism as the guiding thought for "true Japanese"

(Shin no Nihonjin) and to promote Shinto as "the Way of the Japanese" (Nihonjin no michi)

- ironically, in the same way that the Jews absolutely committed to their religion in the

West.

Hiraizumi was interested in how historical scholarship was being accommodated in the German universities. Tokyo Imperial University had a Historiographical Institute

(Shiryo hensanjo), but there was no room for the study of the Nation's History, even though the university facilitated Occidental and Oriental histories. Hiraizumi was enthusiastic about founding a research room for the Nation's History (Kokushi kenkyu shitsu). When he

11 Ernst Breisach, Historiography: Ancient, Medieval, & Modern, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1994.)p.380-l 12 However, he flatly denied Marxism was a product of "the tragic history" of the Jews, also a basic tenet of the anti-Semites of the period. 13 Hiraizumi Akira, "Chichi Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ni tsuite," in Shintoshi kenkyu, 33.1. (Kyoto: Shinto shigaku kai, January 1986.) P. 138-9.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 114 visited major German universities, therefore, he looked into their research facilities for historical scholarship and made note of these research rooms at each university he visited.

Based on this knowledge, he realized his dream of founding a research room for the

Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University. This research room played a significant role in history scholarship and history education until 1945.

Hiraizumi was also interested in how national history was taught and how spiritual history was applied to it in the West. To this end, he visited a number of junior high schools.

Hiraizumi was also given school textbooks on German history. And he visited the National

Institute of History (education) to learn how German historians conducted their research, studied, and taught the national history of Germany. For example, he met with Dr. Reiman, a friend of Ranke, to discuss how national history was taught at junior high and high schools. Hiraizumi was inspired to see that the German national history was written in such a way that the people could be proud of themselves and their nation. In this respect,

Hiraizumi paid particular attention to how philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762-1814) and his Addresses to the German Nation were quoted in school textbooks.14

As a result of his observations, Hiraizumi wrote two articles under the title of

"History Education in Germany" for History Education in March and April 1932. He wrote not from the standpoint of a researcher on history, but from that of an educator, asking how the history of Germany was taught in Germany. His newly acquired knowledge on the subject was useful to him when he later reorganized the teaching method of history at

Tokyo Imperial University and reorganized its facilities on campus.

14 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Doitsu ni okeru rekishi kyoiku." Rekishi kyoiku 7 (April 1932). Furthermore, as discussed later in this chapter, in Britain, Hiraizumi studied Edmund Burke and his anti-revolutionism. Hiraizumi was intrigued that his literary work continued to inspire the young Britons over the centuries.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 115

Hiraizumi was inspired by the on-going influence of the philosopher Johann

Gottlieb Fichte (1762-1814) on national education in Germany.15 Fichte was trained as a theologian and became Professor of Philosophy at Berlin University. After his death, his position remained vacant until Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) assumed the position in 1818. From Fichte, Hiraizumi learned about the use of history education for the purpose of strengthening national unity with respect to the relations between individuals and the state. Fichte appealed to Hiraizumi: his example confirmed Hiraizumi's belief that a great man and his ideas could set the course of history. Fichte was a great man, an exceptional intellectual, and a man of action. This echoed the Neo-Confucian concept of

Gyogaku no icchi (The Unity of Action and Learning) taught by the school of the Kimon, which Yamazaki Ansai founded.

What did Hiraizumi learn from Fichte's philosophy? In "History Education in

Germany" Hiraizumi summarized the key points of Fichte's Addresses to the German

Nation, a collection of 13 speeches given to educators at Berlin University while the city was occupied by Napoleon after the French defeat of Germany in the Franco-Prussian War.

15 It is not clear when he became inspired by Fichte's works. Hiraizumi does not mention it in his autobiography. However, after his return from the West, he said that contemporary German intellectuals honoured Fichte by proposing the revival of the Seishin of Fichte and other important German historical figures. Hiraizumi described how certain German intellectuals studied Fichte, delivered lectures on him, and organized a festival dedicated to the Geist of Fichite on university campuses. However, the author's research drew a conclusion that the promotion of Fichte was not Hiraizumi's personal project. In fact, the Ministry of Education orchestrated the promotion of Fichte. The Ministry published the Japanese translation of Fichte's major work. Fichte jutsu, Doitsu kokumin ni tsugu (Jikyoku ni kansuru kyoiku shiry5 tokubetsugo dai san) (Tokyo: Monbusho, 1917.) The author found the material in the collection of the 4th High School in the central library of Kanazawa University in Kanazawa, Ishikawa prefecture, during his research trip to the region on July 2005. Also, the Iwanami shoten, a major publishing company in Japan, published the same work as part of the Iwanami bunko. Fichte, Doitsu kokumin ni tsugu, trans.by Otsu Yasuo (Iwanami bunko 265-267) (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1928.) This publication suggests the work was made affordable and available to a wider audience. Also, The Department of Education of the Ministry of the Imperial Navy (Kaigunsho Kyoiku kyoku) actively promoted Fichte and his spirit (Seishin) to strengthen "Japanese Spirit" ("Ninon seishin"). Hiraizumi played a key role in the campaign as an invited lecturer.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 116

The French authorities thought his speeches addressed issues of education, but they were much more than this. In reference to Fichte, Hiraizumi wrote:

The major points of this lecture remained as true and would immensely evoke an emotional response even if it was applied to the present conditions of Japan. Nonetheless, it worth paying a sincere attention to the fact that Germany, which had been totally defeated in the First World War, is undertaking the great venture by remembering the lectures of Fichte and taking his spirit as its own to save itself from the verge of its ruin.16

In his famous lecture, cited at length by Hiraizumi, Fichte clearly defined the relationship between individuals and the state, emphasizing the totality of the relationship between the two. The interests of the individual must be tied to the interests of the state.

At the time when Fichte gave his speech, the confidence of the German people had been shattered. He proposed that a romanticized version of history would elevate the

German spirit and help the process of national reconstruction. Historical romanticism produces love for the motherland: the collective feeling for the motherland is a solid emotional and spiritual base (from the individual's point of view) and a solid ideological base (from state's point of view) for the management of that state. Individual life exists as long as one's nation remains independent. Therefore each individual should be willing to fight to the death to ensure the independence of his or her nation and its national spirit. By so doing, these individuals defy death, entering the world of eternality.

This is evocative of Hiraizumi's notion of the relations of Japanese imperial subjects with the National Polity of Japan. According to Hiraizumi, as long as the physical existence

16 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. "Doitsu no rekishi kyoiku," in Bushido nofukkatsu. (Tokyo:Shibundo, 1933), 83. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Tw<> Intellectual Formation 117 of Japan was maintained, the National Polity of Japan also existed. As long as the National

Polity of Japan was secure, one's spirit would externally live in it. In this context, Hiraizumi constructed a justification for death on the battlefield, using a similar development of logic,

Kokka goji no seishin (The Spirit of Defending the State). Following the same patterns of logic as Fichte, Hiraizumi saw history education as a means of strengthening national unity in terms of the relations between individuals and the state. Just as Fichte was aware that a world based on abstraction differs from what actually happens in the world, so too

Hiraizumi was likely equally conscious of what he was intellectually doing in history education (rekishi kyoiku). He was probably aware of the gap between the image of the world he rhetorically presented and his analysis of the Nation's History of Japan and the world around Japan. His decision to frequently cite Fichte reasonably suggests that he consciously used history to unite individuals and the state by inviting those individuals and the state to "history."

Hiraizumi was keenly interested in the preservation of the cultural particularities of

European nations. To this end, he met Heinrich Rickert (1863-1936), at the University of

Heidelberg. A leader in the Southwest School, Rickert advocated subjective conceptualism

(Shukan teki kannen ron), and had published Kulturwissenschaft und Naturwissenschaft

(1898).17 When Hiraizumi visited him, Rickert said it must be enjoyable for him in

Germany as many Japanese students were studying there. Germany had not recovered economically from the devastation it suffered in World War I, and everything was affordable to Japanese students whose country had profited from its supply of war materials to Europe. Hiraizumi commented that there were many people from Japan, but

17 The first Japanese translation of the book was published by Iwanami Shoten in 1939. See Rikeruto, Bunka kagaku to shizen kagaku, trans. Satake Tetsuo and Toyokawa Noboru (1923-1924) (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1939). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 118 they were not "true Japanese." Rather, he said, "They were just licking the sugar of the

Western culture." Hiraizumi was also critical of Japanese students who worshipped the

West and Western scholarship. He went on to explain to Rickert what he meant by "the

Japanese." In a letter to a friend in Fukui, Hiraizumi said he was excited about

1 8 "introducing 'Japanese Spirit' (Nihon seishin) to his German colleagues."

In their discussion, Rickert used the metaphor of archery to describe "the characters of the Orient and the Japanese" (Toyo to Nihon no tokusei). When archers fail to hit the mark, he said, they may assume their posture is incorrect, or that they are not calm enough.

In other words, they self-reflectively seek a cause of failure in themselves. This, to Rickert, characterized "the morality of the Orient." The German philosopher also told Hiraizumi that he loved Japanese paintings and admired the spirit enlivened in them. However, in recent years, he said, Japanese painters used Western methods. He was not sure whether the same spirit would live in the paintings. If not, Japanese paintings might cease to exist, and that would be unfortunate.19 Meeting with Rickert helped Hiraizumi confirm his brief in the significance of preserving the cultural particularities of a nation rather than emphasizing the commonalities among nations. This confirmation further assured him of the necessity of promoting the method of history by which to clarify the Seishin of Japan.

A personal objective of Hiraizumi's trip to the West was to meet the intellectuals who had influenced his concept of history. One of these was Professor Friedrich Meinecke

(1862-1954) of the University of Berlin. Hiraizumi visited him in his private residence outside the city on the morning of September 18, 1930.20 Meinecke was a student of 18 "Hiraizumi bungaku hakushi no shosoku," in Fukui hydron, 7.3 (Fukui: Fukui hyoronsha, March 1931.) 19 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon Seishin (Shiso mondai shiryo, vol.10; Tokyo: Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku, 1933). P.25-6. 20 See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokushika to shite obei wo miru," Yushu 220/21 (Tokyo: Yiishukai, Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 119

Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886) and learned orthodoxy from him, thus remaining

"uncontaminated by Marxism." Hiraizumi had read Welturgertum und Nationalsaat:

Studien zur Genesis des deutschen National staates (J: Sekai shugi to kokumin kokka)

(1908) and Die Idee der Staatstrason (J: Kokka risei no rinen) (1924), and he brought these books with him instead of a letter of self-introduction. Hiraizumi was inspired by

Meinecke's sense of commitment to state affairs and by his views of history. Meinecke believed his historical research and writing must serve his nation; he stood for the idea that

"historical value judgment was nothing else but to clarify the true state rational (Kokka risei) of a given nation."21 Similarly, Hiraizumi pursued the study of the Nation's History of Japan solely to clarify the National Polity (Kokutai), "the true rational state" of Japan.

Hiraizumi's meeting with Meinecke lasted more than two hours. Meinecke made a deep and lasting impression on him, and he later called Meinecke Sensei in his writings.

The Preservation of Culture: Hungarians and Jews

Hiraizumi left Germany on October 1 1930. He traveled southward, visiting

Czechoslovakia, Austria, Hungary, and Yugoslavia. While traveling in Central Europe,

Hiraizumi carefully observed how people preserved their culture, language, and religion.

He was particularly impressed by the Jews and the Hungarians.

March and April 1932); Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Wareto no ikyo," in Banbutsu ruten (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1936); Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higeki jiiso (Ise: K5gakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980); Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kono michi woyuku: Kanrinshi kaikoroku (Tokyo: Sozosha, 1995). 21 The Political Scientist Uemura Kazuhide has already worked on the intellectual influences of Meinecke on Hiraizumi. See, Uemura Kazuhide, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi to Furi-dorihi Mainetsuke (1)", in Sandai hogaku 33.3&4 (Kyoto: Kyoto sangyo daigaku, February 2000.), 34.1&2 (July 2000), 34.4 (February 2001), 35.3&4 (February 2002). Also, see, Uemura Kazuhide, Maruyama Masao to Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Showaki Nihon no seiji shugi (Tokyo: Kawashi shobo, 2004.) At the beginning of the book, Uemura demonstrates that Meinecke's work inspired both Muruyama Masao one of the most influential and liberal political scientist and professor at University of Tokyo in postwar period, and Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. The work is the first scholarly book on Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, who had passed away in 1984.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 120

Hiraizumi arrived in Prague, the capital of Czechoslovakia, when a Jewish religious ceremony was about to start. He recalled that people were dressed up, walking towards the old Jewish temple that traced its origins back a thousand years. Hiraizumi was not allowed to enter the building, but he returned the next day to look inside. He was aware that this thousand-year-old building had lasted because of the ongoing religious faith of Jews.

The Jewish commitment to their religion impressed him. As a devout Shinto believer,

Hiraizumi might even have envied them, because many Japanese considered Shinto obsolete. For Hiraizumi, religion was a guardian of culture, and the Jewish example supported his personal view: Judaism preserved Jewish culture. Hiraizumi probably wished

Shinto would play a similar role in Japan. He was also aware of the Jews' commitment to their language. While visiting London and New York later, he saw that Hebrew newspapers were widely circulated. In short, the Jews he observed inspired him to renew his commitment to the revitalization of Shinto and the preservation of the Japanese language.

Hiraizumi was also sympathetic towards "the tragic history of the Jews" who had lacked a homeland for a thousand years. However, Hiraizumi said this was why they were suspicious of the state and failed to show their loyalty to the state in which they lived. He was quite dogmatic on this point because, like many others, he held the view that the formation of Marxism was deeply entrenched within the historical experience of the Jews.

Hiraizumi later asked his fellow Japanese to draw the line between their sympathy towards the Jews and their rejection of Marxism as a guiding philosophy, identifying Marxism as

"the Way of the Jews" (Yudayajin no michi).23

The Hungarian people impressed Hiraizumi in terms of preserving their culture and

22 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Minzoku no tokuisei to rekishi no kokyusei," Shintogaku zasshi, 12. (Tokyo: Shinto gakkai, July 1932.) P. 71-5. 23 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 121 language. He saw that the Hungarians, whose ancestors migrated from Central Asia many centuries ago, had maintained their customs and tradition. For instance, they still placed their family names before their given names. This was quite different from the Japanese, who were willing to westernize their names. In a 1932 lecture he said: The Hungarian preserves the Oriental modes. They placed their family name before their surname. How about us? We have to be careful that many contemporary Japanese adopt the custom of placing the surname before the family name when they use the western style business card.24

In this instance, Hiraizumi admitted he was no exception.25 Hiraizumi's positive view of the Hungarians might have been enhanced by meeting a history professor, Csaszar Elemer, who shared his spiritual view of history. Professor Csaszar invited Hiraizumi to the excavation of the ancient Roman remains just outside Budapest.26 Hiraizumi saw that while the area was once under the influence of the Roman Empire, the Hungarians had kept their culture and language.

What did Hiraizumi learn from the Jewish cultural and religious traditionalism and the Hungarian cultural conservatism? Essentially, he concluded that the Japanese must follow their own traditions, not the traditions of others, in the same way as Hungarians and

Jews were absolutely committed to the preservation of their traditions. In short, he discovered the universality of traditionalism and conservatism, and restorationism. He was encouraged to face the problems at home and was committed to solving them through

Japanese "tradition" as this "tradition" was preserved in Shinto.27 This realization helped

24 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Minzoku no tokuisei to rekishi no kokyusei," Shintogaku zasshi, 12. (Tokyo: Shinto gakkai, July 1932). P.75. 25 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Obei wo megurite sokoku wo omou," in Aichi kyoiku (Nagoya: Aichiken kyoikukai, November 1931). P. 10. 26 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, HigekiJuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980), p. 423. 27 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Minzoku no tokuisei to rekishi no kokyusei (Shozen)," Shintogaku zasshi,

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 122

Hiraizumi resolve to reinvigorate Meiji state Shinto as the backbone of the Japanese state in the Showa period.

In Greece and Italy

Hiraizumi arrived in Athens, Greece, on October 14, 1930, and stayed there for about ten days, visiting historic sites such as Olympia. These ancient Greek ruins reminded

Hiraizumi that "culture" and "the state" do not last forever - they rise and decline.

Hiraizumi was further encouraged by this historical inevitability when he went to Rome a month later.28 He became convinced that the study of history must focus on something that eternally runs through history, as opposed to culture and the state that rise and decline in the course of history. His visits to these historic sites in Greece confirmed the legitimacy of the direction of his scholarship, as outlined in "The Various Stages of the Development of

Japanese Spirit" in Shigaku zasshi. In other words, Rankian positivism and cultural history were to be pursued to strengthen spiritual history.

Hiraizumi took a ship from Greece to the port of Brindisi on the east coast of the

Italian peninsula on October 27, 1930. He went directly to Naples,29 where he visited

Benedetto Croce (1866-1952), the philosopher and historian, on the morning of October

29. Croce was another intellectual whose scholarship had significantly influenced

Hiraizumi's concept of the Nation's History before his visit to the West. Croce welcomed

13. (Tokyo: Shinto gakkai, December 1932.) P.51-2. 28 Based on his experiences in these cities of ancient Western civilization, Hiraizumi wrote "Haikyo" (Abandoned historic remains), which appeared in Banbutsu ruten (1936). See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Haikyo," in Banbutsu Ruten (Tokyo: Teibundo, 1936). 29 After meeting Croce in Naples, Hiraizumi visited Rome, Venice, and Florence. In Rome, he visited the remains of ancient Rome. Hiraizumi later recalled that Florence was the most impressive place he visited during his entire stay in Europe. 30 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Napori no tetsujin Geirin 43 (June 1953). Rpt. in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin shihitsu and Hiraizumi shironshd.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 123

Hiraizumi with open arms. They had a series of discussions in German during the three-day visit, and Croce gave Hiraizumi copies of the nine books he had written.

Hiraizumi was inspired by Croce's idea of a fusion of philosophy and history. More importantly, he was exposed to Croce's criticism of Marxism. For this, Hiraizumi considered Croce his mentor (Onshi).

Hani Goro (1901-1983), who was highly critical of "the Marrow Bone of the Study of the Nation's History" ("Kokushigaku no kotsuzui"), was on his way to becoming a leading historian of the Koza faction (Koza-ha) of the Marxist school. He translated

Croce's work into Japanese; it appeared as Rekishi jojitsu no ronri oyobi rekishi in 1926.

Hiraizumi wrote a friendly and encouraging review, "Croce rekishi jujitsu no riron oyobi rekishi hoyaku wo ete," in Shigaku zasshi (1926). A Japanese historian has pointed out that from Croce's scholarship Hani and Hiraizumi learned that "history is about the present."

Hani and Hiraizumi strove to determine how they could contribute to the present as

"materialist" (Yuibutsu) and "spiritual" historians, respectively. While they both learned from Croce's work, they interpreted his ideas differently. Both were searching for a philosophy to replace positivism's "the lack of philosophy" ("Mushisosei"), but they gravitated to opposite ends in philosophy and method of history.31

In France

Hiraizumi arrived in France on November 24, 1930. For the most part, he stayed in Paris,

31 Osumi Kazuo was the first to indicate Croce's influence on Hiraizumi's view of history. As early as 1959 and 1960, he made this point in "Nihon no rekishigaku ni okeru 'Gaku',"in Kokushi kenkyii shitsu Showa 34.2 Showa 35.2 (Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku bungakubu kokushika, 1959 and 1960.) The article is also found in Osumi Kazuo, Chusei shisdshi e no koso: Rekishi, bungaku, shukyo. (Tokyo: Meicho kankokai, 1984.) Saito Takashi, "Ijo na fukei: Hiraizumi Kiyoshi," in Saito Takashi, Showa shigakushi noto: Rekishigaku no hasso (Tokyo: Shogakukan, 1984.) P.96-8.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 124 where he researched at the Bibliotheque Nationale, reading literary works by French novelists highly critical of the French Revolution. He was inspired by their views of history and revolution, the relationship between the lord and the people in the pre-revolutionary period, and the present restoration of the King. While in France,

Hiraizumi began to interpret the history of other nations from the standpoint of the

Nation's History of Japan. He conducted a critical study of the French Revolution, using

Taigi Meibun (ethical and moral principles) upon which his interpretation of the history of

Japan was based. In other words, Hiraizumi applied Japanese ethical and moral standards to his understanding of the history of the French Revolution and French traditionalism

(Furansu dento shugi) in present-day France.

Hiraizumi was keenly interested in the critical study of the moral foundation of the

French Revolution. He challenged the idealized image of the revolution found in French scholarship (and elsewhere). He questioned whether the French Revolution was really initiated with a view to realizing the ideals of "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity." In fact,

Hiraizumi was deeply suspicious of the historical validity of these "idealistic" concepts, the moral and ideological foundation of the world's first modern revolution. In the course of his research, Hiraizumi traveled to Lyon and Strasbourg to copy original documents at archives and libraries. He purchased relevant historical material at antiquarian book stores when he found them. He concluded that liberty {liberite) was the only concept that had been expressed by the revolutionaries by 1789. This concept was followed by equality {egalite) in 1792. Finally, fraternity (fratenite) was added to the previous two as late as 1848.

Hiraizumi wrote that "if the set of these ideas was accompanied by the revolutionary movement from its start, the revolution could not have been as brutal and bloody as it actually was."

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 125

Hiraizumi showed his research results to eminent French historians in Paris in

February 1931. Charles Seignobos (1854-1942) and Sagnac disagreed with Hiraizumi, but

Mathiez supported his view.32 Although he did not meet with universal support, Hiraizumi was pleased with his findings.33 He commented that this was his major achievement during his visit to Europe. As a proponent of the ethical and moral interpretation of medieval history of Japan, the fact that he had undermined the moral foundation of the French

Revolution had tremendous significance for him, and he continued to deliver lectures based upon his findings in following years. This became the basis for his view that the expansion of a Japanese history which preserved the morality of Japan would be the best instrument for countering any revolutionary ideologies which originated from an event whose foundation was not moral.

Hiraizumi was interested in finding out how French society had suffered from the revolution. What happened to the spirit of the nation and its people during and after the revolution? Here, he sought answers outside the field of history. There was no room for such questions in historical scholarship in modern France. Nor could he find French historians who shared the same research angle. Instead, he turned to French literature.

"French traditionalism" (Furansu dento shugi) had a significant impact on the formation of

Hiraizumi's view of "history" in relation to "revolution." In this regard, he was inspired by the novelist Paul Bourget, who was highly critical of the effects of the revolution on the

French society and showed his longing for traditionalism in his novels. Hiraizumi held that

32 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kakumei to dento (Tokyo: Jiji tsushinsha, 1964), pp. 3-4. 33 His findings undermined the historical significance of the French Revolution as a moral and ideological source for the chain of the revolutions that followed. Pro-revolutionaries later projected their ideals onto the revolution through the process of repeatedly reinterpreting and redefining the event, seeking to meet expectations of what their own society wanted from it mythologically, ideologically, and politically.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 126

"history" and "revolution" cannot coexist because when "revolution" takes place, the "spirit of nation" dies. He was inspired by Bourget's view of "the spirit of nation" and

"revolution:" Revolution dried up the fountainhead of vitality of France. Moreover, revolution defeated feudalism and centralized the state system. Second, revolution cut off all the continuities between the past and the present.34

Hiraizumi wanted to meet Bourget, but he was on vacation in Nice. However, Bourget sent

Hiraizumi a list of French traditionalist writers: this became the roadmap for Hiraizumi's reading on the anti-revolutionalism in modern France.

Hiraizumi read the works of the French traditionalists suggested by Bourget, such as

De Bonald (1754-1840), de Balzac (1799-1850), Le Play (1806-1882), Taine (1828-1893), and, of course, Bourget himself.35 In their work, he saw echoes of his attempts to revive the spirit of Japanese scholars who contributed to the clarification of the National Polity of

Japan. The spiritualist historian Hiraizumi saw an image of Japanese spiritual history in the efforts of the French traditionalists, who carried on the spirit of France through their novels.

Hiraizumi also paid attention to French feudalism (Hoken shugi) and the family structure

(Kazoku seido) described by these French writers. He interpreted the values, such as loyalty, on which lord-subject relations were based, in light of the late Mito school's theory of

Taigi Meibun,. In this structure, a lord compassionately acts for his subjects while his subjects remain loyal to their lord. Hiraizumi saw Japanese feudal society reflected in the way the French traditionalists portrayed pre-revolutionary French society.

In his letter to Hiraizumi, along with the suggested readings, Bourget told Hiraizumi

34 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Ishin no genri," in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Bushido no fukkatsu, (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1933.) p. 358. 35 See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Dento (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1940).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 127 about a French youth movement calling for the restoration of the King. To Hiraizumi, this movement was evocative of key historical events in Japan, such as the Kenmu Restoration

(1334) or the Meiji Restoration (late 19th century), in which the ancient imperial system was

"restored." At such times, patriotic scholars strove to revive the spirit of great books such as

Nihon shoki (720), Jinno Shotoki (1339-1343), and Dai Nihon shi (1657-1906), and young men acted according to that spirit. Hiraizumi saw that the French royalists were doing something similar to the Japanese. The restoration movement in France led Hiraizumi to conclude that the Japanese religious/historical concept of restoring the ancient (Fukko shugi) and his historical concept of revival (Fukkatsu) were universal and timely.

After his return to Japan in July 1931, Hiraizumi presented his criticism of the three principles (liberte,fraternite, egalite) and praised French traditionalism. He was convinced that the Japanese should know more about the spirit of French traditionalism if they were to defend the spirit of Japan from revolutionary ideologies, including Marxism. For this reason, the French Revolution and "French traditionalism" became an integral part of his lectures on the Nation's History of Japan at Tokyo Imperial University. Some students, such as

Ienaga Saburo (1913-2002), recalled that they could not comprehend why Hiraizumi was teaching about the French Revolution in the course on the Nation's History of Japan.36

Moreover, he mainly discussed the works of French novelists, not historians. But in

Hiraizumi's view, French literature and the Nation's History were perfectly linked by their shared interest in defending the spirit of their nations from revolution, which would break the continuity of the spirit of the nation.

Ienaga Saburo, Rekishigakusha no ayumi : Kyokasho saiban ni itarumade (Tokyo: Sanseido, 1967). P.77-8. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 128

In Great Britain

Hiraizumi left Paris for London on April 7, 1931. He spent the first month researching

Edmund Burke (1729-1797) and the Florentine Catholic monk Girolamo Savonarola

(1452-1498) in the Library of the British Museum. Then he left London to see other parts of

England. For example, he accompanied Professor Ichikawa to visit the poet Edmund

Blunden. He met Professor Fisher, a former British Minister of Education and the Principal of New College at the University of Oxford, and he met the historian George Macaulay

Trevelyan (1876-1962), Principal of Trinity College at Cambridge University. Interestingly enough, Hiraizumi did not write about what he discussed with those two eminent British historians.37 He traveled to York, Durham, Edinburgh, Grasmere, and Stratford, returning to London on May 22, 1931.

Hiraizumi had already visited Florence where Savonarola had lived in the 15th century. But the British Museum had an excellent book collection on Savonarola in Italian,

English, and German, and so Hiraizumi had an ideal opportunity to do research while he was in London. Hiraizumi pointed out that serious academic research on Savonarola had begun in Germany. Hiraizumi began to lecture on this topic to his class on the Nation's

History after his return to Japan in 1931, and he published "Savonarola and Nichiren" in

Rissho bunka (1932).38 Hiraizumi encouraged his readers and his students to pursue this topic. But his advice seemed to fall on deaf ears.

While he was in Britain, Hiraizumi studied revolutionary movements and their

37 Hiraizumi told Tokutomi Soho about these meetings with British historians in a letter to him in the postwar period. Tokutomi responded that he would have met the same historians if he had a chance. The letter is the property of the Tokutomi Soho Memorial Museum in Kanagawa prefecture. (Indicate the date.) 38 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Savonarola and Nichiren," Rissho Bunka (July 1932). Rpt. in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Bushido nofukkatsu (Tokyo: Teibundo, 1933).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 129 failure in Britain, reading the works of such revolutionaries as Thomas Paine. However,

Hiraizumi pursued the subject only to explain the defeat of intellectual and political revolutionary movements by the conscious effort of British conservatives. He was particularly interested in the decisive impact of Edmund Burke (1729-97) on the course of

British history.

After his return to Japan, he published a series of three articles on "The

Counter-Revolutionalism of the British Nation" (Eikokumin no hankakumei seishin) in

Rekishi chiri {Journal of History and Geography) in February, March, and April, 1932.39

Hiraizumi said that Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790) had decisively influenced British public opinion with respect to how Britain should deal with the ideological influences of the French Revolution. Burke's guiding of public opinion was so effective that it eventually led Prime Minister William Pitt to stand firmly against France.

Hiraizumi projected his concept of "history" onto Burke's role in changing the course of the

British history. In Hiraizumi's mind, the historical example of Burke could be superimposed over certain Japanese counterparts, such as the scholars of the Kimon school or the late Mito school, who had set the direction of the Nation's History of Japan at critical junctures, such as the Meiji Restoration.

Furthermore, the lasting influence of Burke's writing impressed Hiraizumi. He noted that Reflections on the Revolution in France had been reprinted many times, educating young Britons for generations. He concluded that the living influence of his work was Burke's most significant contribution to his nation.40 In short, Hiraizumi was

39 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Eikokumin no hankakumei seishin." Rekishi Chiri 59.2,3,4. (Tokyo: Rekishi chiri gakkai, February, March, April, 1932.) 40 Of Burke, Hiraizumi said: "His writing not only influenced the public opinion of the time but also it [Reflections on the Revolution in France'] is still considered a great piece of writing more than one hundred years after it was written. Its philosophy guided young Britons for many

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 130 encouraged by Burke's historical role and his influence on the course of British history.41

He was inspired by the fact that Burke and his book successfully prevented Britain from falling into the path of revolution. This probably strengthened his faith in the role that

Kitabatake Chikafusa (1293-1354) and his book Jinno shotoki had played as the foundation for the southern court view of history and, thus, in setting the direction of the Nation's

History. The British and Japanese examples reminded Hiraizumi that a great man and a

"spirited" book could defend a nation and its spirit. He was inspired to play a similar role in history.

Departure from Europe: Hiraizumi in the United States

During his stay in Europe, Hiraizumi was closely observing developments in world affairs.

He felt a sense of impending crisis. Although he had planned to stay in the West for two years, he decided to return home immediately. He needed a legitimate reason to shorten his length of time abroad, however, and he claimed he was ill.42 His request to return was granted, and he left Britain for the United States on May 25, 1931, a half-year earlier than originally planned. He arrived in New York on June 2. He subsequently visited Washington

DC, New Haven, Chicago, the Grand Canyon, and Los Angeles. Hiraizumi expressed little interest in the United States. The nation was formed from its successful revolution against

generations and prevented them from being moved by the newly imported revolutionary ideology. You must recognize it was a great contribution he had made." 41 These historical examples supported Hiraizumi's conviction of the role played by great men in history and the impact of great books. 42 Hiraizumi told this episode to the team of four historians led by Professor Ito Takashi of University of Tokyo when they visited Hakusan shrine. Hiraizumi told them to be cautious when they read university records.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 131

Britain; thus, it had no true "history" in his definition. The house in which he lived at

Hakusan Shrine in Fukui prefecture was older than the United States!43

Hiraizumi visited Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, conducting research on Professor Whitney, a graduate of the university. Professor Whitney had been one of many foreign scholars hired by the Meiji government to assist in its grand project of reforming Japanese higher education. When Mori Arinori (1849-1889) proposed the abolition of the Japanese language and the adoption of English, Whitney insisted that the

Japanese must preserve their own language.44 After observing that the Hungarians and the

Jews had preserved their own languages, Hiraizumi was aware that language preservation was fundamental to the survival of a people and a nation. This was the only scholarly activity Hiraizumi took up in the United States. He was more interested in recent developments taking place both inside and outside Japan.

Hiraizumi left San Francisco for Yokohama on June 25, 1931. On his way to Japan, he stopped at Hawaii45 and arrived at Yokohama on July 9. His trip to the West was over.

Although he had cut his journey short, the year and a half spent in the West accomplished a number of things. First, he confirmed his sense that spiritual history was the means of counteracting the scientific method of history. Second, he reinforced his notion that nations

After Japan's defeat in August 1945, some American soldiers visited Hakusan Shrine for an inspection because Hiraizumi was considered a prospect to be purged as a wartime writer. Hiraizumi explained the history of Japan and the history of the shrine to them. After their discussions, he got to know them better. As a result, he said, he was not escorted to Sugamo prison, where select wartime Japanese leaders were kept as war criminals during the trial. This episode is mentioned in some of Hiraizumi's writings in the postwar period. 44 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Obei wo migurite sokoku wo omou," Aichi kyoiku (Nagoya, Aichi ken kyoiku kai, November 1931). P. 15. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon Seishin {Shiso mondai shiryo, vol.10; Tokyo: Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku, 1933). P.25-6. Also, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon seishin." (Shiso kenkyu shiryo) vol. 101-110 (Kaigun daigakko, 1933-4). P.25-6. 45 Hiraizumi predicted Japan would crush the United States in this area in the near future. See, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kono michi wo yuku: Kanrinshi kaikoroku, (Not for sell) (Tokyo: Sozosha, 1995).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Two: Intellectual Formation 132 had certain cultural particularities that they should work to maintain. In the case of Japan, he concluded, Shinto was the Japanese way of life. Third, he knew that the southern court view of history and Shinto were up to date and universal. Fourth and finally, the trip to the

West strengthened his belief in the value of spiritual history. For Hiraizumi, a "Japanese" method of history was indispensable for "the eternal development of Japanese Spirit." This

"spirit" must be defended from any attempts at "revolution," internally as well as externally.

The southern court view of history became increasingly significant in his defense and dissemination of "spirit" in following years.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 133

CHAPTER FIVE

The Revitalization of "Spiritual" History: The 1930s

Upon his return from the West in July 1931, Hiraizumi was "determined to rescue the

Imperial Nation by the spread of Seishin" (G: Geist, EiSpirit).1 To achieve this, he strove to reinvigorate "spiritual" history and Shinto throughout the 1930s. It was a personal determination based upon his faith in Shinto and his commitment to the imperial nation.

But more importantly from a historical point of view, he also acted at the request of state authorities, including the Ministry of Education, the Imperial Navy (The Kantai-faction), the Imperial Army (both the Kodo and Tosei factions), the Ministry of Internal Affairs

(Police and Thought Police [Tokubetsu koto keisatsu]), and various prefectural (provincial) governments. The time was right for someone like Hiraizumi: state authorities felt that the country was in crisis and had launched a campaign called "National Awakening at the Time of Emergency" (Hijoji ni okeru kokuminteki jikaku). Hiraizumi's efforts dovetailed with such institutional efforts, and the formation of the war structure (Senji taisei) was certainly linked to the definition of Seishin promoted by Hiraizumi.2

This chapter examines the period from 1931 to 1940, addressing three major issues.

It first looks at Seishin. What did Hiraizumi mean by Seishin1? Next, the chapter explores how he explained Seishin to a number of key organizations, both formal state institutions

1 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Seishin naki mono wa horobiru," Nihon (1931). 2 The process was nearly complete by 1936 and, whether directly or indirectly, laid the foundation for the National Spiritual Mobilization Movement (Kokumin seishin sodoin undo) that officially began on October 12, 1937. The Japanese were mentally and "spiritually" prepared for war. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 134 and more informal groups; it considers how these organizations used Seishin to achieve their various objectives. Finally, the chapter examines the results and consequences of

Hiraizumi's efforts to disseminate Seishin during the period. To what extent did Hiraizumi accomplish his objective of unifying individuals and the state?

Hiraizumi's Concept of Seishin

Hiraizumi was determined to spread Seishin, but what exactly did he mean by Seishin? An important characteristic of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi as a scholar was that he always had a clear understanding of what he meant by the terms he used. As a Japanese scholar put it,

"Hiraizumi clearly defined each term he used as if he were a student in the faculty of law"

(Hogakubu teki).3 Although "spiritual" history derived from the tradition of Shinto and its views of Seishin and history, as explained in Chapter Three, Hiraizumi was also inspired by the role Fichte played in Berlin during the 18th century, and he learned a great deal about the German version of spiritual history while he was in Germany, meeting with such

German counterparts as Professor Schramm of the University of Gottingen. Partly because of his experiences in Germany, Hiraizumi came to believe that spiritual history (including the southern court view of history) was not parochial, outdated, or obsolete. Rather, it was universal, current, and applicable.

Some postwar Japanese historians consider Hiraizumi Kiyoshi to have been part of the fascist movement taking place in Japan during the 1930s. Even some state authorities, such as the Military Police of the Imperial Army (Kempei Shireibu), identified Shukokai, a

3 Uemura Kazuhide, Maruyama Masao to Hiraizumi Kiyoshi to Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Showa ki Nihon no seiji shugi (Tokyo: Kashiwa shobo, 2004), P.4. 4 The English word "spirit" may come close, but it does not fully convey the meaning of Seishin. The German word Geist would be more appropriate. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 135 patriotic student organization at Tokyo Imperial University (Hiraizumi was the president in

1931) as part of this movement. But how did Hiraizumi perceive his activities in the spread of Seishinl During the 1930s, Hiraizumi played an active role in government campaigns striving to accomplish the country's "historical" and "moral" ideal, namely, "the restoration of rule of a state by the immediate direction of the emperor" (Tenno Goshinsei), following the historical example of the Kenmu Restoration of 1334. By so doing, he strove to accomplish the Showa Restoration (Showa ishin), similar to "the great accomplishment of the Meiji Restoration" (Meiji ishin no taigyo).5

Hiraizumi promoted the ideas of returning, revival (Fukkatsu), and restoration

(Chuko; Ishin). He unswervingly believed this was the original and sole form of the

National Polity (Kokutai) of Japan in name and practice. He believed an ideal form of governance existed between emperor and subjects when the Nation's History of Japan began, as the Japanese historical writing Nihon Shoki described in the eighth century. For this reason, he acted with the notion that returning to the beginning of the Nation's History of Japan would solve the "ideological problems" which Japan was facing at home and abroad during the late 1920s and 1930s.

In this way, his personal objective was not, at least in his mind, to promote the fascist movement. However, his efforts to unite the interests of individuals and the interests of the state as one and the same in the image of the medieval imperial restoration unquestionably amounted to an attempt to enhance the power of the Japanese state and definitely assisted in laying the basis for the "ethical and moral" consolidation of Japan's war structure in the next fifteen years.

5 Kido nikki kenkyukai, ed. Kido Koichi Nikki (jo). (Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku shuppan kai, 1966), P.218. Hiraizumi presented his political objectives for the Showa Restoration to Kido Koichi during one of their meetings. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 136

Hiraizumi promoted the Gi of the emperors and considered it a crucial feature of an ideal master (Kun). He particularly respected the emperors who tried to or did accomplish the restoration of this ancient Imperial system at some point in the course of the Nation's History. For example, he revered Emperor Jinmu, Emperor Gotoba

(1180-1239), Emperor Godaigo (1288-1339) and the two subsequent emperors, and

Emperor Meiji (1852-1912). From 1931 to 1936, Hiraizumi praised the Seishin of Emperor

Godaigo, who accomplished the Kenmu Restoration of 1334, and promoted Seishin. The

Emperor demonstrated his ethical character of Gi (being just) by taking up arms against the rule of the Hojo family (Bakufu) and defeating it. He restored the ancient imperial system after a long period of rule by the warrior class. Hiraizumi expected Emperor Hirohito to follow this historical example of Emperor Godaigo and to exercise strong leadership in the reform of Japanese society.6 In sum, Hiraizumi had a clear view of what form the country should take. He praised emperors who bravely demonstrated characteristics of Gi (being just). But what he really admired was the Seishin of the Imperial loyalists of the southern court.

The Way of the Subject (Shindo) was one of the most significant components of

Hiraizumi's understanding of Seishin in the early 1930s. To this end, he taught the ethical and moral principles which were required by "ideal" imperial subjects (Shinmin). Such subjects would serve their emperor, even at the cost of their own lives, if the country were challenged (Kokka goji). The ethical and moral principles of Chu and Gi are the core principles of the Way of Subjects (Shindo). These, in turn, are the guiding principles for

6 Arima Ryokitsu and Araki Sadao arranged Hiraizumi's lecture to Emperor Hirohito on December 24, 1932. 7 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokka goji no seishin," in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kokushigaku no kotsuzui (Tokyo: Shibundo, September 1932). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 137

"The View of Death and Life" (Shiseikan), which Hiraizumi and state authorities promoted during the 1930s and 1940s. To promote "The View of Death and Life," Hiraizumi advocated "The Way of the Japanese" (Nihonjin no michi) as opposed to "The Way of the

British," "The Way of the Chinese," or "The Way of the Jews" (Yudayajin no michi: he also called this Marxism). He realized, however, that the promotion of "The Way of the

Japanese" was not enough; therefore, he called upon "Bushido" and "The Revival of

Bushido" (Bushido no fukkatsu).9 Hiraizumi saw Kusunoki Masashige (-1336), the imperial loyalist of the southern court of the 14th century, as the embodiment of these principles and the ideal image of Bushi.10

These principles and "The View of Death and Life" were used to define the ideal

"Spirit of Family" (Ie no seishin) during the same period. Hiraizumi hoped that the establishment of a proper moral relationship and the concept of Bun (one's own status) among family members (Kazoku) would sustain the "morality" of the country. To this end, he promoted the concept of "Family State" (Kazoku Kokka) as a model for the moral consolidation of the state. He believed that as long as the moral relationship and the concept of Bun were secured among families who felt "moral indebtedness solely towards the Emperor" (Koon), the Nation's History would be secure. Thus, "The Morality of

Japan" (Nihon no dotoku) would be secure as well. There was no room for revolutionary ideas to disrupt the "history" and "morality" of Japan.

Such a "moral" consolidation of families and the country was indispensable for

8 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Yoshida Shorn sensei," (Kogu keisatsu sokki), Sanjo 24 (Tokyo: Kunaish5 sanjo kai, May 15, 1934), P.37. This is the property of the Shikiryobu of the Agency of the Imperial Household. The author expresses his appreciation for use of this material. 9 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Bushido no fukkatsu," Dai Ajia Shugi (Tokyo: Dai Ajia kyokai, September 1933.) 10 Rai Sanyo (1780-1832) invigorated the practice of worshipping the Seishin of Kusunoki Masashige (Nanko) in 22 volumes of Nihon gaishi (1827). Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 138 the defense of "history" from "revolution." Hiraizumi divided the world into nations that

experienced no "revolution" and uninterruptedly continued their "histories" and nations that experienced "revolution" and thus failed to continue "history," arguing that Japan was the only nation that belonged to the former category. Russia, China, the United States, and

France had all experienced "revolution" and, hence, had failed to preserve their "histories."

He saw the situation at home and abroad in the 1930s as a struggle between "history" and

"revolution" in this context.11 For this reason, Hiraizumi was determined to promote the

study of the Nation's History for historical scholarship as well as for national

indoctrination (Kokumin kyoka). He firmly believed that the study of "history" and

"morality" must be pursued with a particular attitude and Seishin.

This is the point at which Yamazaki Ansai and the Kimon School enter the picture.

Hiraizumi actively promoted True Scholarship (Shin no gakumon) in the pursuit of the

Way (Michi). In the process, he became convinced that the study of history must be

pursued with the Seishin of the Kimon (Kimon no seishin). The Kimon School (Kimon

gakuha) was started by Yamazaki Ansai, who combined Shinto and Neo-Confucianism to

found the Suika branch of Shinto. Through his writing, he clarified the moral principle of

Chu and supported the southern court view of history. More importantly, his scholarship

and his attitudes towards scholarship had a lasting impact on his students; they tried to

understand his Seishin and to carry it on without changing it. For example, they followed

the concept of Chigyo itchi (Unity of Knowledge and Action), immediately acting

according to the principles they learned from the scholarship.12 The concept is a key term

11 Hiraizumi saw the domestic situation in Japan from this point of view and came up with a way of solving its problems. He later applied this logic to the historical and moral basis for Japan's expansionist policy overseas. 12 Later, Tokugawa Mitsukuni invited some of Yamazaki's students to take charge of the compilation of Dai Nihon Shi. They played a significant role in the formation of the theory of Taigi Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 139 for Wang Yangming (1472-1529), the critically important heterodox Neo-Confucian whose name was invoked by numerous Meiji Restoration (of the nineteenth century and later) activists.

Hiraizumi was determined to continue the Seishin of the Kimon, pursuing historical scholarship in the same way as its students had done for centuries. He pointed out that some young men, such as Hashimoto Sanai, became conscious of their role in the defense and continuity of "history" (Shi wo tatsuru mono) by studying the scholarship of the

Kimon and sacrificing their lives for "the Great Accomplishment of Meiji Restoration"

(Meiji ishin no taigyo). He educated his students at Tokyo Imperial University in this

Seishin, and tried to reform "Red" school teachers and "left-wing" students at high schools and universities upon the request of the Ministry of Education.13 Through the Seishin of the Kimon, Hiraizumi believed he could promote "true scholarship" and demonstrate "the

Way," which all Japanese must follow to achieve national consolidation in the midst of ideological diversification.

As noted, Hiraizumi believed that the ideal form of the state existed at the beginning of the Nation's History, when the Emperor was directly involved in the governance of the country (Tenno shinsei). As an essentialist in Shinto and the study of history, Hiraizumi considered such a political condition the true form of the Japanese state and, thus, of the National Polity.14 He insisted that the reform of society and the nation must be conducted by following the example of "history" but never by going against it (i.e.,

Meibun and in the clarification of the National Polity (Kokutai) in early modern Japan. 13 Hiraizumi respected Yamazaki Ansai in the same way he respected Fichte. In fact, Hiraizumi considered Yamazaki the Japanese counterpart of Fichte. 14 While this political situation had not lasted very long (the warrior class came to power and formed Bakufu), there were two occasions when imperial loyalists had managed to restore this ancient imperial system: the Kenmu Restoration (Kenmu no chuko) and the Meiji Restoration (Meiji ishin). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 140 revolution). Hiraizumi held that many who contributed to "the Great Accomplishment of the Meiji Restoration" were inspired by the Kenmu Restoration and the Imperial loyalists of the southern court. He wanted to reform Japan by following the same "historical" example. He expected Emperor Hirohito (1926-1989) to follow the lead of Emperor

Godaigo. And he expected the young army and naval officers and university/high school students to learn from "history" and act accordingly. In essence, he wanted to restore the ancient imperial system, even taking part in a movement for the Showa Restoration

(Showa Ishin),15 advocated by intellectuals such as Okawa Shumei (1886-1957).16

The Dissemination of Seishin

Hiraizumi's view of Seishin was disseminated in a number of key organizations, and each used Seishin to achieve its objectives. Some Japanese historians argue that Hiraizumi acted alone. In reality, he worked within a system that had already launched a number of national campaigns by 1931. Moreover, as mentioned in the previous chapters, national leaders and loyal supporters (both individuals and institutions) promoted Hiraizumi to a position of leadership early in his career. They supported his efforts "to disseminate Seishin to rescue the nation." It is possible to identify each organization and each campaign. But the organizations often worked together for common purposes and in the same campaigns, creating a certain amount of overlap. In this way, the spread of Seishin assisted a significant number of general policy aims, for example, National Indoctrination (Kokumin

15 Kido Koichi nikki kenkyukai, ed. Kido Koichi nikki (Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku shuppan kai, 1966). 16 Hiraizumi sent his journal article "Kokushigaku no kotsuzui," to Okawa Shumei; they exchanged letters before, during, and after the war. Okawa respected Hiraizumi as his mentor in the Nation's History. See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Okawa Shumei Hakushi," in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Zokuzoku sanga ari (Tokyo: Tachibana shobo, 1958), P. 167. 17 Arima Ryokitsu, Kuroita Katsumi, Tokutomi Soho, and Matsudaira Yoshitami were noteworthy.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 141 kyoka), Intellectual Guidance (Shiso zendo), "Spiritual" Education (Seishin kyoiku), and

Intellectual Control (Shiso tosei). They promoted "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon Seishin), seeking to regulate any "revolutionary" activities that would undermine it and, more importantly, that would threaten "National Polity" (Kokutai). Hiraizumi became one of the eminent figures, if not the preeminent figure, in the dissemination of Seishin for these policy aims in the first half of the 1930s.

The Ministry of Education

The Ministry of Education nurtured the young historian Hiraizumi Kiyoshi from his student years in the 1920s and made him a leader in its campaign for the promotion of

"Japanese Spirit" (Nihon seishin) in the 1930s. Hiraizumi always worked loyally for the

Ministry and "the Imperial nation," fulfilling his duty as public servant whenever the

Ministry sent him nationwide to deliver "spiritual" lectures at institutions of higher

learning.18

The Ministry of Education had launched a campaign to promote Nihon Seishin

(Japanese Spirit) in 1928. The campaign targeted perceived intellectual problems in elite

high schools and universities. To deal with the issue, the Ministry set up a system of

special lectures (Tokubetsu kogi seido),19 overseen by the Division of Student Affairs. The

Hiraizumi had had contacts at the Ministry of Education even since he was a student at Tokyo Imperial University in the 1920s. He might have been involved in the editing of school textbooks on the Nation's History. Professor Mikami Sanji and Associate Professor Kuroita Katsumi in the Division of the Nation's History already considered Hiraizumi a promising student and nurtured him to become a scholar. The Division of the Nation's History was closely associated with the Ministry of Education; thus, the Ministry was probably aware of Hiraizumi's potential to become a leading historian. When the Ministry of Education asked Associate Professor Kuroita to translate Nihon shoki into modern colloquial Japanese, Kuroita insisted that if he would not accept unless Hiraizumi were assigned to translate Jinno shotoki in the same project. The Ministry assigned the task to Hiraizumi. He completed it on his way to Europe. 19 "Roku Tokubetsu kogi seido (1930-1934)," in Kakekawa Tomiko, ed., Gendaishi shiryo 42

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 142

Division, in turn, launched a project on Intellectual Guidance (Shiso zendo) to direct those

high school students and university students who were leaning towards "Western

individualism." The Division requested scholars, often authorities in their chosen fields, to

visit high schools and universities to deliver lectures to the students and teachers

influenced by "the Reds." Hiraizumi worked for this project in the 1930s.

May 1932 was a critical month in the intellectual development of the Showa period: the so-called "May 15 Incident" took place. In addition, the Japanese communist

party announced its "Thirty-Two-Year Theme" and openly called for the abolition of the

imperial system.20 State authorities were alarmed by these ideological and political

developments and redoubled their efforts to regulate the current intellectual trends which

criticized the existing social order. Under the circumstances, the significance of the role

Hiraizumi played increased dramatically.21 He embarked on a lecture tour upon the request

of the Ministry in early summer 1932. The Division sent him to the 4th High School in

Kanazawa City, Ishikawa prefecture (his alma mater), where he delivered a lecture

"Kokumin teki jikaku" (National Self-Awakening).22 Hiraizumi gave other high school

lectures throughout 1932: "Rekishi to kakumei" at 3rd High School; "Yamazaki Ansai

sensei" at 6 High School; "Yamazaki Ansai sensei" at Matsue High School; "Yamazaki

Ansai sensei" at Kochi High School; and "Yamazaki Ansai sensei" at Himeji High

School.23

Shiso tosei (Tokyo: Misuzu Shobo, 1976), p. 48. 20 Nihon kyosanto chuo iinkai shuppanbu, ed. Nihon kyosanto no yonjunen (Tokyo: Nihon kyosanto chuo iinkai shuppanbu, 1962.) 21 The Kanto Army invited Hiraizumi to Manchukuo in May 1933. He saw that the threat of communism was real in the region. His experience in Manchukuo reinforced Hiraizumi's fear of Marxist influences. 22 See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokumin teki jikaku," in Sonkenkai, ed., Inoue sensei kiju kinen ronbunshu (Tokyo: Fuzanbo, 1931). 23 Shiso kyokuyoko (Tokyo: Monbusho shiso kyoku, 1934). Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 143

When he spoke at Osaka High School, he discovered that the students embraced liberalism, socialism, and communism. Here, he spoke on "History and Revolution" on

May 30, 1932. Although the school made his lecture mandatory for all students, many stayed outside and ignored his lecture.24 Hiraizumi was not happy. Back in Tokyo, he wrote to Okawa Shumei (1886-1957) on June 5, 1932, saying that he had recently promoted Nihon Seishin (Japanese Spirit) at Osaka, Kochi, and Kyoto, and he deplored the

"corrupted minds" of the high school students he had met.25 In the same letter to Okawa,

Hiraizumi expressed his determination to spread the spirit of Kimon (Kimon no Seishin) at both Tokyo Imperial University and Kyoto Imperial University in the fall of 1932.26 He was convinced that he could solve the intellectual problems at institutions of higher

learning by spreading the spirit of the Kimon.

The Ministry of Education formed the Research Center for the Study of National

Spirit and Culture (Kokumin seishin bunka kenkyujo) on August 25, 1932, in response to a

series of "intellectual problems" (Shiso mondai) it perceived throughout the country.

Hiraizumi was on the list of founding members. He was invited to deliver lectures, some of

which he published, including "Kakumei ron" (The Theory of Revolution), delivered at the

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku, 1980). 25 However, Hiraizumi had a wonderful discussion with some students at Kyoto Imperial University25 and was encouraged by their sincere concern with the intellectual climate at one of the nation's leading universities. And his experience at Osaka High School was not all discouraging: he met some students who later became members of Seisei juku,25 the private academy he founded on April 7, 1933. See "103 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi 1 Showa nananen rokugatsu itsuka Hongo-ku Komagomecho juni yori," in Okawa Shumei kankei monjo, p. 762. 26 "103 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi 1 Showa nananen rokugatsu itsuka Hongo-ku Komagomecho juni yori," in Okawa Shumei kankei monjo, p. 762. The existence of some letters between the two patriotic intellectual leaders of the time would suggest there was a trustful relationship between Okawa and Hiraizumi by 1932. However, the study requires further research on the question of what impact this trusted relationship between Okawa and Hiraizumi had, if any, on the coup d'etat attempts of 1932 and subsequent years.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 144

Center on September 2 and September 5, 1933.27 The Ministry of Education also made arrangements for lectures at imperial universities. For instance, the Division of Students

(Gakuseibu) at Hokkaido Imperial University, which was directly linked to the Ministry of

Education, invited Hiraizumi to speak in February 1933,28 as part of its strategy to guide students in the "correct" intellectual direction. Hokkaido Imperial University was a new imperial university, known for its left-wing student movement; the administration was struggling to deal effectively with this movement.29

Hiraizumi delivered three lectures during the period of three days: "The Seishin of

Fichte," "Banbutsu Ruten," and "The Spirit of Shishi." Among other things, he mentioned that Japan was on its way to isolation in the international community. But he argued that the Japanese must return to being Japanese, and Japan must return to being Japan to cope with the current situation effectively. In the end, the Japanese must follow "the Way of the

Japanese" (Nihon jin no michi), which included the "view of Death and Life" (Shiseikan).

Hiraizumi also warned of the current trend to see university students taking part in student movements as men of spirit, emphasizing that reform must be conducted according to "the

spirit of history" (Rekishi no seishin), never by going against it. This was how men of

spirit contributed to the Meiji Restoration of the 19th century. Hiraizumi sincerely hoped the youth would follow the historical example of Shishi?0

The Takigawa Incident, which took place in the Faculty of Law at Kyoto Imperial

27 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kakumeiron (Shiso mondai shogo 6) (Tokyo: Monbusho, March 1934). 28 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon seishin (Sapporo: Hokkaido teikoku daigaku gakuseibu, April 1934). 29 When Hiraizumi was walking around the campus before his lecture, he saw men cutting off the branches of tress so that no one could take a position to harm the Emperor when he visited in the near future. 30 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Shishi no seishin," in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon seishin (Sapporo, Hokkaido teikoku daigaku gakuseibu, April 1934). It is noteworthy that Nihongaku kyokai, the prototype of Seiseijuku in postwar period, republished "Finite no seishin" and "Banbutsu ruten" in its journal Nihon. However, they did not republish "Shishi no seishin." Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 145

University in May 1933, marked the tightening of intellectual control by state authorities and the beginning of the decline of academic freedom even at imperial universities.

Hiraizumi commented on the incident during a lecture at Ueda History Study Group in

Ueda city, Nagano prefecture, in November 1933, He was critical of the fact that some people were trying to solve the incident by appealing to the international community and putting external pressure on Japan. Hiraizumi argued that such a problem must be solved among the Japanese themselves. There was no need to seek help from foreign nations, such as Russia.31 A number of young people seemed to be listening to Hiraizumi's concerns, as

Seiseijuku, his private academy, was rapidly attracting more students. As a result, he decided to open new branches, including Shohakujuku, in various parts of the nation.

With renewed determination, Hiraizumi embarked on efforts to fight the influence of Marxism among students, teachers, and university professors, at the request of the

Student Affairs of the Ministry of Education during the summer of 1933.33 He was invited to talk about "The National Spirit" at Dai 'ikkai shigaku shakai kyoiku shuji shisd mondai koshukai on June 28, 1933.34 In lectures he delivered in Ehime and Akita prefectures during that summer, Hiraizumi talked about Jewish attitudes towards their own culture, language, and religion. While he expressed his sympathy towards their tragic history, he rejected Marxism upon which he said "their historical experiences were based." For

Hiraizumi, it was odd to see some Japanese adopting Marxism, as in his view, it was "the

Way of the Jews" (Yudaya jin no michi). Rather, the Japanese must follow "the Way of the

31 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon Seishin ni tsuite (Ueda shi: Ueda shidankai, November 1933). 32 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanai no omoide (Tokyo: Kajima shuppansha, 1983), P.20. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Waga michi woyuku: Kanrinshi kaikoroku (Tokyo: Sozosha, 1995), P. 180. 33 Hiraizumi was also in charge of educating school inspectors, who were in the position to supervise schoolteachers throughout the nation. 34 Tanaka Takashi, Hiraizumi shigaku to kokoku shikan (Tanaka Takashi hyoronshu 2) (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 2000), P.277. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 146

Japanese" to become "true Japanese" (Shin no nihonjin).

In the fall of 1933, Hiraizumi was invited by the Committee on Education

(Kyoikukai) in Korea to give a lecture in Seoul. There was a Committee on Education in the government of each prefecture in Japan. The same organization existed in the Japanese colony of Korea, and Hiraizumi's invitation to speak there suggests that "the Way of the

Japanese" was expanding overseas. Hiraizumi talked about "The Theory of Kakumei"

(Kakumeiron) at the Research Center for the National Spirit and Culture (Kokumin seishin

bunka kenkyujo) on September 2 and 3, 1933. He discussed the Chinese origin of the

Japanese word "Kakumei" and the Western origin of the English word "revolution" and

concluded that they essentially meant the same thing. He went on to argue that

"revolution" and "history" cannot co-exist: when there is a revolution, history dies away.36

In a lecture at Ueda History Study Group in Nagano prefecture, Hiraizumi

described Bushido as a philosophy or ideology (shiso) which could counteract Marxism.

Marxism was "rampant" here and had been expressed in the communization of elementary

school teachers in Nagano prefecture in February 1933. Hiraizumi argued for the spread of

the ethical principle of Gi to counteract the influence of Ri.37 He also lectured on Bushido

to future schoolteachers at the Women Teachers' School in Kanagawa prefecture near

Tokyo in 1933 or 1934. His lecture, "The Divine Essence of the Seishin of Bushido," was

Hiraizumi' view on the Jewish people, their history, and their culture, during the summer of 1933, see, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Yoshida Shoin sensei," (Kogu keisatsu koen sokkiroku) Gojo 24 (Tokyo: Kunaisho gojokai, May 1934). The author expresses his appreciation to Shikiryobu of the Agency of the Imperial Household (Kunaicho) for use of the material; Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon seishin ni tsuite," Akita kyoiku (Nihon seishin kyochogo)(Akita: Akitaken kyoikukai, August 1933); Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon seishin," Ehime ken kyoikukai, ed., Ehime kyoiku (Matsuyama: Ehime ken cho nai Ehime ken kyoikukai, jimusho, August 1933). 36 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kakumeiron (Shiso mondai shogo 6) (Tokyo: Monbusho, March 1934). 37 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon seishin ni tsuite (Ueda shi: Ueda shidankai, November 1934), p.32-3. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 147 published in Kanagawaken kyoikujiho five times between February and April 1934.

The Ministry of Education was making a number of changes during the 1930s. For one thing, to win the hearts of the masses, it began to promote the popularization of

Japanese classics. The Division of Societal Education of the Ministry of Education published a modern colloquial Japanese translation of Jinno Shotoki as volume 10 of The

Series on Japanese Thought (Nihon shiso sosho) on March 25, 1934.39 For another thing, starting in 1934, the Ministry of Education undertook the centralization, expansion, and localization of its sub-institutions. As noted, Hiraizumi worked closely with the Division of

Student Affairs of the Ministry of Education (Monbusho gakusei kyoku) in the area of the intellectual guidance of students and school teachers. As part of its internal reform, the

Ministry upgraded the Division into the Department of Ideology (Shiso kyoku) and re-enforced its capacity to cope with intellectual issues at institutions of higher learning. As a result, its capacity was strengthened and its efforts to cope with intellectual problems were centralized.40

The new Department of Ideology continued to invite Hiraizumi to deliver lectures under the System of Special Lectures.41 It published Nihon Seishin ron no chosa (Research on Theories of Japanese Spirit) in November 1935. The book listed 54 scholars and intellectuals who supported Nihon Seishin, including Inoue Tetsujiro, Kuroita Katsumi, and

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. It defined the Seishin of Chu and Gi (Chugi no Seishin) and the

38 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Bushido Seishin no shinzui," Kanagawa ken kyoikujiho (1934): 3. 39 Monbusho shakai kyoikubu zaidan hojin shakai kyoiku kai, ed., Jinno Shotoki (Monbusho zoban) {Nihon Shiso sosho, vol. 10) (Tokyo: Dai Nihon kyoka tosho kabushiki gaisha, 1934). 40 The Ministry inaugurated Lecture Centers for the National Spiritual and Cultural Research (Kokumin Seishin Bunka K5shujo) in each prefecture on June 1, 1934, following the objectives set by the Research Center for the National Spirit and Culture (Kokumin seishin bunka kenkyujo) founded on August 25, 1932. Hiraizumi had a few speaking engagements through the Research Center. 41 Shiso kyoku yoko, (Tokyo: Monbusho shiso kyoku, 1934). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 148 character of respecting the Martial Arts (Shobu no kish5).42 The Department of Ideology also published Kokutai no Hongi (The Cardinal Principles of National Polity) on March 30,

1937.43 Determined to strengthen its ideological control after the Sino-Japanese conflict erupted, the Ministry of Education replaced the Department of Ideology with the

Department of Indoctrination (Kyogaku kyoku) on July 9, 1937.44 On November 18, 1935, the Ministry of Education founded the Council on Indoctrination Reform (Kyogaku

Sasshin HySgikai).45 As might be expected, Hiraizumi was on the list of founding members. The Ministry added a new course on Japanese Intellectual History, a new course on archeology, and lectures on Shinto at Tokyo Imperial University, to its curriculum and budget, presented to the 70th session of the Imperial Parliament on December 1936

(without consulting the school authorities of Tokyo Imperial University). The One Hundred

Years History of the University of Tokyo: The History of Faculty One (the Faculty of

Literature) points out that the addition of lectures on Japanese Intellectual History was part of a plan to integrate the university into the mobilization towards war.46

The Ministry of Education promoted the "Revival of Bushido" through school textbooks, not just in the field of the Nation's History, but in the Nation's Letters

(Kokubungaku) as well. Hiraizumi's "The Revival of Bushido" was included in some school textbooks in areas other than history: "Bushido and Nihon Seishin" was in Chugaku kokubun kyokasho ken nana, a textbook on Japanese for junior high schools in August

42 Monbusho Shiso kyoku, Nihon Seishin ron no chosa (Tokyo: Monbusho shiso kyoku, 1935), p. 190. 43 Monbusho, Kokutai no hongi, (Tokyo: Monbusho, March 1937). 44 Kyogaku kyoku yoko (Tokyo: Monbusho kySgaku kyoku, 1941). 45 See, Nihon bunka kyokai, Kyogaku sasshin hyogikai toshin oyobi kengi (Tokyo: Nihon bunka kyokai, February 1937.) 46 Tokyo Daigaku hyakunen shi hensan iinkai, ed. Tokyo daigaku hyakunen shi kyokubushi ichi (Bungakubu) (Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku shuppanbu, 1986), p. 434. 47 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon seishin to Bushido," in Yoshida Tsunehei, ed., Chugaku kokubun Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 149

1937; and "The Revival of Bushido" was included in Kokubun shinsen, a school textbook on the Nation's Letters for vocational schools in July 1937. Those examples suggest that the Ministry of Education wished to use literature to educate a wide range of students in the Nation's History, as part of prewar instruction in morals and ethics (Shushin kyoiku).

Hiraizumi returned to Fukui prefecture, where he was born, to deliver lectures during the 1930s. While he was closely involved in national affairs, he was keenly interested in the education of the youth in his home prefecture. The Education Committee of Fukui prefecture (Fukuiken kyoikukai) organized a youth camp for the cultivation of character (Tanrenkai) for five days at the Fukui women's high school from August 1-5,

1938. As a result of this event, a local organization, Fubokai, was formed at the initiative of

Kobayashi Kenjyuro, one of Hiraizumi's students who attended the event.49 Fubokai became a key organization to promote Hiraizumi's ideas in Fukui prefecture. Hiraizumi was invited to the Lecture Center for the National Spiritual and Cultural Research in Fukui prefecture in 1937 and delivered the lecture "Seigaku" on August 6.50

The Significance of Unofficial Channels

Hiraizumi worked within the system, but at the same time, he effectively used unofficial and private channels to disseminate Seishin. Here, he more freely and openly taught the ethical principle of Gi, the moral principle of Chu, and more essentially, "the concept of kyokasho kan nana (Tokyo: Kofukan shoten, August 1937). 48 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Bushido no fukkatsu," in Kakiuchi Matsuzo and Nishio Minoru, eds., Jitsugyo gakko: Kokubun shinsen (shinseiban Kan yon) (Tokyo: Chuto gakko kyokasho kabushiki gaisha, July 1937). 49 Kobayashi Kenjuro, "Henshugoki," in Kobayashi Kenjuro, ed., Bodairin wo aogite: Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei tsuitoroku (Fukui: Shikaseiban and Kobayashi Kenjuro, 1985), p. 154. 50 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Seigaku," in Fukuiken kokumin seishin bunka koshujo shogo san (Fukui: Fukuiken kokumin seishin bunka koshujo, 1939). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 150

death and life" (Shiseikan), the most fundamental part of "the Way of the Japanese"(Nihon jin no michi). These unofficial channels connected individuals of various organizations and

factions and mobilized them to the common goal. Without a close examination of their role,

we cannot appreciate how the dissemination of Seishin operated across the boundaries of

various organizations and factions.

A number of nationalistic (Kokusui shugi teki) organizations were formed before

and after the Manchurian Incident of September 1931. Shukokai, a patriotic student

organization, was formed on the campus of Tokyo Imperial University in November 1931.

It was a prototype of Nanaseisha, a prestigious student organization started by Professor

Uesugi Shinkichi to compete against Shinjinkai, a communist student organization at

Tokyo Imperial University.51 Soon after its foundation, Hiraizumi became president and

began to educate its members - students of the Division of the Nation's History at the

beginning, and later, students in various faculties of the university. As he educated

Shukokai members, he was inspired by the historical example of Sonkasonjuku, a private

academy of Yoshida Shoin (1830-59), a well-known Shishi, who laid the foundations for

"the Great Accomplishment of the Meiji Restoration." Hiraizumi also delivered lectures on

the writings by Sentetsu (wise sages). According to Murao Jiro (1914-2006), a member of

Shukokai, there were three research groups within Shukokai: a research group on the study

of Kimon (Kimongaku) by Yamazaki Ansai, a research group on history (the study of

history by reading Jinno shotoki by Kitabatake Chikafusa and Shinron by Aizawa Seishisai

of the late Mito school of history), and a research group on legal studies (the Meiji

51 Shihosho kenjibu shisobu, "Kokka shugi oyobi kokka shugi dantai goran (Zotei kaiban)" (Showa jflichinen junigatsu shirabe), Shakai mondai shiryo kenkyukai, ed. Kokka shugi oyobi shakai shugi dantai goran: zoteikaiban: (Jo) (Shiso kenkyu shiryo tokugo dai 26 go (Gentei shuppan) (Kyoto: Toyo bunkasha, August 1974), p.396. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 151

Constitution of 1889). The members of Shukokai did not treat these subjects as abstract knowledge. Rather, they began to act according to what they learned. They embraced the unity of Knowledge and Action, which Yamazaki Ansai and the Kimon School expected students to follow.

When Miyazawa Toshiyoshi (1899-1976) visited Professor Nakata Kaoru

(1877-1967), Dean of the Faculty of Law at Tokyo Imperial University, Nakata told him that the members of Shukokai did not mind violating school regulations in the name of serving the Emperor through the moral principle of CM (Loyalty).53 This episode suggests that the members of Shukokai (i.e., Hiraizumi's students) could justify their actions by citing CM, even when violating the rule of law. In this way, "morality" began to prevail over the rule of law. The behavior of the members of Shukokai, according to this logic, was the epitome of what would happen on campus of Tokyo Imperial University, in Tokyo itself, and in the nation. The members of Shukokai saw themselves as forerunners of a

"moralist" movement that would soon dominate many key segments of Japanese society.

But others saw it as the beginning of the decline of civil society that respected the rule of law.54 In 1935, a confidential government source included some members of Shukokai, including Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, in its list of right-wingers.55

Murao Jiro, Kyokasho chosakan no hatsugen, (Tokyo: Hara shobo, 1969.) P.228-9. 53 "Meiji kenpo kara shin kenpo e: Taidan Miyazawa Toshiyoshi, Kobayashi Naoki", in Mainichi shinbunsha, Shdwa shisdshi e no shogen: kaitei shinban (Tokyo: Mainichi shinbunsha, April 1972.) P. 148. 54 On this point, although Murao Jiro later recalled that Shukokai prohibited its members from taking political action, their "moral" actions seem to have had political consequences. As early as 1932, the Military Police identified Shukokai as part of a "fascist movement." See Kempei shireibu, "Shuppanbutsu wo tsujite mitaru waga kuni shakai undo no fashoka ni tsuite," Shiso iho 27 (Tokyo: Kenpei shireibu, March 1932), P.33-34, in Yoshida Yutaka, ed. Jugonen senso gokuhi shiryoshu 14: Shiso iho (ge) (Tokyo: Fuji shuppan, 1990) 55 Uyoku kankei jinmeiroku (Absolutely confidential) (November 1935). This does not indicate its publisher. (Property of the Main Library of Kogakukan University) Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 152

The Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University

As the previous chapter made clear, the Rankian positivist method of history and the

southern court view of history (Spiritual history) co-existed in the Division of the Nation's

History at Tokyo Imperial University. As a proponent of spiritual history, Hiraizumi conducted his teaching and research according to the Spirit of the Kimon and promoted this spirit in academic communities. As a devout Shinto believer, he strove to de-secularize

Tokyo Imperial University, which was originally founded as a modern secular institution.

Ultimately, the Seishin of the Kimon had an impact on the modern notion of the

separation of religion and education at institutions of higher learning, working to eliminate the demarcation between religion and scholarship. To cite one example, the 250-year commemoration of Yamazaki Ansai was held in the great hall of Tokyo Imperial University

in October 23 1932. This was a historic event in the sense that a religious event was held at

Tokyo Imperial University whose Western orientation had been evident since its founding.

Now, as the commemorative event made clear, the Seishin of the Kimon was widely recognized as the spirit suitable for the pursuit of scholarship at the institution.

Hiraizumi wanted to promote the Kimon, the pursuit of "true scholarship" (Shin no

gakumon), and the pursuit of the "Way" (Michi) (discussed earlier in this chapter). He

wished to create the type of scholarship that derived from the "tradition" of Japan. He saw

the Seishin of Kimon as a source of such scholarship, feeling that the Japanese could

present it as their original scholarly contribution to the world.56 Hiraizumi officially

launched this task when he produced a series of lectures called Nihongaku sosho in 1938.57

56 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Ninon bunka no sekai ni taisuru kiyo," Nihon 46.6. (Tokyo: Nihongaku kyokai, 1996), P, 14. 57 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, ed. Nihongaku sosho (Tokyo: Ozankaku, 1938). There are 13 volumes in this series. Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 153

For his lectures, Hiraizumi selected Japanese classics and historical documents in relation to (and in support of) the southern court view of history, focusing on the promotion of the moral and ethical principles of CM and Gi. He taught his students how to read and understand these historical documents.58

Hiraizumi also lectured on the French Revolution. As mentioned in Chapter

Three, he was keenly interested in the so-called moral foundation of the French Revolution and conducted research to challenge this moral foundation. He sought "spiritualism" and

"traditionalism" in France, finding them in French novelists but not French historians.

Hiraizumi even found a French version of Kunshin no gi (Gi between lord and vassal) in the birthplace of modern revolution. In fact, he interpreted the history of the French revolution from the point of view of CM and Gi. The French revolution became a topic that he regularly discussed during his lectures on the Nation's History.

It should be noted there was strong opposition to Hiraizumi and his group of students at Tokyo Imperial University by 1932-1933. A number of students and university faculty members felt uncomfortable with the rise of the "spiritual" history of Hiraizumi

Kiyoshi and his efforts to spread the Seishin of the Kimon School. The Research Group on the Study of History (Rekishigaku kenkyu kai) was a leading organization whose members pursued Marxist historical scholarship; they flatly opposed Hiraizumi and his method of history.59

Nevertheless, ignoring the opposition, Hiraizumi took his students for field

58 Some historians expressed their appreciation for Hiraizumi's teaching on how to read medieval documents during his seminar in the Division of the Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University although they did not fully agree with his view of history. 59 Hani Goro, Nishioka Torashiro, Ishii Takashi, and Kitayama Shigeo were among those who made critical comments on the influence of Hiraizumi and his students on the Division of the Nation's History in their reminiscences. See also Rekishigaku kenkyukai, ed., Rekishigaku kenkyukai yonju nen no ayumi (Tokyo: Rekishigaku kenkyukai). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 154

research to places that were significant in the southern court view of history, including

Mito and Osaka. At Mito, Dai Nihon shi was compiled at the initiative of Tokugawa

Mitsukuni; it took more than 200 years to complete. A number of students of the Kimon

School (of Yamazaki Ansai) led this project according to the moral and ethical principles of

Chu and Gi (and Neo-Confucianism). Hiraizumi probably wanted to teach his students the

attitudes and purpose of the scholarship of the late-Mito school of history, which

systematized the theory of Taigi Meibun and clarified National Polity. These became the

guiding principles of those who contributed to the Meiji Restoration. Hiraizumi often took

his students to Mt.Kongo (Osaka prefecture), where Kusunoki Masashige fought and

defeated the "rebels." On student, Ienaga Saburo did not want to visit the site, and along

with other students who objected, he expressed his view to Professor Hiraizumi, who

responded by saying, "Do not act as if it were a labor dispute."60

Hiraizumi and his students, including Hirata Toshiharu (1911-1994), were a

dominant force in Shigakukai (the Society for the Study of History) by 1934. His students

occupied key positions of the student committee, which was in charge of editing the journal Shigaku zasshi. As a result, their view of history influenced the selection of journal

articles. Hayashi Kentaro, historian of Western history and later the president of the

University of Tokyo, was a student at the time. As he pointed out, because of the selection

procedure, the quality of the journal declined.61 In 1931-1932, some Marxists, such as

Hani Gor5, still wrote articles for the journal until 1931, but this opportunity soon faded.

In January 1935, Kuroita Katsumi retired from his professorship in the Division of

Ienaga Saburo, Gekido nanaju nen no rekishi wo ikite (Tokyo: Shinchi shobo, 1988), P.68-9. 61 Hayashi Kentaro, Utsuriyuku monono kage: ichi interi no ayumi (Tokyo: Bungei shunju shinsha, 1960.) P. 141-2. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 155 the Nation's History and Hiraizumi was appointed to the position. He became a dominant figure in the Division for the next ten years, a critical time in Showa history

(1926-1989). In response to the Incident of the Organ Theory of the Emperor (Tenno kikan setsu jiken) by Professor Minobe Tatsukichi in 1935, the Ministry of Education issued directives on the clarification of the National Polity and formed Kyogaku sasshin hydgikai in 1936. Its 1936 report called for universities' commitment to National Polity and demanded university reorganization. In April 1938, a course on Japanese Intellectual

History (Nihon shiso shi koza) was established at Tokyo Imperial University; Hiraizumi was put in charge, and a research room for Japanese Intellectual History was placed in the research room for the Study of the Nation's History, which Hiraizumi had founded after returning from the West.63

As the southern court view of history and the Seishin of the Kimon became predominant under the leadership of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, the historical research being conducted in the Division of the Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University was more in accordance with the policy aims of the Ministry of Education. Such historical research was regarded favorably by other state institutions, including the Imperial Army, the

Imperial Navy, Police (Special Police), and groups of State Shinto supporters. Thus, although liberal academics objected to the influence of Hiraizumi and his students at Tokyo

Imperial University, the Division of the Nation's History under Hiraizumi played a leading role in national affairs between 1935 and 1945.

By the early 1940s, Hiraizumi's view of history dominated in textbooks on

62 Tokyo daigaku hyakunen hensan iinkai, Tokyo daigaku hyakunen shi kyokubu shi ichi "Bungakubu" (Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku shuppankai, 1986), P.616. 63 Tokyo daigaku hyakunen shi hensan iinkai, ed., Tokyo daigaku hyakunen kyokubu shi (Bungakubu) (Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku shuppan kai, 1986), p. 617. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 156

Japanese Intellectual History64 and the Nation's History.65 In 1942, Hiraizumi was appointed to the committee to set the examination used to select the prospects for high-ranked bureaucrats, a committee under the Ministry of Education.66 In other words, one had to write the exam according to what was written in those history textbooks to get high marks and be promoted within the wartime bureaucracy.

The Imperial Navy

The historian Hata Ikuhiko told the author that the Imperial Army used Hiraizumi's spiritual lectures for political reasons whereas some officers of the Imperial Navy fanatically followed Hiraizumi's spiritual guidance. However, this was not entirely true.

The Imperial Navy also used Hiraizumi's spiritual history for political objectives from

1931 to 1936. More specifically, Hiraizumi's determination to rescue the nation by the spread of Seishin was closely linked with the efforts of the Kantai faction of the Imperial

Navy to renounce the treaties signed at the Washington and London naval conferences in

1921 and 1930, respectively. Japan renounced the Washington conference at the end of

1934 and the London conference in 1936. Hiraizumi was in the midst of this movement, and his spiritual lectures played a significant role.

Hiraizumi's association with members of the Imperial Navy began before his trip to the West. He was invited to Yushukai, the social club for officers, to lecture as early as

December 14, 1928, when he spoke on Yamazaki Ansai (1618-82) and his school.67 And

64 Teidai purinto renmei hengo, Kogi purinto Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei Nihon shisoshi (1) Showa juroku nen shigatsu-junigatsu: Tokyo teikoku daigaku bungakubu kogi (Tokyo: Teidai purinto renmei, December 1941). 65 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kaitei; Kokushi gaisetsu (kan), (Showa 18 nendo ban: Tokyo teikoku daigaku bungakubu kogi) (Tokyo: Keimeisha, 1943). 66 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964). 67 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Rekishi wo tsuranuku myomyo no chikara," Yushu 183,184 (Tokyo: Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 157 he delivered a lecture, "The Outline of the Study of the Nation's History" (Kokushigaku no gaiyo) at the University of the Navy (Kaigun daigakko) on April 1930,68 right before his departure. On his way to Europe, he wrote the article "Nihon Seishin" (Japanese Spirit), which was published by the Department of Education as part of a series on Materials on

Ideological Education (Shiso kyoiku shiryo) in April 1930.69 In this way, the Imperial

Navy, not the Imperial Army, played a crucial role in the early stage of Hiraizumi's involvement in the dissemination of "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon seishin).

When Hiraizumi returned from the West, Arima Ryokitsu, a hero of the

Russo-Japanese War and a leader sympathetic to the Kantai faction, organized a welcome-home party and asked the promising young historian to speak about his trip on

November 16, 1931. Hiraizumi lectured on "Kokushika to shite obei wo mawaru" at

Yushukai.71 After this, Arima asked Hiraizumi to organize an event for the manifestation of the spirit of Yamazaki Ansai (in October 1932) and the spirit of Emperor Godaigo and the two following Emperors (in 1934). The committee for the organization of the latter event became Kenmu gikai, the Society for Gi of Kenmu in March 1936, just one month after the February 26 Incident of 1936. Kato Haruhiro (1870-1939) of the Kantai faction

Yushukai, February and March 1929). 68 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokushigaku no gaiyo," in Tanaka Takashi, ed., Hiraizumi hakushi shiron sho (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 1998). 69 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon Seishin," Shiso kyoiku shiryo 36 (Tokyo: Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku, April 1930). 70 The organization of the Imperial Navy followed the example of the British Royal Navy and adopted its liberal traditions. Factions did not immediately emerge. This changed with the Washington Naval Disarmament Treaty (1925) and the London Naval Disarmament Treaty (1930). In particular, the London treaty caused discontent, even anger, among the officers who attended the treaty conference. It also caused the emergence of two major factions: those who agreed with arms reduction in the Pacific formed the Joyaku faction; those who opposed it formed the Kantai faction. Leaders of the Kantai faction approached Hiraizumi in the latter half of 1920s. The Joyaku faction did not approach Hiraizumi at all; it openly expressed its dislike of Hiraizumi's view of history 71 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokushika to shite obei wo miru," Yushu 220.221 (Tokyo:Yushukai, March and April 1932). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 158 was another naval leader who was supportive of Hiraizumi. Kato was from the

Fukui-Echizen domain and a member of Keigakukai, whose primary aim was to honor and manifest the spirit of Hashimoto Sanai as the core of "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon seishin).72

The spiritualists of the Imperial Navy tightened their ties with Hiraizumi in 1934 when the Washington Naval Disarmament Conference of 1925 expired. The Department of

Education of the Ministry of the Imperial Navy (Kaigunsho kyoikukyoku) actively promoted the concept of Death and Life (Shiseikan) through "spiritual" lectures (Seishin kowa) and invited Hiraizumi to various institutions to deliver these. In January and

February 1934, Hiraizumi visited naval bases on a superhuman schedule. The

mainstream Imperial Navy, however, remained staunchly opposed to Hiraizumi and his

view of history. Although the spiritualists were sympathetic to him, the Imperial Navy, in

general, remained a liberal institution. When Hiraizumi delivered a lecture at the

University of the Imperial Navy (Kaigun daigakko) in February 1934, Oi Hajime, one of

its students, openly criticized the contents of the lecture, in which Hiraizumi divided

historical figures into two categories: Chushin (imperial loyalists) and Gyakushin

(rebellious subjects). The student thought that if his lecture were a talk (Kowa), it would be

acceptable. But as a scholarly lecture (Kogi), it posed a problem. Apparently, Hiraizumi

did not respond to the comment but remained silent.74

Hiraizumi gave another lecture, this one on "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon Seishin), also

upon the invitation of the Education Department of the Ministry of the Imperial Navy

(Kaigunsho Kyoikukyoku). He spoke on February 24, 1933, the day Matsuoka Yosuke

72 Kato Haruhiro, Gunshuku kaigi to kokumin no kakugo (Tokyo: Nihon seishin kyokai, January 1935). Kikuchi Takeo was president of Nihon seishin kyokai (the Association for Japanese Spirit), the publisher of this booklet. 73 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higeki Juso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980), P.414-5. 74 Agawa Hiroyuki. Takamatsu no miya to kaigun (Tokyo: Chuo koron sha, 1996), pp. 26-29. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 159

(1880-1946), the Minister of Foreign Affairs, left a meeting of the League of Nations in

Geneva. Shortly after the incident, the government of Japan decided to withdraw from this international organization.75 Japan was now on its way to its diplomatic isolation. This story suggests that there was a group who supported Hiraizumi's view of history within the department, perhaps members of the Kantai faction, who flatly denied the validity of any international arrangement that derived from the naval disarmament treaties of Washington

(1925) and London (1930). They promoted a movement denouncing the regulations

"imposed upon" Japan as a result of these treaties, even though Japanese liberals and those who agreed with international cooperation supported them.

Hiraizumi was invited to the Technical Research Center of the Imperial Navy

(Kaigun Gijutsu Kenkyujo) in Meguro Tokyo, where he delivered the lecture "With regards to Jinno Shotoki" on April 27, 1936.76 He established ties with Ueda Soju, who was assigned to the Center; this relationship continued through the following years. The

Mechanical School of the Imperial Navy (Kaigun Kikan Gakko) at Tsurumaki also invited

Hiraizumi to give spiritual lectures. A link between Hiraizumi and the naval base for

Kamikaze pilots was established as early as 1935: he was invited to the Kasumigaura

Naval Air Force base (Kasumigaura kaigun kokutai kichi) in Ibaraki prefecture in 1935, and talked to the young trainees about "Nanko" (Kusunoki Masashige).77

Hiraizumi played a significant role in the promotion of Seishin at these educational institutions of the Imperial Navy. However, after the February 26 Incident of 1936, the

Imperial Navy became suspicious of Hiraizumi's involvement with the young officers of

75 The Imperial Navy and Hiraizumi in 1933, p. 15. 76 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Jinno shotoki ni tsuite. (Suishinkan koenroku dai hachi go) (Tokyo: Kaigun gijutsu kenkyujo, April 1936). 77 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise:Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980), pp.268-9. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 160 the Imperial Army and kept a distance from him until 1942. Relations improved after the

Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor when the responsibilities of the Imperial Navy increased dramatically. Tokunaga Sakae, Head of the Department of Education of the Imperial Navy, was a devout student of Hiraizumi and asked his mentor to deliver lectures at the Naval

Academy (Kaigun hei gakko) on a regular basis. The head of the Kasumigaura Naval Air

Force Base also visited Hiraizumi's residence in Tokyo and requested that he design the history museum78 and deliver spiritual lectures to Kamikaze pilots who were about to depart to dive into the enemy's ships in the Pacific. Chapter Six will discuss this topic in more detail.

The Imperial Army

Hiraizumi's relationship with the Imperial Army was established later than his relationship with the Kantai faction of the Imperial Navy. However, as early as 1932, some young

Army officers attended the lectures he gave at Shukokai. After Hiraizumi's return from the

West, the Ministry of the Imperial Household (Kunaisho) invited him to deliver a series of more than 70 lectures to Prince Chichibu (1902-1953), who had trained as an officer of the

Imperial Army. The Ministry was concerned about the recent intellectual development of the Prince: he was closely associated with a group of young officers interested in restructuring the state by following the guidance of Kita Ikki (1883-1937), an advocate of state socialism. Hiraizumi's lectures to the Prince continued until the middle of the summer of 1934.79

Arima Ryokitsu of the Imperial Navy personally requested General Araki Sadao

78 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980). 79 Yusuhito shinnojikki. (Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobunkan, 1972), P.494. This is the official memorial publication for Prince Chichibu. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 161

(1877-1966) of the Kodo faction of the Imperial Army to recommend Hiraizumi to the

Ministry of Imperial Household (Kunaisho), so that Hiraizumi could deliver a lecture in the presence of Emperor during a grand field exercise in Osaka in 1932. This did not materialize, because Emperor Hirohito "got a cold," forcing Hiraizumi to return to Tokyo without delivering the lecture. Later, the Grand Chamberlain Suzuki Kantaro (1867-1948) asked Hiraizumi to give a lecture to Emperor Hirohito in Tokyo. Hiraizumi was honoured to accept this request, and he delivered "With Regards to the contributions which Nanko made" (Nanko no koseki ni tsuite) in the presence of Emperor in the Imperial Palace on

December 24, 1932. Although Hiraizumi's loyalty to the Emperor was absolute (maybe too much so), there was tension between the lecturer and Hirohito. When the lecture was over,

Hirohito asked a few questions concerning whether Emperor Godaigo had made some errors in the policies which his government implemented (after the Kenmu Restoration).80

This episode yields insight into Hiraizumi's attitudes towards the Emperor. As "the true

Imperial loyalist," Hiraizumi appeared to remonstrate the Emperor directly (Chokkan), urging him to take a stronger leadership role in current state affairs by emulating the historical example of Emperor Godaigo. In return, Emperor Hirohito and his liberal confidants in the Imperial court expressed their dislike of the southern court view of history, which they saw as the product of a rigid interpretation of medieval history. Although this view of history could be applied as an instrument for the Way of Subjects (Shindo), it was not appropriate for the master (Emperor) to follow. Thus, the Emperor consistently distanced himself from staunch proponents of the southern court view of history.81

80 HaradaKumao, ed., Saionjiko to seikyoku 5 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1967), P. 130-1. 81 Yoshida Yutaka, Showa tenno no shiisenshi (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1992), P.219-222. Yoshida used the terms "Seishin uyoku" (Spiritual right-wing) and "Kannen uyoku."(Conceptual right-wing). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 162

Meanwhile, his two brothers, Prince Chichibu and Prince Takamatsu, cultivated close ties with Hiraizumi throughout their lives.

Regardless of Hirohito's response, this event increased the social prestige of young

Professor Hiraizumi. The news of his lecture was spread nationwide,82 and he gained enough prestige to attend any event. Hiraizumi expressed his appreciation to the Emperor for "giving this opportunity."83 Yet the Ministry of Imperial Household never called him back to speak in front of Emperor Hirohito again.

Obata Toshishiro (1885-1947)84 of the Kodo faction invited Hiraizumi to the committee meeting for the founding of the Association of Great Asianism in the early months of 1933. Hiraizumi met Konoe Fumimaro (1891-1945), later Prime Minister of

Japan, at one of these meetings. Through Konoe, Hiraziumi was introduced to Kido Koichi

(1889-1977). Konoe and Kido both became key players in conservative circles of the

Imperial court and national leadership in the next ten years. Obata also wrote a letter of introduction for Hiraizumi when he left for Manchukuo, a new state in northeastern China, in 1933. Hiraizumi was escorted by the Kanto Army throughout the trip. In short, the Kodo faction helped to develop a network for Hiraizumi in 1932 and 1933.

As mentioned, Hiraizumi founded Seiseijuku, his private academy, near Tokyo

Imperial University in 1933. A number of young officers of the Imperial Army, regardless of their faction, attended the lectures he gave there and learned about the moral principle of

Chu and the ethical principle of Gi. This type of unofficial organization gave Hiraizumi

82 See "Hiraizumi hakushi Nanko no jiseki wo goshink5," Tokyo Asahi shinbun (Saturday December 3 1932), and "Hiraizumi hakushi goshinko: Nanko no koseki ni tsuki," Tokyo Asahi shinbun (Tuesday, December 6, 1932). 83 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Waga michi woyuku: Kanrinshi kankoroku (Tokyo: Sozosha, 1995), P. 154. 84 For more about Obata, see Suyama Yukio, Sakusen no oni: Obata Toshishiro (Tokyo: Fuyo shobo, 1983). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 163 contact with people beyond the factional barriers that existed in the Imperial Army. Twata

Masataka, an officer of the Imperial Army who joined Seiseijuku in 1934, wrote that

Hiraizumi's lectures focused on the epistles by the Shishi of the Meiji Restoration. In particular, Hiraizumi carefully went over Tenka wa hitori no tenka ni hizaru no setsu wo

haisu and Toshiron by Yoshida Shoin. Another was Nanshiron by Maki Izumi (1813-64), a

student of Aizawa Seishisai (1781-1863), a Shinto priest, and a Shishi in the Bakumatsu period. Hiraizumi explained the thought (Shiso) imbued in the words and phrases of these writings, the concept of Kokutai, the spirit of Bushido, the relevant historical facts, and

added to them his criticism on politics and social phenomena.85 Iwata was inspired; he

learned of the "true" concept of Kokutai and decided to leave "Kita Ikki whose teaching was state socialism in the disguise of Kokutai." Iwata was one of many army officers who

switched from Kita to Hiraizumi during this period, cutting ties with the Kodo faction for

once and for all.

Admittedly, there was opposition to Hiraizumi and his thought in the Imperial

Army. A group of young officers, including Nishida Mitsugu (and probably Prince

Chichibu), tried to undertake a National Reconstruction (Kokka kaizo) according to the

state socialism of Kita Ikki (1883-1937), but Hiraizumi took the opposite point of view,

promoting Seishin to support the correct form of National Polity (Kokutai). Kita Ikki was

quite influential among the young army officers during this period; some sought an

opportunity to put his ideas into practice and thus did not view Hiraizumi favorably. When

Hiraizumi visited the Toyama school of the Imperial Army to give a lecture on March 17,

1933, one officer even tried to kill Hiraizumi with his sword.86

85 Iwata Masataka, "Misui ni owatta kirikomi keikaku: 226 jiken no shinjijitsu," Child kdron. 107.3 (March 1992), P.322. 86 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku, shuppanbu, 1980). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 164

The Tosei faction of the Imperial Army approached Hiraizumi as well. In 1934, he gave a lecture at the Cadet Academy of the Imperial Army (Rikugun shikan gakko). The school master (Kanji), Tojo Hideki (1884-1948), was in the audience when Hiraizumi delivered the lecture "The Seishin of Japanese nation" (Nihon kokumin seishin) on April 16,

1934.87 Tojo was impressed by the content of his lecture, and he visited Hiraizumi's Tokyo residence a few days later. He asked Hiraizumi to reform the Cadet Academy's curriculum on the Nation's History. Hiraizumi and his students were put in charge of writing history textbooks, including Textbook on the Nation's History (Kokushi kyotei), and his students were appointed as history professors at the Academy: Utsumi Hideo was appointed in 1935.

Subsequently, a number of students at the Cadet Academy (Rikugun shikan gakko) were recruited by Hiraizumi's former students, now professors on the Nation's History at the

Academy, to join Seiseijuku. In 1934, Nishiuchi Tadashi and Utsumi Hideo made arrangements for those who were interested to meet members of Seiseijuku at the Shoin

Shrine, where Yoshida Shoin, a Shishi, was enshrined.89 In this way, the presence of

Hiraizumi's students in the Cadet Academy caused the ideological conversion of some young officers. They were awakened by "the true concept of the National Polity" which

Hiraizumi presented, and they grew away from the state socialism advocated by Kita Ikki.90

On November 19, 1935, Takeshita Masahiko wrote in his diary about his joy when he met

"Hiraizumi's ideology" for the first time at Seiseijuku.91 There must have been more young

87 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon Kokumin seishin," in Rikugun shikan gakko,ed., Nihon seishin koenshii (Zama: Rikugun shikan gakko koto shukaijo, May 1934). 88 Rikugunsho kyoiku sokanbu, ed., Kokushi kyotei (Tokyo: Rikugunsho kyoiku sokanbu). 89 Iwata Masataka, "Misui ni owatta kirikomi keikaku," in Child koron 107.3 (Tokyo: Chuo koron sha, March 1992), P.322. 90 Iwata Masataka, "Misui ni owatta kirikomi keikaku," in Chuo koron 107.3 (Tokyo: Chud koron sha, March 1992), P.322. 91 Takeshita Masahiko, Takeshita Masahiko Nikki. November 19 1935. This is the property of the Division of the Primary Sources on Modern Japanese History in the Faculty of Law at University Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 165 officers who had a similar experience.

On January 27, 1936, Hiraizumi was invited to the Cadet Academy to deliver a lecture on "The Fundamental Spirit of the Meiji Restoration" to the students of the 48th class.92 He gave a lecture, "True Scholarship" (Shinjitsu no gakumon), to the students of the 49th and 50th classes on June 22 and 23, 1937.93 Hiraizumi delivered lectures at the

Preparatory School of the Cadet Academy (Rikugun yoka shikan gakko) as well, as for example, "The mental attitudes of the Samurai" (Shotaru no kokorogamae) on September

15, 1938. Obata Toshishiro of the Kodo faction invited Hiraizumi to the University of the

Imperial Army (Rikugun daigakko). From February to March 1935, Hiraizumi delivered a series often lectures on the Nation's History (Kokushi kowa)94 at the institution where the future generals of the Imperial Army were educated. Horige Ichimaro, who was a student there, recalled that like lectures by Professor Uesugi Shinkichi on the constitution,

Hiraizumi's lectures on the Nation's History were considered extracurricular. Even so, the students listened intently.95 On November 22, 1935, he spoke at Hoko School: some young officers of this school were involved with the February 26 Incident of 1936. It is fair to say that Hiraizumi's ideology had a considerable impact upon the minds of these officers, who were considering various philosophies in search of truth. They may have felt that they had finally found light in the midst of darkness. On December 3, 1935, Takeshita Masahiko wrote in his diary: "I vowed to make the Hiraizumi ideology (Hiraizumi shiso) the guiding of Tokyo (Tokyo daigaku hogakubu genshiryobu). The author expresses his appreciation to the Faculty of Law for use of the material. 92 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Meiji ishin no konpon seishin," in Rikugun shinkan gakko, ed., Nihon seishin koenshu vol.2 (Zama: Rikugun shikan gakko kotokan shukaijo, 1937). 93 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Shinjitsu no gakumon," in Rikugun shinkan gakko,ed., Nihon seishin koenshu, vol.2 {Zama.: Rikugun shikan gakk5 kotokan shukaijo, Ocotober 1937). 94 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kokushi kowa (Tokyo: Rikugun daigakko, June 1936). Horige Ichimaro, "Rikudai ni miru doran no rikugun," in Nakamura Kikuo, ed., Showa rikugun shi (Tokyo: Bancho shobo, 1968), p. 131. Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 166 spirit (Shido seishin) of the Imperial Army."96

Hiraizumi was also associated with the Reservists Association of the Imperial Army

(Teikoku zaigo gunjinkai). He gave a lecture to the soldiers in reserve in 1934, and became chief advisor of the organization in 1937.97 The organization was another channel through which Hiraizumi disseminated Seishin. It also was a powerful political interest that had the capacity to exert pressure on state authorities on behalf of the Imperial Army.98

The February 26 Incident was a critical event in Showa history. After the incident,

Mazaki Jinzaburo, a leader of the Kodo faction, which was defeated in the power struggle with the Tosei faction, attended a lecture and meeting held by Kenmu Gikai (the Society of

Gi of Kenmu) on January 18, 1938. Hiraizumi delivered the lecture "Shinyoshu ni tsuite" and Sasaki Shin spoke on "Busho to waka." Apparently unimpressed, Mazaki wrote in his diary that there was nothing noteworthy to mention, other than the fact that the speakers possessed a vast amount of knowledge.99 After the Incident, the authorities of the Imperial

Army were more concerned about the whereabouts of young officers. In this context,

Hiraizumi was invited to the Headquarters of the Military Police (Kempei shireibu), where he talked about "The Devine Essence of Japanese Spirit" on June 10, 1936. During

February and March 1938, Hiraizumi was again invited to the School of the Military Police

(Kempei gakko). This time, he delivered a lecture on "The Main Points of the Nation's

History" (Kokushi no gakumoku),100 one of the major lectures of his career. It was

96 Takeshita Masahiko, Takeshita Masahiko Nikki. December 3 1935. 97 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu. (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964). 98 Hiraizumi was acquainted with Kikuchi Takeo (1875-1955), the head of the Kikuchi family, whose ancestors had contributed to the defense of the imperial line and the national polity in the southern court view of history. Kikuchi was a leading member of the Reservists Association who openly criticized Professor Minobe Tatsukichi for his Organ Theory of Emperor in 1935. 99 Mazaki Jinzaburo, Mazaki Jinzaburo nikki: Showa juichinen nanagaku-Showa jusan nen junigatsu (Kindai Nihon shiryo sensho 1-3) (Tokyo: Yamakawa shuppan, 1981), p. 263. 100 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokushi no ganmoku," Kenyu 32.7-11 (Tokyo: Kenyukai, July-November, Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 167 published by the Reservists' Association of the Imperial Nation (Teikoku zaigo gunjinkai)101 and included in Tenpei ni tekinashi (1943).102 It inspired many people, and

Hiraizumi was later punished by the Allied forces in 1946 for having been a wartime writer because of what he said in the lecture, namely that Japan was not fighting against China, but against the forces behind China - the United States, Britain, and Russia.

Police and Special Police (Tokko)

Hiraizumi delivered spiritual lectures to the police and special police as part of Thought

Control (Shiso Tosei), a campaign launched by the Ministry of Internal Affairs (Naimusho) in the 1930s. Hiraizumi saw the police and special police in the same light as he saw the

Imperial Army and the Imperial Navy. He considered that the Army and the Navy defended the Imperial Nation from external pressure and threats, while the police and special police defended the Imperial Nation from internal pressure and threats. Both the military and the police must possess the Spirit of Defending the National Polity (Kokutai goji no seishin).

In the 1930s, state authorities sought to strengthen internal security with respect to ideological problems (Shiso mondai). To this end, the Ministry launched a campaign for the promotion of Police Spirit (Keisatsu Seishin) in 1934, targeting the "spiritual" education of police officers.103 As part of this campaign, Hiraizumi was invited to deliver spiritual lectures to police officers, special police officers, and police officers in training.

This section will explore how his concept of Seishin was disseminated in the police and

1938) 101 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kokushi no ganmoku (Tokyo: Teikoku zaigo gunjin kai honbu.) 102 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokushi no ganmoku," in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Tenpei ni teki nashi (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1943). See Aketa Takumi, Keisatsu seishin no shin kenkyu: Kanshido no saikento (Tokyo: Shokado shoten, 1934). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 168 special police and how those institutions used Seishin to accomplish their objectives from

1931 to 1936.

According to his autobiography, Higeki Juso, Hiraizumi became acquainted with

Nomura Yoshigi, Head of the Department of Special Police (Tokko ka) of Hokkaido prefecture when Hiraizumi visited Sapporo, the provincial capital, to deliver a lecture at

Hokkaido Imperial University in February 1933.104 (Nomura later joined Seiseijuku.)105

Although the Department of Students (Gakuseika), which was closely linked to the

Division of Student Affairs of the Ministry of Education in Tokyo, had invited Hiraizumi to give this particular lecture, he was also working with the Special (thought) Police (Tokko) under the direction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (Naimusho). The Ministry of

Education and the Ministry of Internal Affairs cooperated on the issues of Intellectual

Guidance (Shiso zendo) and Intellectual Control (ShisS tosei) by 1933. In this case, the two campaigns went hand in hand, and Hiraizumi contributed to the efforts of both ministries to reform the intellectual climate of the imperial university.

Generally speaking, the method by which Hiraizumi and government organizations established ties followed a particular pattern. Often, someone in an organization was inspired by Hiraizumi's view of history through listening to a lecture. The person then became Hiraizumi's student by joining Seiseijuku, his private academy. When the individual was promoted, he would invite Hiraizumi to the institution of which he was in charge. Thus, Hiraizumi delivered lectures for the education of the personnel of the organization, and his view of history became an integral part of the organization.

Tomita Kenji (1897-1977) was one such individual. A young bureaucrat when he

104 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higeki juso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppan bu, 1980). 105 Nomura became a leading member of Nihongaku kyokai, the prototype of Seiseijuku in postwar period (see Chapters Seven and Eight). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 169 first attended a lecture in 1931, he was impressed by Hiraizumi's views.106 A few years later, Tomita, now Chief of the Police Section of the Ministry of Overseas Affairs

(Takumusho keimubu), joined Seiseijuku.107 When Tomita was appointed Head of the

Department of Police of Ishikawa prefecture in 1934, he invited his mentor Hiraizumi to give a lecture in front of the police officers of Ishikawa prefecture. Hiraizumi delivered the lecture "Chii to Gi" (Loyalty and Just) on this occasion.108 Tomita was appointed to Head of Police Department of Osaka prefecture in 1935.

As a result of Hiraizumi's work with the police, some leaders of the police and special police conducted their duties according to the ethical and moral principles he taught.

For instance, Nomura Yoshigi bathed in cold water every morning and read the booklet

Chii to Gi. Then, he undertook to persuade people with intellectual "problems" to abandon their ideological beliefs and undergo intellectual conversion. When Emperor Hirohito visited Sapporo in 1934, Nomura, as head of Special Police of Hokkaido prefecture, decided not to keep intellectually dangerous people in prison. Nothing happened, and the

Emperor safely completed his trip.109

Yasui Eiji, who knew Tomita and was sympathetic to Hiraizumi but not his student, was appointed governor of Osaka. Yasui believed that political systems changed from era to era, but the Way of Gi was eternal:

The Meiji period was nationalism (Kokka shugi). The Taisho was Democracy. The first half of the Showa period was also nationalism. Although each had impact on my works, my attitude as a bureaucrat did not change much. From the standpoint where I

Tomita Kenji, Haisen Nihon no uchigawa: Konoe ko no omoide (Tokyo: Kokin shoin, 1962). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, HigekiJuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980), p. 548. Hiriazumi Kiyoshi, Chii to Gi (Kanazawa: Ishikawa ken keisatsubu, September 1934). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 170

myself did not think about it and wished for politics and bureaucracy according to Dogi (the Way of Gi) since I was young. I would have complaints about each of those periods.110

Yasui and Tomita launched a series of projects to promote Seishin within the prefecture.

There was an event for the manifestation of the spirit of Great Nanko (Kusunoki

Masashige) at Osaka Asashi News Paper Lecture Hall in Osaka City in 1935.111 There was an event recognizing the spirit of Sakura Azumao112 and an exhibition of the materials relevant to Sakura in the city at the same time. Hiraizumi leased some of his possessions for this event.113

Importantly, after the February 26 Incident, the system of police was tightened nationwide, and spiritual lectures became more significant in the education of police

officers in training. They were educated as to what "Japanese Spirit" meant and how to

cope with those manifesting it and those opposed to it, as for example, Marxists. Reading

material of the Division of Special Police in the Police Department of Hyogo prefecture,

adjacent to Osaka, published in 1936, states that, in principle, the proponents of "Japanese

Spirit" were not likely to harm the National Polity (Kokutai). Therefore, unlike

communism, socialism, or anarchism, they were not automatically subject to investigation.

Even so, the police had to ensure that they did not violate the law. In this way, the role of

the police was to guide Japanese spiritualists in the right direction, not to punish them.114

Kisoshinshusoshikoku seinen gakudokai, ed., Yasui Eiji sensei danwa: Ichi gakuto to shite no gyosei seijika no keiken (Tokyo: Kisoshinshusoshikoku seinendokai, 1970), pp.271-2. 111 Asahi shinbunsha, Dai nanko wo kataru: dai nanko kinen koenshu (Osaka: Asahi shinbunsha, May 1935). 112 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Sakura sensei no seishin (the property of Tokyo Tama Library). 113 Osaka furitsu toshokan, Kinno shishi Sakura Azumao iboku bunken tenrankai mokuroku (Nara: Osaka furitsu toshokan, November 1935). The material was printed in Nara prefecture. 114 Takeuchi Akihiro, Tokko keisatsu to Nihon shugi undo no gaisetsu (Hyogo ken shirozaki gun tomiokacho: Hyogoken Tomioka keisatsucho tokko shitsu, May 1936). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 171

The Police Department of Osaka followed this trend. The Police Academy of Osaka prefecture (Osakafu keisatsu koshujo) published Taiyaku: Jinno shotoki (jo), the translation

oi Jinno shotoki (1339) into modern colloquial Japanese with Furigana}15 The proponents

of the southern court view of history, including Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, revered the book. This

suggests that the Police Department of Osaka was striving to promote the spirit of the book

among the police officers in training after the February 26 Incident. The Police Division of

Osaka prefecture also invited Hiraizumi to deliver a lecture in 1936, and he spoke on

"Eternal Life" (Eien no seimei) on November 13.116

Under the strong leadership of Governor Yasui Eiji, the building of Sondokan (The

Building where the Way exists) was founded at Mt. Chihaya in Osaka prefecture. Mt.

Chihaya was the place where Kusunoki Masashige fought against the soldiers of the

northern court in the 14th century. Governor Yasui admired Kusunoki as the leader who had

governed the Kawachi area, now a part of Osaka prefecture, seeing him as a "spiritual

navigator" (kokoro no sasae). Yasui mentioned in the postwar period that he believed in

"Eternal Life," the title of the lecture Hiraizumi delivered at the Police Department of

Osaka prefecture in 1936 (cited above). Yasui revered Kusunoki.117 Hiraizumi was invited

to the House of Chihaya (Chihaya no ie) at Sondokan and delivered the lecture

115 Nishioka Toramatsu, ed., Taiyaku: Jinno shotoki sho (Jo) (Osaka: Osakafu keisatsu renshujo, April 1936). Furigana is letters of the Japanese phonetic syllabary printed [written] at the side of ideographs. 116 Hiraizumi was invited to Osaka Study Group on Ideological Problems (Osaka Shis5 Mondai kenkyukai), where he presented "The Revival of Japanese Spirit" in the same month. The Department of Ideology of the Ministry of Education founded the system of Study Group on Ideological Problems on October 2, 1934, and implemented the system in Osaka prefecture on February 23, 1934. See Shisokyoku yoko (Tokyo: Monbusho Shisokyoku, November 1934), pp. 160-61. 117 Hiraizumi hoped that all Japanese would similarly revere Kusunoki; he sought to accomplish this in the 1930s. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 172

"Sondokanki" on November 16, 1936.m On the same occasion, a stone monument with an inscription written by Hiraizumi was erected at the site.

Hiraizumi's establishment of trusted relations with Tomita Kenji and Yasui Eiji during the period of 1933-1936 was tremendously significant to his influence on the core of the Japanese government and bureaucracy during the period from 1937 to 1941, partly because Yasui Eiji and Tomita Kenji both entered the 1st Konoe administration in 1937.

Yasui was appointed Minister of Education, and Tomita became Head of the Police

(Keihokyokucho), in charge of maintaining peace in the capital and in the rest of the nation.

Some liberals were unhappy with the appointments. For instance, Emperor Hirohito expressed his concern to Saionji Kinmochi. I19 Although liberals saw them as

"right-wing," "fanatic," and "fascist," these men stayed at the core of Japanese leadership throughout the war.

Ise Grand Shrine, in which Amaterasu Omikami (the Sun Goddess) was enshrined, is located in Mie prefecture, a prefecture closely linked historically to the mythological origin of the imperial house. In June 1938, the Police department of Mie prefecture held a seminar for the cultivation of mind for Kanbu (Kanbu koho shuren koshukai). Out of eight textbooks used for the seminar, four were written by Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Banbutsu ruten,

Nihon Seishin, Chusei ni okeru kokutai kannen, and Kitabatake Akiie ko wo shinobu. The

Words ofYoshida Shoin, whom Hiraizumi respected, was used as well.120

Although Hiraizumi did not hold an official position in the Konoe administration,

118 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Sond5kanki", Chihaya akasaka mura hensan iin kai, ed. Chihaya akasaka mura shi shiryohen (Osakafu minami kawachi bun chihaya akasaka mura: Mura yakuba, March 1976). 119 "Showa juni nen junigatsu nijunana nichi kojutsu," Harada Kumao, Saionjikd to seikyoku dairokkan ji showa juninen rokugatsu tei showa jiisan nen rokugatsu (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1967), pp. 194-7. 120 Mieken keisatsu honbu keimubu keimuka, Mieken keisatsushi dai san kan (Tsu: Mieken keisatsu honbu keimubu keimuka, 1966), pp. 113-14.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 173 he had trusted channels of communication with the administration through his personal ties with Yasui and Tomita during the critical period of 1937-1940. During this time, police control of intellectual activity drastically increased, and Hiraizumi was more frequently invited to deliver spiritual lectures to police officers and to police officers in training, points that will be explored in more detail in a later chapter. Yasui and Tomita were both purged in 1945. However, they both came back to national politics and were elected to parliament multiple times in the postwar period. Their expertise as experienced bureaucrats of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (abolished after Japan's defeat) was appreciated by state authorities coping with the "intellectual problems" that arose in the postwar period. It is not certain how close they remained to Hiraizumi, but both continued to hold Japanese

Spirit (and the ethical principle of Gi) as their guiding thought when they served the state during national reconstruction.

The Results of Disseminating Seishin

Did Hiraizumi accomplish his personal objectives while serving the interests of state authorities from 1931 to 1940? Did he successfully spread Seishin throughout various segments of Japanese society? Did he make a difference?

Hiriazumi successfully promoted "spiritual" history in academia. He took advantage of his position at Tokyo Imperial University to encourage the methods of positivism and cultural history. He also helped to de-secularize Tokyo Imperial University by introducing Meiji state Shinto's practice of revering and manifesting the Seishin of

Yamazaki Ansai and Kusunoki Masashige. To a large degree, he succeeded in unifying religion and historical scholarship during the 1930s.

Off campus, Hiraizumi promoted the ethical and moral principles on which the

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 174 southern court view of history was based, as the foundation for Shindo (the Way of the

Subject) whose core was the concept of death and life (Shiseikan). His students at Tokyo

Imperial University and his disciples in the Imperial Army, the Imperial Navy, and the

Police (and the Thought Police) had faith in those principles and acted according to them.

They were convinced of their superiority over the rule of law, and they had a sense of absolute loyalty to the Emperor. It was their understanding that when Japanese subjects acted according to those principles, the true form of the Nation Polity would become apparent, and Tenno shinsei (rule by the immediate direction of the Emperor) would be realized.

However, Hiraizumi was not successful in all areas. The above-mentioned view of ethics/morality as superceding the rule of law was too extreme in the eyes of many who believed in the Meiji constitutional monarchy. The Imperial Navy (the Joyaku faction), liberals and Marxists (Rekishigaku kenkyukai, for example) in academia, and liberals in the Imperial court, including Emperor Hirohito himself, Yuasa Kurahei (1874-1940), Ichiki

Tokuichiro (1867-1944), and Suzuki Kantaro (1867-1948), consistently opposed Hiraizumi and his view of history. They saw him as an "ultra-right," "ultra-nationalist," or/and

"fascist" (Fashoteki). Although they kept a distance from Hiraizumi, his disciples, and their ideas, however, they seemed to understand the benefit of keeping Hiraiuzmi involved in state affairs because of his absolute commitment to the defense of "history" and his absolute denial of "revolution." For this reason, if for no other, Hiraizumi had a historical role to play during the 1930s.

Hiraizumi's personal interests and the interests of state authorities (most importantly, the Ministry of Education) coincided during the 1930s. At this time, Hiraizumi consciously assumed a role required by various programs initiated by state authorities.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 175

Nevertheless, his absolute commitment was not to the government of Japan or Japanese state authorities. Rather, his absolute loyalty lay with abstract concepts of the National

Polity, Tenno shinsei, believed to exist at the beginning of the Nation's History and realized in the Kenmu Restoration of the 14th century and the Meiji Restoration of the 19th century.

During the 1930s, when more Japanese began to share this "historical" view, Japan was moving towards imperialism, militarism, and fascism - at least in the eyes of some. In the eyes of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and his supporters, however, Japan was going through a period of Showa ("enlightened harmony" or "illuminating harmony").

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 176

CHAPTER SIX

The Roles of Japanese Mythology and "Spiritual" History

in the Overseas Expansion of Japan: 1931-1940

As the preceding chapter noted, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, a historian of Japanese medieval history, actively disseminated Gi (the Just) and Bushido as ethical principles for the

Japanese throughout the 1930s. Not surprisingly, given his views of history, when the

Sino-Japanese war broke out in 1937, he began to call Japan "the Country of the Way of the Just" (Dogi no kuni), drawing on ethical principles demonstrated by Emperors Gotoba

(1180-1239) and Godaigo (1288-1339) in the ancient imperial system of medieval Japan.

In the Sino-Japanese war, Hiraizumi saw the role of Japan in the light of "the opening of the nation" (Chokoku), which refers to the start of the Nation's History and the southern court of the 14 century. Further, he saw 20 century Japanese soldiers as present-day embodiments of such imperial loyalists of the southern court as Kitabatake Akiie

(1318-1338) or Nitta Yoshisada (1301-1338). In this way, he gave a "historical" meaning to the role of the Japanese soldiers in contemporary battlefields. In his view, these soldiers were united "spiritually" with the imperial loyalists of the southern court and lived inside

"history" forever. At the same time, he linked the national character of Japan with the

ethical character of the two emperors mentioned above. Using the same logic, he used

medieval history to apply "historical" and "spiritual" meanings to Japan's militaristic

expansion, with a view to realizing the mythological concept of Hakko Ichiu (eight corners

of the world under one roof), said to have originated at the opening of the nation Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 177

(Chokoku). This was an extension of his ongoing efforts to realize the restoration of "rule of a state by the immediate guidance of the Emperor" (Tenno shinsei). This chapter takes a closer look at this particular period in Hiraizumi's life. What was his place in a nation at war in Asia, a nation rapidly heading for a much larger war in the Pacific?

The Formation of Hiraizumi's View of Asia

Hiraizumi's view of Asia and Japan's role in Asia took shape in his early years. Although he was still only a boy, he wrote of his determination to defeat Russia when the

Russo-Japanese War broke out in February 1904.1 But he was shocked when Emperor

Nicholas was killed during the Russian Revolution (1905-1917). Because he saw the

Russian Revolution as an offspring of the French Revolution (Chapter Three), he enthusiastically studied the French Revolution when he visited Europe in 1930-1931

(Chapter Four); he considered that the successful revolutions in the two countries marked for them the end of "history" and the death of their "spirit." He was determined to halt a similar encroachment of the spirit of "revolution" in Asia. Given these interests, Hiraizumi developed a keen interest in the northeastern part of China or Manchuria.

Hiraizumi saw firsthand the condition of Asia, the "mother of world civilizations," on his way to Europe via Asia and the Suez Canal in May 1930 (see Chapter Four), and he was unhappy with what he saw. He changed his initial plans to stay abroad for two years, coming back a few months before the Manchurian Incident in September 1931, because he perceived Japan to be threatened internally and externally. He was "determined to rescue the nation by the spread of Seishin" (G:Geist and E:Spirit).2 In his view, Seishin or

1 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban), p. 2. 2 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Maiju shukuga kai ni okeru shaji: Seishin naki mono ha horobu," Nihon Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 178

"Japanese Spirit" functioned to cope with both domestic and international problems. Japan grew increasingly isolated in the international community as a result of its withdrawal from the League of Nations on February 24, 1933, leading Hiraizumi to consider Hashimoto

Sanai's theory of an alliance between Japan and Russia (Nichiro domei ron). In the same year, Lieutenant-General Obata Toshishiro (1885-1947), the Kodo-faction of the Imperial

Army, introduced Hiraizumi to the founding committee of the Association of Great Asia

(Dai Ajia kyokai).3 Ultimately, in the midst of Japan's increasing isolation, Hiraizumi called for the "Revival of Bushido" (Bushido no fukkatsu) in September 1933, asserting that to rescue Asia from its misery, Japan must return to being "true Japan." For this to occur, the Japanese people must return to being "true Japanese" by reviving the "Spirit of

Bushido" (Bushido seishin) whose primary ethical principle is Gi (the Just).4 Keep in mind that the term Bushido was not Hiraizumi's invention. Inoue Tetsujiro (1855-1944),

Professor of Philosophy at Tokyo Imperial University, first promoted the term during the

Meiji period. However, "the Revival of Bushido" probably was Hiraizumi's idea. He combined the Shinto concept of "revival"(Fukko shugi) with the ethical concept of

Bushido so that the people could have religious faith in the system of ethics. He strove to convince the Japanese public it was inevitable for the Japanese to walk away from arrangements made by the international community, such as the League of Nations, because Japan was on its way to becoming "true Japan" and would rescue the rest of Asia.

Hiraizumi promoted his views outside Japan as well, delivering a lecture on

45.6 (1995); also in Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanai no omoide(Tokyo: Kajima shuppankai, 1982). 3 Later he met Kido Koichi (1889-1977): the Kodo faction of the Imperial Army introduced Hiraizumi to the young conservatives of the Imperial Court, something crucial to Hiraizumi's involvement in affairs of state in following years. He also became acquainted with Konoe Fumimaro (1891-1945), Japan's future Prime Minister. 4 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Bushido no fukkatsu," Dai Ajia shugi 5 (Tokyo: Dai Ajia kyokai, September 1933). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 179

"Japanese Spirit" at the 25th anniversary event for the beginning of the Japanese governance of Korea in August 1935. Hiraizumi described Kusunoki Masashige (7-1336) as the epitome of "Japanese character" to the Korean audience in Keij5, the capital of the

Japanese colony of Korea. Using Kusunoki, Hiraizumi explained the moral principle of

CM and the ethical principle of Gi to the Koreans.5 More significantly, he defined

"Japanese character" from the standpoint of the moral principle of CM and the ethical principle of Gi. The colonial authorities in Keij5 probably hoped Hiraizumi's "spiritual" lecture would contribute to transforming the Korean people into the Imperial subjects of

Japan (Komin-ka). Hiraizumi, however, may have hoped to "rescue" other Asians, the

Koreans in this case, by the spread of Seishin.

Hiraizumi, the Imperial Army, and Manchukuo

Hiraizumi visited the newly founded state of Manchukuo on April 11, 1933.

Lieutenant-General Obata Toshishiro of the Kodo faction of the Imperial Army wrote a

letter of introduction for him, and the Kanto Army escorted him while he was there. During the trip, Hiraizumi witnessed the lack of safety in the region - he even saw a human head

floating on the river.6 He was warned of the spread of the "Reds," as well, and he visited a kindergarten whose classrooms were filled with communist propaganda posters. Hiraizumi

concluded that it did not matter how well the Japanese army was fighting on the ground: the "Reds" would eventually take over the region. The Kanto Army was in the area for

5 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon seishin kovia,"Bunkyo no Chosen. 122 (Keijo: Chosen kyoiku kai, October 1935) 6 Ito Takashi, Sakai Yutaka, and Terunuma Yasutaka, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei gozen no bu: Showa gojii san nen juichigatsu nijunana nichi" (Tokyo daigaku kyu shokuin intabyu), Tokyo daigaku shi kiyoM (March 1999): 127. 7 Ito Takashi, Sakai Yutaka, and Terunuma Yasutaka, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei gozen no bu: Showa goju san nen juichigatsu nijunana nichi" (Tokyo daigaku kyushokuin intabyu), Tokyo Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 180 this reason, but Hiraizumi did not think highly of its ability to deal with the region's ideological problems. Instead, he was convinced that if he could spread the Shinto faith in

Manchukuo, this would eventually free the region from the spirit of "revolution" which came from Soviet Russia. He wrote two poems, asking Japanese gods to migrate to the area to rescue Shinkyo, the capital, from communist influence:

I stand on a grand field in Manchuria, reciting a Shinto prayer, asking the gods for help.8

The Japanese gods (Nihon no kamigami)! Please migrate here and save the hill of Shinkyo.9

As a devout ShintS believer, Hiraizumi thought the new state desperately needed

"spiritual" strength, in other words, the strength of Japan, the true Imperial Nation. Japan was the only nation that had remained independent in Asia in the midst of Western expansion to the area since the 16th century.

Japan was obviously losing its ideological battle with Russia in the region by 1933.

The Japanese were well aware of this, and the Kanto Army continued to seek cooperation from Hiraizumi in the management of Manchukuo's affairs. Itagaki Seishiro (1885-1948), head of the Kanto Army, was impressed by the booklet Chu and Gi (1934), which was based on Hiraizumi's lecture at the Police Department of Ishikawa prefecture on June 23,

1934. He wanted Hiraizumi to assume the presidency of Kenkoku University, which the

Kanto Army was planning to establish in Shinkyo, Manchukuo.10 The new university daigaku shi kiyo 17 (March 1999): 128. 8 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964), p. 35. 9 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964), p. 35. 10 Yamane Yukio, Kenkoku daigaku no kenkyil: Nihon teikoku shugi no ichi danmen (Kyuko sosho Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 181 aspired to educate the state's future leaders, regardless of race and nationality. Tsuji

Masanobu (1902-1968) visited Hiraizumi's residence to request him to assume this position. Hiraizumi did not accept, but he recommended three other professors. He also actively recruited his students from Tokyo Imperial University who were members of

Shukokai and Seiseijuku (see Chapter Five) to assume teaching posts.11 Although the

Kanto Army initiated the project, leading members of the Research Center for National

Spirit and Culture (Kokumin seishin bunka kenkyujo), a sub-institution of the Ministry of

Education, were closely associated with it from the outset.12 Army officers and intellectuals attended a series of meetings, to which the government of Manchukuo also invited Hiraizumi. For the most part, Hiraizumi and other committee members were unhappy with the intellectual atmosphere of universities in inner Japan (Naichi); they hoped to establish a new type of university, quite different from Japan's imperial

49) (Tokyo: Kyuko shoin, 2003). The author interviewed Professor Yamane Yukio (1921-2005) during his research trip to Japan in 2003.1 express my appreciation to Professor Yamane, a former student of the Division of the Oriental history at Tokyo Imperial University and an authority on the history of the Ming period in China for sharing his personal experience as a student when Hiraizumi Kiyoshi was Professor of the Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University during the war. Professor Yamane also encouraged me to continue my research on Hiraizumi because he strongly felt Hiraizumi must be written about as part of the history of the Showa period. He told me that he wanted to study the Nation's History, but he decided not to do so because Professor Hiraizumi and his students dominated the field. Instead he chose to study Chinese history and took a critical stance towards what was going on in the field of the Nation's History through his study of Chinese history. Professor Yamane was one of many university students who sought guidance from Hani Goro, the leading Marxist historian. Hani consistently opposed Hiraizumi's view of history before and after 1945. 11 See "Shokuin," Kenkoku daigaku ydran (Shinkyo: Yasutoku hachi nen) (A property of the National Diet Library of Japan.) "Nihonjin Kenkoku daigaku kyoshokuin ichiran," Miyazawa Eriko, Kenkoku daigaku to minzoku kyowa. (Tokyo: Kazama shobo, 1997). The historian Mori Katsunori described the scene in which Hiraizumi personally recruited him to assume teaching position at Kenkoku University during 1930s, Mori Katsunori "Rokujunen no omoide," in Mori Katsunori hakushi koki kinen kai, ed., Shigaku ronshu taigai kaikei to seiji bunka 3 vol. (Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobunkan, 1974), p.617. 12 See, chapter one in Miyazaki Eriko, Kenkoku daigaku to minzoku kyowa (Tokyo: Kazama shobo, 1997.) Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 182 universities.

Hiraizumi had a decisive impact on the structure of Kenkoku University. At

Seiseijuku, his private academy in Tokyo, he educated his disciples with the ethical and moral principles of the imperial loyalists (Chushin) of the 14th century and of the men of high aspiration (Shishi) of the 19th century. He brought these interests (and his followers) with him to Kenkoku University. In 1937, he introduced the system of Juku (Academy), making it an integral part of the university. Each dormitory building constituted Juku, and each Juku had its own Principal (Jukuto), who was in charge of the academic and residential lives of the residents. The dons were also responsible for organizing meetings for reading the works of the imperial loyalists, the men of high aspiration, and the sages

(Sentetsu), who embraced the ethical and moral principles of CM and Gi. Kenkoku

University institutionally and ideologically maintained close ties with Hiraizumi and his private academy in Tokyo until it was closed as a result of Japan's defeat in 1945.

Hiraizumi delivered a lecture before middle-level bureaucrats, non-Japanese visiting from Manchukuo in the fall of 1939. In the lecture, "The Driving Force of

Awakening Asia" (Koa no gendoryoku), Hiraizumi claimed the fundamental strength of

Japan lay in "the Way of the Just" (Dogi) and "the faith of the people." He introduced the audience to the "truth" of Japan: no revolution had taken place in the course of a few thousand years because Japan's fundamental strength resided in brief (Shin) and sincerity

(Makoto). He also introduced them to Kusunoki Masashige (-1336), the representative of those who had struggled to defend this truth and had died in the process. Hiraizumi told

13Toji Banzo, ed. Kenkoku daigaku nenpyo (Tokyo: Kenkoku daigaku dosokai, 1987.) P.43. Hiraizumi also expressed this view to Prince Takamatsu, a second brother of Emperor Hirohito. See, Takamatsu no miya, Takamatsu no miya nikki 2. Showa juninen gogatsu niju nana nichi. (Tokyo: Chuo k5ron sha, 1995) P.439. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 183 them that Kusunoki was still revered by the nation. He added that the driving force behind re-awakening Asia was serving the fundamental spirit of Japan, namely Koon (one's moral indebtedness towards the Emperor.).14 Hiraizumi asked the guests from Manchuria to learn about "the internal character" of Japan during their stay.

His Lectures to Puyi, the Emperor of Manchukuo, in 1940

Hiraizumi delivered a series of six lectures15 to Emperor Puyi (1906-1967) of Manchukuo from March to April 1940. A small group of high officials of the government of

Manchukuo attended the lectures as well. Nakajima, a veteran of the Russo-Japanese War, translated Hiraizumi's lectures into Manchurian for the Emperor.16 In his lectures,

Hiraizumi compared Western history, Oriental history (Toyoshi), and the Nation's History of Japan. He explained the tradition of the southern court view of history, perhaps hoping that the Manchurian Emperor would act according to the historical image of Japanese emperors, such as Emperor Gotoba and Emperor Godaigo, who took up arms for the restoration of the ancient imperial system during the medieval period. Okawa Shumei

(1886-1957), a leading ideologue of the time, said to Hiraizumi that he was impressed by

"the intelligence" of the Manchurian Emperor and was pleased to find Isshin ittoku (One heart, one morality [virtue]) between the Imperial House of Japan and the Imperial House of Manchukuo.17 He sincerely hoped that the Manchurian Emperor would understand this

14 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Koa no gendoryoku," in Daido gakuin, ed., Ronsb, vol.2 (Shinkyo: Manshu gyosei gakuin, March 1940). 15 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon to shina oyobi seiyo shokoku tono kokutai oyobi dogi no konponteki sai ni kansuru kdwa (Shinkyo: Kantogun shireibu, May 1940). The author expresses my appreciation to Professor Shimizu Kiyoshi of Kogakukan University for release of a copy of this lecture when the author visited Ise, Mie prefecture for research on January 2003. 16 Tokyo Asahi shinbun (Gyoshukuban) Saturday, 20 April, 1940, p. 7. 17 See, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higeki Juso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku, 1980.) P.525-6. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 184 particular notion of history, which was driving Japan's efforts to re-awaken Asia.

Hiraizumi was so taken with the whole experience that he wrote the following poem to express his feelings after the last lecture: Not only giving his words many times, giving a long hand shake Through a hand shake the emperor granted me, I felt his heart. I could not shed my tears as seeing the emperor was yuiyuishiku Walking down the front stairs of the palace Ah, Manchuria, this nation will prosper eternally 1 & As this Yuiyuishiki emperor reigns. Hiraizumi delivered a lecture at the Headquarters of Hokushi Army, Kenkoku

University on April 5 and April 6, at the Headquarters of Tenshin Army on April 9, and the

Headquarters of Kanto Army in May.19 His schedule shows that while the government of

Manchukuo invited him in theory, in reality, the Kanto Army of Japan was solely in charge of escorting him. Hiraizumi returned to Tokyo in the afternoon of April 19. A short article,

"Being satisfied with the lecture on the Nation's History: Dr.Hiraizumi, who delivered the lecture, discusses the brightness of the Emperor of Manchukuo," appeared in the newspaper Tokyo Asahi Shinbun on April 20, 1940.20

Two months later, Emperor Puyi arrived in Japan on June 22, 1940, and began a

19-day official visit. During his trip, he met Kotaigo, the mother of Emperor Hirohito and made a stop at Ise Grand Shrine in Mie prefecture. He met Emperor Hirohito on June 26.

According to a source in Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Emperor Puyi thanked Hirohito for resolving various border incidents, including Nanmonhan, through his moral influence and for demonstrating his commitment to the new construction of Asia by

18 Nagae Taro of Institute for National Defense Studies (Boeicho senshi kenkyu shitsu) kindly provided the author with a copy of the poem during his research trip to Japan on January 2003. 19 Tanaka Takashi, Hiraizumi shigaku to kokoku shikan. (Tanaka Takashi hyoronshu 2) (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 2000), P.292. 20 Tokyo Asahi shinbun (Gyoshukuban) July 1st 1940. P.7. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 185 following the Seishin of Hakko ichiu?x Emperor Hirohito hosted a farewell lunch for

Emperor Puyi on July 1 and presented him with a sword; Puyi told Hirohito that he would keep it as a memento of the national founding of Manchukuo.

As Hiraizumi wrote in his autobiography Higekijuso, after Puyi visited Ise Grand

Shrine, he decided to build a shrine dedicated to Amaterasu Omikami (the Sun Goddess) in

Manchukuo. On July 7, 1940, a Shinto shrine for the Construction of the Nation was completed in the inner quarters of the Imperial palace in Shinkyo; after this, the Imperial

Rescript of the national principles (Kokuhon teitei shosho) was promulgated. Hiraizumi concluded that "the construction and development of Manchukuo was based upon the morality of the divine emperor of the nation of Japan, wishing for the eternal glory of both countries according to the concept of one mind and one morality (virtue)" (Isshin ittoku).

Dogi (The Way of the Just) of the Imperial Loyalists and that of the Soldiers of the Imperial Army

Hiraizumi played a significant role in the ethical and moral education of Japanese soldiers, likening them to the imperial loyalists of the southern court. In 1938, there was a series of events for the manifestation of the spirit of the imperial loyalists, Kitabatake Akiei and

Nitta Yoshisada, both of whom died in the defense of the southern court during the 14th century. Hiraizumi was requested to deliver lectures at events for the 600th anniversary of those imperial loyalists, and at the 600-year anniversary of Nitta Yoshisada at the

21 Tokyo saiban shiryo kanko kai, ed., Tokyo saiban kyakka miteishutsu bengogawa shiryo. 2 (Tokyo: Kokusho kankokai, 1995). P.400. Keep in mind that this is the collection of the documents, which the team of Japanese defence lawyers were not allowed to use in court during the Tokyo War Crimes Trial (1946-8). 22 Tokyo saiban shiryo kanko kai, ed., Tokyo saiban kyakka miteishutsu bengogawa shiryo. 2 (Tokyo: Kokusho kankokai, 1995). P.400-1. 23 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso. (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980), P.529. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 186

Fujishima Shrine in Fukui prefecture, his home province, he discussed "Remembering

Nitta Yoshisada" on May 5, 1938.24 There was also a series of events for the 600-year anniversary of Kitabatake Akiie in Osaka prefecture, at the Abeno Shrine where he was enshrined. Hiraizumi gave a lecture called "Remembering Kitabatake Akiie" at the Youth

Academic Hall of Osaka on May 7, 193825 A few days later, he talked about

"Remembering Kitabatake Akiie and Nitta Yoshisada," at the Tokyo Yoseikan.

The series of events suggests a conscious effort on the part of state authorities to promote those historical figures. But why was Kitabatake Akiie chosen over other imperial loyalists of the southern court? The historical image of Kitabatake is that of a young man who obeyed his parents, served his master, and died in battle at the age of 21. In other words, he acted according to the moral principle of Ko for his parents, he bravely fought following the ethical principle of Gi (the Just), and he served his master according to the ultimate moral principle of Chu (Loyalty). He embodied all principles with which the state authorities hoped to inculcate Japanese youth. The Japanese media actively participated in the promotion of Kitabatake in journals and youth magazines in 1938.

Many young people were inspired by Kitabatake. They tried to revive his spirit in their hearts and acted according to his spirit, knowing that like him, they would be remembered by future generations, and their spirits would live eternally in "history." By following his example, Japanese youth could find a "historical" meaning to their participation in Japan's military operations, even if they died in the Chinese "Incident."

24 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nitta Yoshisada ko wo shinobu (Fukui: Bekkaku kanheisha Fujishima jinja shamusho, May 1938). 25 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kitabatake Akiie ko wo shinobu (Kitabatake ko roppyakunen kinen shuppan) (Osakafu shakai kyoiku sosho, no.8) (Osaka: Osakafu shakai kyoikuka, June 1938). 26 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kitabatake Akiie Nitta Yoshisada ryoko wo shinobu," Kenmu. 3.4 (July 1938). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 187

The historical image of Kitabatake Akiie aided in the recruitment of young men to military service, a trend that continued in following years. Many young men died in a "historical" replica of the death of Kitabatake Akiie. They "religiously" believed their deaths had

"historical" meaning; as imperial loyalists, their spirits would live on.

In Hiraizumi's view, the present and the past were united and became one through the application of the southern court view of history to current affairs. From this point of view, "the tragic history" (Hishi) of the southern court and the "struggles" of the

Sino-Japanese Incident became one.28 The Way of Gi (Dogi) of Japan was eternal and unchangeable. The correctness of the Way of Gi of the imperial Loyalists of the southern court was the source of the strength of the Japanese soldiers, who, through Hiraizumi's teaching, revived the Way of Gi in their hearts. In this way, the Japanese soldiers of 1940

and the imperial loyalists of the 14l century were united in the realm of "spirituality."

Japanese soldiers believed they were fighting in China for the continuation of the Nation's

History. Thus, while Japan was expanding militarily, it saw itself as going back towards the

beginning of the Nation's History. Using this "historical" logic, Japan derived strength

from its "history."

How did Hiraizumi view the Sino-Japanese Incident that began in 1937 and

continued until the War began in the Pacific in 1941? In a lecture "The Mental Attitudes of

the Generals" (Sho no kokorogamae) delivered at the Cadet Academy of the Imperial

27 Some believed this view and others did not. Even so, they found comfort in the explanation. More importantly, however, this was what young soldiers were told before their departure for battle. This was the historical objective for which they fought and died. If one accepted the historical fact, then one could not criticize the continuing practice of the Yasukuni, as to do so was insensitive to those who lost family members in battle. This is part of the sentiment which some experience while they are in Japan. 28 He identified resisting forces simply as "revolution." Hiraizumi used the modern concept of revolution to re-interpret the southern court view of history. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 188

Army (Rikugun yoka shikan gakko) on September 15, 1938,29 Hiraizumi commented on the Sino-Japanese Incident, saying it was "an incident in name. But in substance it goes without saying it was nothing else but the great war." This comment is crucial to an understanding of his view of Japan's military operations in China. What Hiraizumi was saying, in effect, was that the history of the world was changing. He saw the development in Europe and the development in Asia as one grand historical development. He defined the mission of Japan in the Sino-Japanese Incident30 and asserted that the revival of

Bushido was indispensable if Japan were to assume this role.

"The Way of the Just" of Kun (the Emperor)

In 1939, several events commemorated the spirit of Emperor Gotoba and Emperor

Godaigo who during the medieval period had tried to restore the rule of the state by the

Emperor (Tenno Goshinsei), using armed force against the governing warrior class, hence demonstrating their Gi. As part of this commemoration, Hiraizumi wrote an article,

"Welcoming the Festival for Honoring 700 Years of Emperor Gotoba and 600 Years of

Emperor Godaigo" for the journal Kenmu (1939).31 In it, he drew upon the ethical principle of Gi to analyze the international affairs of contemporary East Asia. He also brought up the concept of revivalism and the dichotomous view of the world based upon a tension between "revolution" (Kakumei) and "the power of tradition" (Dento no chikara), showing the "historical" role of Japan in current affairs. The article sets his understanding

29 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Shd taruno kokorogamae (Tokyo: Rikugun yoka shikan gakko, November 1938). 30 Hiraizumi repeated this view in the lecture "The Essence of the Nation's History." The view of the war he presented in these lectures led to his being purged as a wartime writer in 1946. 31 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Ronsetsu: Gotoba tenno nanahyakunen Godaigo tenno roppyakunen no onsai wo mukae tatematsurite," Kenmu 4.1 (January 1939). Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 189 of the significance of the Sino-Japanese conflict of 1937 within the framework of his analysis of current affairs in East Asia and the ethical concept of Gi (and the Nation's

History of Japan).

Hiraizumi reiterated his view of Japan's role in Asia in "The Revival of Bushido," published in Great Asianism (Dai Ajia Shugi) on September 1, 1933. With respect to the

Sino-Japanese war, he asserted that "the Japanese must realize the three people's principles of China were an offspring of the French Revolution. By realizing it, returning to the original form of the Orient (Toyo), they must seek its purest Way (Michi)." He concluded that to bring the Orient to its original Way, Japan must guide the Orient according to its

"tradition." The article demonstrates his analysis of international affairs according to the theory of the conflict between "the power of tradition" and "revolution." Admittedly,

Hiraizumi simplified the complexities of the international affairs of East Asia. But his view of the conflict between good and evil provided the Japanese with an "ethical" and "moral" explanation, which might have been sentimentally appealing. Hiraizumi argued that each

Japanese individual must revive the spirit of the imperial loyalists and act according to this spirit. In this way, Japan could bring Asia back from chaos to its correct Way (Tadashiki

Michi).32 Yet Hiraizumi's logic resulted in a biased view of Japanese individuals, Japan, and its role in the world that could not and should not be divided into two camps -

"tradition" and "revolution."

Hiraizumi placed the ethical principle of Gi as a source of solution not only for Japan but for Asian affairs as a whole. At the same time, he placed the ethical principle of Gi as the factor that characterized the position Japan must take. To demonstrate this point clearly, Hiraizumi referred to the promotion of the ethical principle of Gi by two emperors during the 13th and 14th centuries. Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 190

Gi (the Just) and Koon (One's moral indebt to the Emperor)

Hiraizumi was in charge of the "historical" and "spiritual" aspects of the series of nationwide festivals honoring Emperor Gotoba and Emperor Godaigo. To this end, he wrote two books on Emperor Gotoba before the event celebrating his 700-year anniversary, and he published "Remembering Emperor Gotoba" in the journal Kenmu on March 20,

1939.34 Five days later, the Minase Shrine in Osaka prefecture published his booklet

Remembering Emperor Gotoba.

On April 5, 1939, the main celebration of the 700-year anniversary of Emperor

Gotoba was held at the Youth Lecture Hall of the Meiji Shrine in Tokyo.36 Arima Ryokitsu,

President of Kenmu gikai, opened the event by saying: "The soldiers of the Imperial Army are acting so bravely in the war because they revived the spirits of the imperial loyalists of the southern court." Kido Koichi spoke on "Welcoming the Event Celebrating the 700-year

Anniversary of Emperor Gotoba" and explained the significance of the event in the present circumstances.37 Hiraizumi delivered the lecture "Remembering the Divine Virtue (of

Emperor Gotoba) on the Occasion of the Event Celebrating the 700-year Anniversary of

Emperor Gotoba." He noted: "Emperor Gotoba said that this is the nation where there was

33 Kenmu gikai, whose objective was the promotion of the southern court view of history and Hiraizumi the key member, played a significant role in the organization of these events from its founding in March 1936. 34 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Gotoba tenno wo shinobi tatematsuru," Kenmu (Tokyo: Kenmu gikai, 1939). 35 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Gotoba tenno wo shinobi tatematsuru (Osaka: Kenhei taisha Minase Jingii shamusho, March 1939). 36 It had been two years since the start of the Sino-Japanese Incident, and it seemed likely to continue. Thus, the manifestation of the national spirit (Kokumin seishin) must be promoted. Kenmu Gikai may have organized the event as part of the Movement for the Total Mobilization of the National Spirit (Kokumin seishin sodoin undo) orchestrated by the Ministry of Internal Affairs (Nanmusho) after 1937. 37 Kido Koichi, "Gotoba tenno nanahyakunen sai ni atarite," Kenmu 4.3 (May 1939). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 191 the Way, the Way of the Just" (Dogi).38 He used this historical anecdote to define Japan's national character in 1939. As the people belonging to the nation of the Way, contemporary

Japanese, must repay their moral indebtedness to the Emperor (Koon ni mukuiru) through their deeds and following the ethical principle of Gi. Hiraizumi wanted the nation to reflect upon this point, as the war in China was inevitably going to be prolonged. He claimed that to repay one's moral indebtedness to the Emperor was the ultimate objective for present-day Japanese.

The Promotion of the Martial Arts by Kun (Emperor)

In the spring of 1940, Hiraizumi became involved in the promulgation of historical images of Emperor Gotoba and Emperor Godaigo as promoters of the martial arts. At a meeting of the Ministry of Health's (Koseisho) Committee for the Promotion of the Martial Arts

(Budo shinko iinkai), Hiraizumi talked about "The Area, Basics, and Objectives of the

Promotion of the Martial Arts" on April 22, 1940. He explained that the martial arts, which had existed in the nation from ancient times, derived from the understanding of inevitable death (Hisshi). The objective of martial arts, he claimed, was the manifestation of the

Imperial Way (Kodo).39 To explain what he meant by this latter point, he referred to medieval history, discussing, for example, how Emperor Gotoba and Emperor Godaigo promoted the martial arts by taking up arms and challenging the rule of the Hojo Bakufu

(feudal government) to clarify the National Polity (Kokutai). Both held the ideal of "rule of a state by immediate direction of the Emperor" (Tenno Goshinsei) and tried to realize that

38 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Gotoba tenno nanahyakunensai ni atarite tsutsushinde seitokuwo shinobi tatematsuru," Kenmu 4.3 (May 1939). 39 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Budo shinko no han'i, kihon oyobi mokuhyo ni tsuite," Budo koron 3.1 (Tokyo: Dai Nihon Seifu kai, February 1941). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 192 ideal. Emperor Gotoba fought against the Hojo Bakufu in the Jokyu War of 1221. He failed in his attempt and was sent to an isolated island of Oki. As for Emperor Godaigo, he succeeded in his efforts to effect change in what became known as the Kenmu Restoration of 1334. However, it lasted only for a short period. The important thing is that both acted to realize their ideals. Their ideals remained unrealized, and their bodies physically ceased to exist, but their spirit and ideals were alive in 1940 in the eyes of those who lived and hoped to live inside "history." What is important here is not the realization of the ideal, but the process of trying to realize it. It is fair to say that these two Emperors represented

Hiraizumi's ideal image of Kun (master) or emperor. Hiraizumi likely expected the present emperor to follow their ethical example; he did not mind remonstrating with the Emperor when he did not live up to these standards.40

Hiraizumi also discussed the unity of scholarship and the martial arts in the

indoctrination of the domain (Han no kyoka), making two important points. First, as ideology, the martial arts could consolidate the state's objective. Second, the promotion and popularization of the martial arts lay in the domain of personal activity. Hiraizumi unified those two, defining the "proper" attitude for the practice of the martial arts. If the martial arts were practiced with a view to reviving the "rule of a state by immediate

direction of the Emperor" (Tenno shinsei), he said, this would ensure the preservation of the National Polity (Kokutai).

Japanese Mythology and the Significance of Expansionism

State authorities launched the promotion of the ancient mythological concept of Hakko

ichiu in 1938 as Japan's military operations continued in China. The Cabinet, the Ministry

40 See, Hiraizumi's lecture to Emperor Hirohito on December 5 1932. (See, chapter five). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 193 of Education, and the Ministry of Internal affairs, co-published the official booklet Hakko ichiu (Eight corners of the world under one roof)41 in December 1937.42 Within this official state framework, Hiraizumi began to promote this mythological concept. As early as 1934, in fact, Hiraizumi had briefly discussed the concept in the preface for a modern colloquial Japanese translation of Nihon Shoki (720),4 one of three books, Nihon Shoki,

Jinno shotoki (1339-43), and Dai Nihon Shi (1657-1906), which Hiraizumi most revered.

In 1938, Hiraizumi traced the beginning of the Nation's History, as described in Nihon

Shoki, explained "the inclusiveness" of the National Polity as it appeared in the spirit of opening the nation (Chokoku), delivered a lecture on the "historical" background of the concept and its definition, and argued for the "historical" legitimacy of the overseas expansion of Japan from the standpoint of the Way of Gi (the Just). Paradoxically, to return to "Japan" was the beginning of the expansion of "Japan."

Hiraizumi delivered a lecture "Hakko Ichiu" at a seminar for instructors at the headquarters of the Teikoku zaigo gunjinkai in Tokyo on January 25, 1939.44 (Hiraizumi was appointed its chief advisor [Komon] on March 25, 1937.)45 The organization was originally designed to serve military reserves and retired soldiers nationwide, but during the 1930s, it functioned as a powerful political institution to assist the Central League of the Movement for the Total Mobilization of the National Spirit (Kokumin seishin sodoin undo chuo renmei).

41 Interpretation of the term was one of the key issues at Tokyo war crimes trial 1946-9. In the judgment of the trial in 1949, it was translated as "worldly brotherhood." 42 Naikaku, Naimusho, Monbusho,ed., Nihon seishin no hatsuyo: Hakko ichiu no seishin (Kokumin seishin sodoin shiryo, vol.4; Tokyo: Kokumin seishin sodoin chuo renmei, December 1937). 43 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nihon shoki kaidai," in Ueda Toshikazu and Inoue Tetsujiro Kanshu, eds., Nihon Shoki (Dai Nihon bunko Kokushi ban) (Tokyo: Dai Nihon bunko kanko kai, 1934). 44 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Hakko ichiu (Tokyo: Teikoku zaigo gunjinkai, March 1939). 45 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 194

In the lecture, Hiraizumi listed the key characteristics of the mythological concept

Hakko Ichiu. It meant the denial of the seclusion policy (Sakoku shugi), implemented by the Tokugawa Bakufu during the Edo period (1603-1867). Hakko Ichiu was a friendly and anti-imperialistic concept, but ichiu (one roof) did not include international liberalism

(Kokusai jiyu shugi). Rather, ichiu included the concept of family state (Kazoku shugi).

Finally, Hiraizumi claimed Japan was truly a nation of the Way of Virtue (Ddtoku) and the

Way of Just (Dogi); therefore, it had the responsibility of rescuing Sina (China). This last objective could be accomplished only after the Japanese returned to being "true Japanese"

(Shin no Nihonjin) by reviving Bushido and its ethical concept of Gi. This view and its logic became a major component of the historical view of the Great East Asian War (Dai

Toa Senso shikan). Some proponents, including Hiraizumi and his students, carried this historical view into the postwar period.

Hiraizumi's Lectures at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1939

Hiraizumi delivered a series of seven lectures at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

(Gaimusho) in February-March, 1939. Sawada, the Vice-Minister, visited Hiraizumi's residence in Akebonocho and asked him to deliver these lectures. His lectures were mandatory for all high-ranking officials: the Minister, the Chief of Bureaus, and the

Vice-Minister, all attended. Hiraizumi delivered a lecture on "The History of Japanese

Diplomacy based upon the Nation's History."4 He also spoke on Hakko Ichiu (eight corners of the world under one roof). Interestingly, Hiraizumi explained the concept of

Hakko Ichiu to these Japanese diplomats in 1939, one year before the Tripartite Alliance

46 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokutai shikan ni motozuku Nihon gaikoshi," Gaimusho shuyo tanren shiryo 1 (Tokyo: Gaimusho, July 1939). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 195

(Sangoku domei) was signed between Japan, Germany, and Italy on September 27, 1940.

In this instance, he applied it to justify the Great Just (Taigi) of Japan which had existed since the opening of the nation. Hence, Hiraizumi placed this diplomatic arrangement of

1940 within the ancient mythology of Japan.

In response to a request from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Hiraizumi gave a series of five lectures in June 1940 under the title of "The Kenmu Restoration." Tani, the

Vice-Minister, introduced the lecture, emphasizing the significance of the Great Just

(Taigi) of the opening (founding) of the nation (Chokoku). In the lectures, as a historian of medieval Japan and a proponent of the southern court view of history, Hiraizumi said that contemporary Japanese (diplomats in this case) could reflect upon the Way of the Just

(Dogi) of the nation of Japan at present by examining the Kenmu Restoration.47 In 1940,

Japan celebrated its 2,600-year anniversary according to the imperial calendar (Koki) of

Japan. Accordingly, Hiraizumi went on to discuss Hakko ichiu and the idea of nurturing correctness (Tadashiki wo yashinau). He emphasized the significance of the concepts expressed by the Emperor Jinmu at the beginning of the Nation's History, as these were written down in Nihon Shoki (720), thereby providing a "historical" and "mythological" meaning to contemporary Japanese expansionism.48

Hiraizumi delivered the lecture "Welcoming Two Thousand Six Hundred Years" in

Nagoya City in Aichi prefecture on February 26, 1940. In this lecture, Hiraizumi again discussed the idea of "nurturing correctness" (Tadashiki wo yashinau). He again asserted that Japan must manifest its true strength according to the spirit of Yamato and reminded his audience the Japanese must renew their determination to cope with the existing

47 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kenmu no chuko ni tsuite: Tokyo teikoku daigaku bungakubu kyoju Hiraizumi Kiyoshi bungaku hakushi kokushi kowa (Tokyo: Gaimusho, June 1940). 48 See Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Dento (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1940). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 196 situation.49 It is clear that Hiraizumi was consumed with the thought that Japan must return to the beginning of the Nation's History to become "true Japan." And in turn, by accepting his explanation, the Japanese also accepted the course their nation was taking; they had a sense of mission to realize the great ideal (Taigi), expressed by the first Emperor at the opening of the nation (Chokoku). This logic constituted an essential part of the

"Japanese" view of the Great East Asian War. In fact, for many Japanese, the "historical" and "mythological" logic still serves as a source of their understanding of Japan's part in the war. Meanwhile, in the eyes of many who suffered from Japan's actions, "the Japanese as a nation" remain strangely unrepentant and even righteously re-affirm their cause. In other words, this supposedly "prewar," "historical," and "mythological" logic is a living logic, functioning as a source of the "righteousness" of the "un-repentant" Japanese who continue to defend "history."

As this chapter has shown, the southern court view of history connected (connects)

"mythological" logic and "historical" logic and gave (gives) the "ethical" and "moral" validity to Japan's reason for starting the war. Hiraizumi promoted this understanding of the Great East Asian War, uniting it with his Shinto faith, strengthened by his absolute commitment to State Shinto. For him, "history" was expanding from its beginning in

Yamato to present-day Asia and the world. He sincerely wished that all Japanese would take part in "history" according to the spirit of opening the nation (Chokoku seishin) and the ethical and moral principles upon which the southern court view of history was based.

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kigen nisen nen wo mukaete (Nagoya: Nagoyashi shakai kyoikuka, June 1941). Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 197

CHAPTER SEVEN

"Spiritual" History and the Great East Asian War: 1941-1945

When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii and other parts of Asia on December 8, 1941, war broke out in the Pacific.1 For the Japanese, the Great East Asian War (Daitoa senso) had a religious component, based on State Shinto (Kokka Shinto) that began in the 19th century. This chapter will show that historian Hiraizumi Kiyoshi played a key role in explaining its significance to the Japanese public. The chapter examines the war as

Hiraizumi placed it within the framework of the Nation's History of Japan, showing how he applied spiritual history to give "historical" meaning to the death of individuals in the war. In fact, many young people "found the place to die" according to the view of death and life (Shiseikan) he advocated. Finally, it looks at the imminent defeat of the Imperial

Nation in 1944-1945, showing how Hiraizumi called for the co-existence of spirit and

science, even when Japan was militarily on the defensive.

The Great East Asian War through the Eyes of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi

Hiraizumi never regarded the war between Japan and the United States as a Pacific War

(Taiheiyo senso). Rather, he placed it within the context of the Nation's History of Japan;

to him, it was the Great East Asian war (Daitoa senso).2 It was also called "the Holy

1 For his immediate response to Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, see Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kessen no kadode ni: Taisho ni kanhai shite," Nihon dokusho shinbun, 15 December, 1941. He also spoke at a lecture meeting at Tokyo Imperial University on December 23, 1941; see Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Taisho wo haishite," Gyosho 4 (June 1942). 2 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964), p. 248. Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 198

War" (Seisen), thereby adding a religious connotation. Spiritual history, which Hiraizumi had consistently taught since the late 1920s, was indispensable in shaping these two images. As has been shown, Hiraizumi brought elements of faith and belief into the study of the Nation's History as early as 1927 when he published "The Bone Marrow of the

Study of the Nation's History" in the journal Shigaku zasshi? and faith and belief remained significant to him throughout the Great East Asian War.

In fact, faith represented the cornerstone of Hiraizumi's understanding of history.

He took the period known as Kamiyo (the ages of gods), part of Japanese mythology, as a literal part of the Nation's History; he taught that the age of gods was the beginning of the

Nation's History in his lectures and seminars at Tokyo Imperial University. The Outline of the Nation's History (Kaitei kokushi gaisetsu) and Lecture Notes on Japanese Intellectual

History (Ninon shisoshi koza),5 textbooks which Hiraziumi assigned for his students, started with the period of Kamiyo. Hiraizumi held that what happened during the age of gods was impossible to confirm at present: quite simply, one must have faith. The historian

Osumi Kazuo wrote that Hiraizumi's method of teaching reminded him of "religious recruitment" {Nyushin). In his classes, Hiraizumi first asked students about their birthdays.

Then, he asked how they knew they were born that day. How did they know they were

sons of their parents? Just as there are limits to our knowledge about these things,

Hiraizumi said, we cannot know everything about the beginning of the opening of the

nation in the Nation's History. Therefore, we must have faith. Without believing in the

validity of the opening of the nation, we cannot conceive of Japanese history. Hiraizumi

3 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokushigaku no kotsuzui,'''Shigaku zasshi 38.8 (August 1927). 4 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kaitei kokushi gaisetsu (kan) (Tokyo: Keimeisha, 1943). The Outline of the Nation's History was critical of Darwin's theory of evolution. 5 Teidai purinto renmei hen go kogi purinto, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei Nihon shisoshi (zen) Tokyo Teikoku daigaku bungakubu kogi (Tokyo: Teidai purinto renmei, April 25 1942). Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 199 would explain this, then ask, "Do you understand?"6 This anecdote suggests that

Hiraizumi considered the study of the Nation's History could only begin with the act of having faith in "history." Going back to the beginning of history meant having faith in its historical (mythological) truth. For this reason, Hiraziumi took Kojiki (712) and Nihon

Shoki (720), ancient historical writings that recorded the earliest periods of history and mythology, very seriously. For him, these should be revered and believed.

Historian Irokawa Daikichi entered the undergraduate program in the Division of the Nation's History in the Faculty of Literature at Tokyo Imperial University in 1943. He recalled that Hiraizumi and his students were dominant in the Division. When Irokawa attended Hiraizumi's lecture, Hiraziumi asked him about Kojiki. Irokawa responded by saying it was a fun reading. Hiraziumi scolded Irokawa - how dare he find it a fun read?7

This story shows how seriously Hiraizumi treated those two writings in the classroom and what he expected from his students. For one thing, Hiraizumi expected students to follow the rigid mannerisms that he had learned from the Kimon school. For another, he expected them to have faith in the spirit of representative works of the Nation's History, such as

Kojiki. Hiraizumi was appointed to the committee on civil examinations on March 21,

1942.9 If students wanted to pass the qualifying exam to become high officers of the civil government (Koto bunkan shiken) by 1943, they had to answer questions according to the content of these history textbooks. In this way, Hiraizumi's view of the Nation's History was required reading for students who became high-ranking bureaucrats. After 1945, many

6 Osumi Kazuo, "Nihon no rekishigaku ni okeru 'Gaku' Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ni tsuite," in Chusei shisoshi e no koso: rekishi, bungaku, shukyo (Tokyo: meicho kankokai), pp. 236-37. 7 Irokawa Daikichi, "Ienaga Saiban no Kuromakutachi," in Meiji no seishin (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobo, 1965), p. 240. 8 Hiraizumi regarded Nihon Shoki more highly than Kojiki. On many occasions, Hiraizumi wrote that Nihon Shoki, Jinno Shdtoki, and Dai Nihon Shi were the main pillars of the Nation's History. 9 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964), p. 49. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 200 remained in various ministries, even though Hiraizumi was purged as a wartime writer.

Japanese mythology was used to explain why Japan should undertake a war on behalf of Asia against the United States and Britain. In fact, when the Great East Asian War began, the Japanese were already on their way to the realization of Hakko ichiu, the ancient and mythological ideal of Japan; in effect, they were going back to the beginning of the

Nation's History to reform the current situation in Asia. In 1940, Japan celebrated the

2,600-year anniversary of the opening of the country, according to the imperial calendar of

Japan. At festivals held all over the nation, the Japanese public were reminded that they should return to the beginning of the Nation's history, to the time when Emperor Jinmu declared the opening of the nation (Chokoku) and announced Hakko ichiu.

Not surprisingly, Hiraizumi was involved in the preparations for this occasion. For example, on December 27, 1938, he was appointed to the research committee for the preservation of historic relics relating to Emperor Jinmu;10 in this capacity, he traveled to western Japan where he visited historic sites with colleagues, such as Yamada Yoshio

(1873-1958), an eminent linguist of the Japanese language and a leading figure in the

Research Center for the National Spirit and Culture.11 Hiraizumi was also appointed head of the research committee on Kikuchi Taketoki (-1333), a sub-division of Kenmu gikai. He traveled to Kyushu to visit the Kikuchi family and collected historical materials to illuminate the spirit of the family (Kikuchi ke no seishin). The committee published The

History of the Imperial Loyalism of the Kikuchi (Kichichi kinno shi), a booklet on Kikuchi

Taketoki, in April 1941.12 Hiraizumi subsequently identified the seishin of the Kikuchi family and the Mizumuse family as sources of Japan's strength: their family spirits, he said,

10 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964), p. 42. 11 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Zokuzoku sanga ari (Tokyo: Tachibana shoten, 1961), pp. 73-74. 12 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kikuchi kinno shi (Tokyo: Kikuchi shi kinno kensho kai, 1941). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 201 would keep the Nation's History shining brightly.

Throughout 1940, Hiraizumi gave lectures celebrating the Imperial Nation's continuity of history. In "Welcoming 2,600 years," delivered at the lecture hall of

Nakanomachi Elementary School in Nagoya City of Aichi prefecture on February 26,

1940,13 he discussed the ancient histories of Greece and Rome, as well as Chinese history.

These civilizations started very early, but the Greek and Roman civilizations did not survive, and while China had a long history, it was not the history of a single country.

Rather, 23 dynasties rose and collapsed throughout the course of Chinese history. Based on this, Hiraizumi argued that the moral characters of the Chinese emperors were not satisfactory under Heaven. In contrast, Japan's history had proceeded into the present without discontinuity because of the moral character of the Japanese emperors. In his lectures, Hiraizumi added that Japanese history had not merely survived. Indeed, some emperors actively demonstrated the Way of Gi in their attempts to bring back Japan to what it had originally been, as for example, in the Jokyu war or the Kenmu Restoration.

Moreover, countless Imperial Loyalists had demonstrated the Way of Gi for their absolute

loyalties {CM) to their emperors and had defended history at the cost of their own lives. In

other words, the Japanese enjoyed their extraordinarily long-lived history because of the

sacrificed lives of these noble emperors and selfless loyalists. Hiraizumi encouraged his

Japanese audiences to take part in the continuation of the "history." Like the imperial

loyalists who preceded them, Japanese soldiers must defend "history" and help it continue.

Once they accepted this definition, Japanese soldiers found a sense of mission in their roles

in the Great East Asian War.

13 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kigen nisenroppyakunen wo mukaete (Nagoya: Nagoya shi shakai kyoikuka, June 20, 1941). Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 202

A year after Japan's successful attack on Pearl Harbor, Hiraizumi wrote "Eternal

Two Thousand Six Hundred and Two Years" for the weekly magazine Asahi. In this

article, he described the United States, a former colony of the United Kingdom, as a

country which had revolted against its home country. The US, he pointed out, was only 160

years old. He also alluded to China, reminding his audience that while China was an old

nation, it had seen a series of revolutions; thus, it had repeatedly experienced the demise of

the nation. In contrast, Japan had never had a revolution or any other state disruption

because of its divine virtue (morality) and the influence of the emperor (Koi). At the same

time, as noted above, Japan's imperial subjects loyally assisted (Yokusan) and defended

(Goji) the country. As the article makes clear, Hiraizumi defined Japan's initial victories in

China and the Pacific from the angle of moral and historical characteristics. In his view, the

young nation America lacked history and tradition, while Japan was the true Imperial

Nation. Hence, Japan's initial victory in December 1941 was inevitable.

One of the most significant concepts in Japanese mythology was the "Spirit of

Opening the Country" (Chokoku Seishin). When Emperor Jinmu, "the first Emperor,"

militarily subdued the surrounding countries, he founded the nation of Yamato, as recorded

in Kojiki and Nihon Shoki. Emperor Jinmu made a speech at the opening of the nation, in

which he declared he would like "to spread the imperial will to the eight corners of the

world." Based on this sentence in the first imperial rescript, Satomi Kishio came up with

the term Hakko ichiu in the 1920s.15 Hiraizumi's efforts to promote "the spirit of opening

14 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Yukyu nisen roppyaku nen," Asahi, 15 February, 1942. 15 As mentioned in Chapter Five, Hiraizumi used the term in public for the first time when he delivered the lecture "Hakko Ichiu" at Teikoku zaigo gunjin kai in 1938. Because the term Hakko Ichiu (Eight corners of the world under one roof) appeared when Japan signed the Tripartite Treaty with Germany and Italy on September 27, 1940, the treaty had significance from a Japanese "spiritualist" point of view. It was signed within the framework of the Nation's History; some Japanese had the impression that Germany and Italy understood and accepted this arrangement. Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 203 the country" included Hakko Ichiu and "the nurturing of correctness" as the war intensified

in the Pacific during the first half of the 1940s. He elaborated on his ideas in his lectures,

as for example, "The Great Ideal of Opening the Nation," given on radio, April 1, 2, and 3,

1942.16 Partly because of Hiraizumi's efforts, many Japanese were taught to participate in

the realization of an ancient and mythological ideal. They understood the significance of

the war against the US and Britain in the Pacific as one of the final stages in accomplishing

the mythological ideal of Hakko Ichiu}1

Hiraizumi drew on some key "historical" events in the medieval period to give a

"historical" explanation of the significance of the Great East Asian War. In fact, it is not

going too far to say that medieval history influenced Japan's policies from 1941 to 1945.

To cite one example, Hiraizumi published "Koki nisen roppyakunen wo mukaete Jinno

shdtoki wo omou" in Jinno shotoki (November 1940). In the article, he called for the need

to read books that were revered among the proponents of the southern court view of history

and the Nation's History in general.18 Furthermore, he located the source of Japan's

strength in the medieval period and viewed the Great East Asian War as the continuation of

the Jokyu War (1221), the Kenmu Restoration (1334), and the Meiji Restoration (19th

century).19

Then, at a festival celebrating the 700-year anniversary of Emperor Juntoku at

Emperor Jinmu called for the notion of nurturing moral correctness (Tadashiki wo Yashinau). In an article published in the 1940s, Hiraizumi said that Japan enjoyed 2,600 years of history because the Japanese had followed Emperor Jinmu's teaching of "nurturing the correctness" since the beginning of history. 16 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Chokoku no dai riso," Hoso 2.5 (May 1942). 17 The Japanese were trying to go back to the beginning of the history while Japan was moving southward in the Pacific during the Great East Asian War. 18 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Koki nisen roppyakunen wo mukaete Jinno shotoki wo omou," in Jinno shdtoki (Koki nisen roppyakunen kinen shuppan) (Ishikawa: Kokuhei chusha Shirayama hime jinja, 1940). 19 The Jokyu War was particularly significant in terms of the establishment of the Way of Gi by Emperor Gotoba and his son, Emperor Juntoku (1197-1242).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 204

Kudan Military Officers' Club (Kudan gunjin kaikan) on October 14, 1942, Hiraizumi spoke on Kagiri naki koon wo aogitatematsuru. x He said that while Asia was annexed and exploited by Western powers, Japan did not submit. Moreover, Japan helped

Manchuria, China, and other parts of Great East Asia and was now on its way to defeating

Anglo-America. "Where does the power of Japan derive from?" he asked rhetorically. His answer: it is the power of the Way of Gi, which has always existed in the nation of Japan.

Simply stated, Japan could embark on great ventures abroad because of the Way of Gi.

Because of Emperor Gotoba and Emperor Juntoku, the Imperial Nation now stood as the nation where there was the Way, and neighboring nations were able to share its light. In this context, Hiraizumi asked the audience to think about how each could repay a moral debt to these emperors.22 The Japanese must act according to the Way of Gi in the midst of the Great East Asian War in 1942 to repay for their moral debt to Emperors Gotoba and

Juntoku. Hiraizumi asked the people from Manchuria and China to share the Way of Gi

(Dogi) with the Japanese so that they could work together.

In this same speech, Hiraizumi compared the Mongolian attempts to invade Japan during the 13th century to Japan's present confrontation with the United States and Britain.

He used the philosophy of the divine nation (Shinkoku shiso) to describe Japan's war against the US in the Pacific. The Mongolians tried to conquer Japan during the medieval period; but despite their vast army, they failed. The event was a crucial moment in the

Nation's History of Japan: it triggered a National Self-Awakening (Kokuminteki jikaku),

20 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Juntoku tenno nanahyaku nen sai haishiki narabini kinen koenkai," Kenmu 7.6 (November 1942): 51-52. 21 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kagiri naki koon wo aogitatematsuru," Kenmul.6 (November 1942): 23-47. 22 There were people from Manchuria and China in the audience, so Hiraizumi mentioned that Manchuria, China, and Japan were able to harmonize and help each other because of the power of the Way of Gi in Japan. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 205 when the country united to resist the invasion, expelling the troops of the largest empire in history. Admittedly, a decisive factor in the failure of the Mongolian attempt to conqueror

Japan was a typhoon that struck their ships in the gulf of Hakata, near the island of Kyushu.

But the Japanese saw the storm as proof that Japan was a divine nation, calling the winds that sank the enemy's ships Kamikaze (divine wind). Indeed, the Mongolian attempts to conquer the divine nation shaped the historical psyche of Japan. In this instance, the

Japanese saw themselves as potential victims of the territorial ambitions of a foreign nation.23 However, they foiled the attempt through their national self-awakening and subsequent national unity.

This historical psyche (outlook) was reinforced at the end of the 19th century when an American ship arrived in the port of Shimoda in Suruga, opening the nation (Kaikoku) to the West. Inspired by Bakumatsu shishi like Hashimoto Sanai24 and Yoshida Shoin,

Hiraizumi compared how they dealt with the coming of the "black ships" from the United

States at the end of the 18th century to the Great East Asian War. The arrival of ships from the West reinforced the historical psyche in which the Japanese saw themselves as victims of the territorial ambitions of foreign nations. This time, however, the divine wind did not blow for the defense of the imperial nation, and Japan was forced to sign an unequal commercial treaty with the United States. As a result, the US gained extraterritoriality in

Japan. Despite their failure, however, the Bakumatsu shishi had revived the spirit of the imperial loyalists in their hearts and acted accordingly.

23 They maintained this mentality even when Japan became a nation with territorial ambitions "to defend itself from the Western powers" in the 20th century. 24 Hiraizumi repeatedly quoted from Hashimoto Sanai's analysis of international relations at the time of the arrival of the black ships. In fact, Hashimoto's analysis of international relations advocated Japan's alliance with Russia in order to compete against Britain in Asia. Also, his view showed the need for Japan to gain the territories overseas to compete against both Russia, who was extending its influence in China and Britain, who already colonized India.

Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 206

Hiraizumi seemed to inherit the national/historical psyche, namely, the belief that mighty foreign empires repeatedly tried to take over the divine nation. The Mongolians attempted to conquer it twice without success. But the Americans successfully forced

Japan to open its doors - which led to an outpouring of the Nation's spirit. Hiraizumi described the outbreak of the Great East Asian War along the same lines. He insisted that the Great East Asian War was imposed upon Japan. It resulted from the pressures that

Western powers had placed upon Asia for a hundred years. It was the United States that expanded its influence in the Pacific and approached Japan, not the other way around.

Hiraizumi said the following in "Towards New History: recollecting the will of the ardent: fierce: fervent: fervid: precursors," published in the newspaper Tokyo Nichinichi Shinbun on November 24,1942:

This war was not something we wanted. It was the war caused by the pressures others imposed upon us and we had no choice but to fight it because of their provocation. On this point, we must be thankful for the consideration of the Konoe administration, which patiently tried to find a way for reconciliation, and we also have to be thankful for the struggle which the ambassador Nomura had gone through while suppressing his emotions. Their pressures and our patience were what persisted for 100 years.25

Hiraizumi's view of the Great East Asian War, then, began with the understanding that

Japan was provoked to take military action. Those who supported this view lacked any sense of responsibility for opening the war. It was true that the United States and Britain first imposed economic sanctions on Japan. But it is also true that Japan started military

25 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Arata nam rekishi e: retsuretsu taru senkaku no iyoku wo kaiko," Tokyo Nichinichi shinbun, 24 November, 1942. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 207 operations in the colonies and territories of the United States, Britain, and other European nations without declaring war. Yet many Japanese leaders felt responsible for being defeated in August 1945, while feeling no responsibility for beginning the war in 1941 or initiating incidents in 1931 and 1937.26

Giving "Historical" Meaning to the Death of Individuals

"Why am I going to die? How do I rationalize my imminent death in the war?" This was a question that many young people asked themselves as the war intensified. Hiraizumi

Kiyoshi played a significant role in providing an answer to the questions. He gave

"historical" meaning to the imminent deaths of young soldiers. Of course, Hiraizumi's was one of many definitions of the "historical" meaning of death. Nonetheless, his was one of the most significant during the Great East Asian War. Hiraizumi, a devout Shinto practitioner, applied "spiritual" history to give historical meaning to the death of individuals, specifically, those who died for the Imperial Nation.27 Key institutions, including the Imperial Navy, regularly invited Hiraizumi to give lectures on the topic of death and life to their young trainees. On other occasions, he delivered spiritual lectures

(Seishin kowa) before the soldiers who departed for the battlefield next day. A considerable number of soldiers embraced Hiraizumi's explanation that they must die to live inside

26 Hiraizumi continued to study this particular aspect of the war in the postwar period after he was introduced to a book by the American "revisionist" historian, Charles Beard (1874-1948), who argued that President Roosevelt had known Japan's plan to attack Pearl Harbor beforehand. He allowed Japan to attack first so that the United States could declare war against Japan and Germany, Japan's ally. By so doing, the United States would enter the war in Europe to assist Britain against Nazi Germany. 27 As has been noted, in Japan the war was also officially called the Holy War (Seisen), thereby adding a religious connotation. In the case of wartime Japan, this was neither Buddhism nor Christianity, but Shinto, moreover, a particular type of Shinto, State Shinto (Kokka Shinto), which started as part of the state policy of the 19th century the Meiji government.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 208

"history" eternally, just as countless imperial loyalists had died for the defense of the

Emperor and the Imperial Nation.

Hiraizumi was pleased to hear the news of Japan's successful military operations in

Pearl Harbor on December 8, 1941. He said "there was no enemy that could stand in the way of the Heavenly soldiers (or the Emperor's soldiers)" in the weekly magazine Asahi

(January 1942). He believed that after the long-awaited declaration of the war, the

Heavenly soldiers would now punish those who did not obey (matsurohazaru: this verb

appears in Japanese classics such as Kojiki and Nihon shoki). It was inevitable that those who sought profit through war (Ogoru) would be defeated by the imperial armed forces trained in the strong tradition of Chii and Gi (Loyalty and the Just).

What were the sources for his philosophy of death? The ethical and moral principles of the early modern period had a decisive influence upon Hiraizumi's notion of

death, especially during the Great East Asian War. More specifically, he looked to

Yamazaki Ansai (1618-1682) who clarified the ultimate moral principle of CM (Loyalty).

This loyalty was solely directed towards one's master, in this case, the Emperor. The loyal

subject must serve the Emperor, even at the cost of his own life. This is difficult, however,

and some fear death. Thus, Yamaga Soko (1622-1685) developed the ethical concept of Gi

(the Just). Hiraizumi said that one must possess Gi to risk death serving the Emperor; he

identified the Way of Gi as the source of Japan's strength.

Yamazaki and Yamaga interpreted the history of Japan from the standpoint of

morality and ethics; both supported the legitimacy of the medieval southern court. At the

end of the Tokugawa period, Hashimoto Sanai of the Echizen domain carried on the

tradition of Yamazaki's scholarship; during the same period, Yoshida Shoin inherited

Yamaga Soko's scholarship. Inspired by the imperial loyalists of the southern court,

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 209

Hashimoto and Yoshida acted according to the spirit of these loyalists and died as young men. Hiraizumi expected his contemporaries to continue the tradition of self-sacrifice and selfless death as the war intensified in the Pacific during the 1940s.28

Since the early 1930s, Hiraizumi had promoted Kusunoki Masashige (-1336) as the ideal imperial loyalist of the southern court. In terms of giving "historical" meaning to the death that results from serving the Emperor, Kusunoki was an ideal example, because his whole family became extinct. Hiraizumi believed that the Japanese nation must be united according to the spirit of Kusunoki Msashige to face the difficult challenges ahead.

Hiraizumi analyzed Japan's initial success in attacking Pearl Harbor and other parts of Asia in this context. He decided that the unity of 100 million Japanese people, who revived the spirit of Kusunoki Masashige in their hearts, was the reason for Japan's great success in its pre-emptive strike on Pearl Harbor. Moreover, for Hiraizumi, the success was an inevitable result of the spiritual consolidation of the nation that began on December 8, 1931, the date of the Manchurian Incident:

Remembering December 8th of the last year, the day of our hundred million Japanese experienced once in lifetime joy (kangeki). We were impassioned with the desire to serve the Emperor by defending the imperial nation and by sweeping off dark crowds over the Pacific. In other words, on that day Japan came to possess one hundred million of Masashige (Kusunoki Masashige) in their hearts. Since then, the brave men, who were

28 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Kokushi wo tsuranuku mono," Gendai (January 1942). Hiraizumi took the family spirits (Ie no seishin) of Minase and Kikuchi families, who loyally served the imperial house for the centuries. He wrote that the Nation's History of Japan was shining. One should not look at what appears on or above the ground, he said; rather, one must look at the buried foundation stones (Soseki) which support this shining and beautiful history. He wrote that one must think of Soseki not only in history but also in the present. Further, it is not a public issue but a personal one. In "Tenka no godaiji," Gendai (April 1942), Hiraizumi discussed the Kikuchi family (Kikuchi Takeshige,-1341). Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 210

fighting in Hawaii, Malaya, and other places, had advanced while conjuring up the image of Nanko (Kusunoki Masashige) in their hearts. Welcoming December 8th that is rolling around once again, we will be further exercising the devotion to serve by protecting the spirit of pure loyalty of Nanko that dwelt in the heart of each

Hiraizumi also described the Kamikaze pilots in the light of the imperial loyalist Kusunoki

Masashige, and compared the Japanese attack on the Pearl Harbor to the battle of

Minatogawa, where Kusunoki Masashige fought and died in 1336. To explain his logic, he

drew on "the theory of being reborn seven times" (Nanashosetsu) of Nanko (Kusunoki

Masashige): Kusunoki said he would be reborn seven times to defend the Emperor.

Hiraizumi published "The wish of the Nanko to be Reborn Seven Times" in the newspaper

Asahi shinbun on March 9, 1942. In the article, he mentioned Taiheiki (written around

1371) and the highest level of the Way of Gi of Japan, which Kusunoki Masashige

demonstrated at the end of his life in Minatogawa. Hiraizumi pointed out that the men of

high aspiration such as Sakura Azumao (1811-1860), Maki Izumi (1813-1864), and

Yoshida Shoin (1830-1859), all inherited the spirit of unswerving loyalty (Churetsu) from

Kusunoki Masahige. He further argued that the wish of Kusunoki to be reborn seven times

reappeared in the pilots of the special mission troops. Hiraizumi said that today's brave

men, who were fighting on the ground, on the sea, and in the sky in the Great East Asian

War, were guided by the teacher Nanko of 600 years ago.31

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Shijun no nengan," in Tenpei ni tekinashi (Tokyo: Shibundo, September 1943). 30 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Nanko nanasei no nengan," Asahi shinbun, 9 March, 1942. 31 Hiraizumi expected the entire nation of Japan to possess the spirit of Kusunoki Msashige at times of national crisis such as the outbreak of war against Anglo-America in the Pacific. He said that if Japan were spiritually united by possessing the spirit of Nanko, the United States and its allies had no chance of defeating Japan. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 211

By now, it is apparent that Hiraizumi revered historical figures who sacrificed their own lives without hesitation. In one article, he used the cherry blossom (Sakura no hana) to make his point, writing "Like the Flower" for the newspaper Asahi Shinbun on March 15,

1942.32 Here, he said that although the cherry was blossoming, once the wind blew, it would scatter the flower without hesitation. We must be like the flower, he said, when we serve the Emperor: "On the day something important happens, by giving one's own life to the Emperor, by wishing to scatter in the same way the cheery blossoms do, the strength of the imperial nation resides in this dearest wish."

Hiraizumi was inspired by Yoshida Shoin, a man of high aspiration, in terms of his view of the relationship between individuals, families, and the imperial nation based upon a particular set of ethics and morality. Yoshida was a student of Yamaga Soko (1622-1685) and later educated a number of Meiji leaders, including Ito Hirobumi (1841-1909), at

Sonkasonjuku, his private Academy. It was said that Hiraizumi followed the example of

Yoshida's academy when he founded his own academy, Seiseijuku, on April 7, 1933.

Yoshida said that if children were determined to die for their parents, if subjects (Shin) were determined to die for their masters, if subjects were all determined to die for the

Emperor, if they were all determined to unite under this same objective, there was no need

for them to worry about threats from foreign powers. Hiraizumi returned this idea many times.

The Study of Loyal Death (Chushi no gaku) was promoted as part of history

education by 1943. Hiraizumi helped prepare high school students to act loyally for the

Emperor even at the cost of their own lives, echoing Yamazaki Ansai's (1618-1682)

clarification of the ultimate moral principle of CM. He noted that Yamazaki Ansai's

32 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Hana no gotoku," Asahi shinbun 15 March, 1942. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 212

students had carried on his principles; as a result, they had contributed to the great accomplishment of Meiji Restoration. Hirizaumi hoped that present-day high school

students would inherit the spirit of these men and act accordingly. There was no room for the pursuit of scholarship for the sake of self-indulgence, self-interest, or self-promotion in the midst of the Great East Asian War. Rather, Hiraizumi promoted the idea of pursuing scholarship to find a way to sacrifice one's life by serving the Emperor. By 1943, many

students accepted this rationalization for death and listened to Hiraizumi's lectures33 with enthusiasm. In turn, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sincerely believed that he helped students give historical meaning to their potential, if not certain, death in the battlefield.

A member of the student committee organized a lecture by Hiraizumi Kiyoshi

during the 51st Anniversary festival of the 4th High School in Kanazawa, Ishikawa prefecture in 1943. He delivered the lecture "The Study of Loyal Death" on November 5,

1943. The members of Dogijuku distributed the lecture as a pamphlet to the residents of

Jishuryo,34 an on-campus dormitory, where Hiraizumi had lived as student. In this lecture,

Hiraizumi discussed the strict mentor-student relations of the Kimon School, and praised

the feudalistic academic traditions and the warmhearted nature of Saigo Takamori who

contributed to the Meiji Restoration. When Saigo received money from the Imperial Court,

he donated it to the founding of Shugijuku, an academy for gathering Gi. Hiraizumi

mentioned Hashimto Sanai, whom Saigo greatly respected. He said that a leader like

Hashitmoto gave Japan the power to act with a clear sense of purpose. He also discussed

Suganuma Teifu, who wrote The History of Commerce of Great Japan (Dai Nihon

33 The lecture "The Study of Loyal Death" epitomized Hiraizumi's view of scholarship at the time of war. 34 Daiyonkotogakko jishuryo ryoshi hensan iinkai, ed., Daiyonkotogakko Jishuryoshi (Kanazawa: Daiyon koto gakko jishuryo, April 1948). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Appl ication 213

Shogyoshi). Some intellectuals, including Hiraizumi, had recently discovered him, and the media had promoted him widely. Suganuma became popular at this time because of his theory of moving southward (Nanshinron). As Japan was confronting the Western powers in the Pacific, Suganuma's work became more significant to Hiraizumi and others involved with the Imperial Navy, whose purpose was to move southward.

After his discussion of Suganuma in the lecture, he moved on to Hashimoto. He identified the school of Kimon by Yamazaki Ansai as central to Hashimoto's intellectual foundation. He listed Asami Keisai (1652-1711) and Wakabayashi Kyosai (1676-1732), as others who passionately pursued the scholarship of Yamazaki Ansai, noting that these men continued their pursuit of scholarship even in severe poverty:

It was because the purpose of those men was in fact the Study of Loyal Death (Chushi no gaku). Their objective was a pursuit of scholarship to serve the Emperor, to find out the way to put CM and Gi into practice. Clarifying the National Polity of Japan, clarifying the duties of subjects and children, and trying to exercise them through their own bodies and deeds. It was a struggle because it is required them to clarify Taigi Meibun and put the Way in practice.35

Hiraizumi pointed out that such scholarship not only survived but prospered in many parts of the nation. For example, it had re-emerged during the Meiji Restoration, which was accomplished not by accident but by the study of loyal death. Moreover, Hiraizumi believed that the development of Showa Japan was based upon such scholarship; he said that he often lectured at the schools of the Imperial Army and the Imperial Navy, and what the people were looking for at these places was simply the study of loyal death.

35 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Chushi no gaku (Fukui: Fukui ken ch5 kyogakuka nai Fukui kyoikukai, n.d.), p. 18 Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 214

Hiraizumi went on to describe loyal death (Chushi), noting that it is written with two Chinese characters but can be pronounced as one word. It is easy to say but is difficult to put into practice. In order to commit to it, one must constantly cultivate one's soul:

"This is where the Way exists. This is the Way of scholarship. We must worship the Way the wise sages (Sentetsu) walked on and we must think of the Way of the wise sages. We

must walk on the footsteps of those wise sages." Finally, Hiraizumi told the students of the

4th High school that many of them would be conscripted soon. He hoped they would

cultivate their souls and prepare themselves. While some professors were critical of the

views presented in this lecture, members of Dogijuku responded by saying that if they

wished to be true Japanese, they would be inclined towards Nanshu (Saigo Takamori) and

would be inspired by Hiraizumi.

"To Secure the Place to Die" (Shisuru tokoro wo eru)

As mentioned, Hiraizumi delivered spiritual lectures on his view of death and life

(Shiseikan) at various educational institutions for more than ten years. Now many of those

who listened to Hiraizumi's spiritual lectures in the classroom or before their departure for

the battlefield were ready to put the notion of the unity of knowledge and action into

practice. They were about to find "the place for them to die (Shisuru tokoro wo eru), which

Hiraizumi identified as the core of "the Way of the Japanese" (Nihonjin no michi). As

Hiraizumi told students, true scholarship (Shin no gakumon) must be pursued to find the

place to die (Shisuru tokoro wo eru tame no gakumon). They always must prepare

themselves for the occasion when they would find the place to die. Hiraizumi had

explained this point to the young officers of the Imperial Navy and the Imperial Army over

the years. Now they were finally ready "to find the place to die" as a result of their

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 215 rigorous pursuit of "true scholarship" on a daily basis. They were bravely departing for battle in the same way as Kikuchi Takefusa stormed into the crowd of Mongolian ships in the bay of Hakata during the second Mongolian attempt to conquer Japan.

The relationship between the spiritual historian Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and the Imperial

Navy was always complex because the Imperial Navy was a liberal institution from the beginning of its history. However, a factional division appeared for the first time when

some officers were discontented with the London Naval Disarmament Conference of 1930.

Those who were unhappy with it formed the Kantai faction. Those who agreed with the treaty formed the Joyaku faction. Their rivalry intensified over the years.

Hiraizumi established contact with Arima Ry5kitsu of the Kantai faction in 1928.

He became a major promoter of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi for the next seven years, and was

involved with Yushukai, a major organization that ran a campaign denouncing the treaty.

Hiraizumi established personal ties with Arima and other leaders of the Imperial Navy,

including Kato Haruhiro. In contrast, the Joyaku faction distanced itself from Hiraizumi. In particular, after the February 26 Incident of 1936, this faction, the mainstream of the

Imperial Navy, decided to keep Hiraizumi away from the educational institutions of the

Imperial Navy as well as the Imperial Navy as a whole. It was suspected that he might be

involved with the young officers responsible for the incident. After this, Hiraizumi had

limited access to the Imperial Navy.

However, Hiraizumi kept in touch with the naval officers who were his students at

Seiseijuku, his private academy near Tokyo Imperial University, and the academy's

branches in various locations nationwide. These students, who later assumed positions of

responsibility, invited their mentor to the Imperial Navy's educational institutions,

including the Mechanical School of the Imperial Navy (Kangun kikan gakko) in Tsurumaki

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 216 and the Technical Research Center of the Imperial Navy (Kaigun Gijutsu kenkyujo) in

Tokyo. In this way, spiritualism survived within the Imperial Navy over the years.

Before his ostracization, Hiraizumi had contributed to the spiritual education of young pilots at the Kasumigaura Naval Air Base. This was the base where the Kamikaze pilots were trained. Here, they learned about spiritualism from Hiraizumi's lectures on the

Nation's History.36 A number of young pilots from the base were among those who attacked Pearl Harbor. Although Hiraizumi was not the only one who played this role, he was certainly instrumental. Ties between Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and the Imperial Navy were resumed after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Tokunaga Sakae, Head of the Division of

Education of the Ministry of the Navy (Kaigunsho kyoikukyoku), a student of Hiraizumi, had remained a loyal supporter when the Imperial Navy officially distanced itself.

Tokunaga personally visited Hiraizumi's residence and asked him to deliver lectures at the

Naval Officers' Academy (Kangun heigakko).37

In a major lecture which Hiraizumi delivered at the Naval Officers' Academy in

1942, "The Way of Defending the Imperial Nation" (Kokoku goji no michi),38 Hiraizumi argued that the Nation's History remained uninterrupted from the beginning to the present because imperial loyalists defended it by shedding their blood. Hiraizumi encouraged the young naval officers not to remain observers but to take part in a tradition of struggle. The historian Nagahara Keiji recalled later that the lecture was used in a textbook at the

Academy. Moreover, Hiraizumi's Materials for Spiritual Education (Seishin kyoiku

For instance, Hiraizumi delivered lectures on Nanko (Kusunoki Masashige) at this base. 37 Hiraizumi was invited to the Academy six times: January, March, April, May, June, and October, 1942. Each time he delivered lectures over a period of three days. 38 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi hakushi kowa: Kokoku goji no michi (Kaigun heigakko, September 1942). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 217

shiryo) (1943)39 became a reading supplement for the Academy; it was about key

individuals in the southern court and men of high aspirations at the end of the Tokugawa period. This reading material shows that Hiraizumi's "spiritual" history became the core of history education at the Academy under the direction of the Education Department of the

Ministry of the Navy, notwithstanding strong and resilient opposition from the mainstream

Navy.

Despite Hiraizumi's inroads into student education, the Academy remained a

stronghold of liberalism. Inoue Shigeyoshi (1889-1975), who became president of the

Academy in 1942, was known as a true liberal. He absolutely disliked the influence of

Hiraizumi and his "spiritualist" view of history on the Academy's students. As a result,

despite the presence of passionate "spiritualists" in the Imperial Navy and at the Academy,

Hiraizumi was not allowed to act freely in the "spiritual education" of the young officers.

For instance, he was not allowed to deliver lectures to the students directly. Instead, he

spoke to the instructors of the academy, and the instructors delivered Hiraizumi's lecture to

their students.40

When Inoue found out that letters had been exchanged between the students of the

Naval Academy and the students of the Officers' Academy of the Imperial Army, he

prohibited the students from doing so again.41 Inoue also encouraged the spirit of

empiricism, issuing instructions on the philosophy of learning, in which he said history

was not about memorization but about learning how to think critically. As this story shows,

Inoue embraced the idea of liberal education and resolved to implement this philosophy in

39 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Seishin kyoiku shiryo (Kaigun heigakko, May 1942). 40 Inoue Shigeyoshi denki kanko kai, ed., Inoue Shigeyoshi (Tokyo: Inoue Shigeyoshi denki kanko kai, 1982), pp. 374-75. 41 Inoue Shigeyoshi denki kank5 kai, ed., Inoue Shigeyoshi (Tokyo: Inoue Shigeyoshi denki kanko kai, 1982), p. 376. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 218 the academy, even in the midst of the Great East Asian War, a reminder that, even during

the war, some Japanese leaders openly opposed Hiraizumi's "spiritualist" view of history

in certain key segments of Japanese society.

In addition, some officers of the Imperial Navy did not accept Hiraizumi's

"spiritualist" depiction of the war. For instance, Takagi Sokichi (1893-1979), who organized

a study group in association with the prewar Kyoto school (Senzen no Kyoto gakuha), was

critical of "historical fallacy" in the application the spirit of Nanko to understand and to

solve current problems. When Takagi Sokichi was told by Okada Keisuke (1868-1952) that

the Imperial Navy must possess the frame of mind of Great Nanko (Dai Nanko no seishin),

he replied there was a decisive difference in terms of character and scale between the war in

the time of the Emperor Jinmu and the present world war. Moreover, with respect to the

argument that the Imperial Navy did not possess the type of mental preparation or guidance

taught by Nanko, he said that he did not want to imitate Nanko (Kusunoki Masashige).42

Takagi aimed to produce an alternative to the "spiritualist" view of history, but as

the war intensified in the Pacific, spiritualism gained more influence on some segments of

the Imperial Navy, in particular, among the young officers trained for missions from which

they were unlikely to return. The demand for the "spiritual" historian Hiraizumi increased

after 1942. Odawara Toshihiko visited Hiraizumi's residence on June 23, 1942 and asked

him to deliver "spiritual" lectures to those who were about to depart for battles at sea.43

Although Japan enjoyed initial victories at the end of 1941, its armed forces were

desperate by 1943, and the conscription of university students was officially implemented.

42 Takagi Sokichi, Jiden teki Nippon kaigun shimatsuki (Tokyo: Kojinsha, 1971), p. 297; see also Takagi Sokichi, Shikan Taiheiyo senso, pp. 188-89. The episode demonstrated that no one had the power to change the intellectual climate until the defeat of Japan in 1945. 43 Moreover, he was invited to various bases where the young officers were trained. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 219

Japanese society glorified the departure of university students for the battlefield of the

intensified war: a grand farewell event was held at Jingu Athletic Stadium (JingQ kyogijo)

in Tokyo. Students of Tokyo Imperial University were not exempt from the new

government policy, and death became a real possibility for many. Under the circumstances, they could not separate their academic interests from their need to rationalize their potential death. The two concerns often overlapped as the war intensified. Although many

students had been critical of the historical scholarship which Hiraizumi taught, some were now attracted to his spiritualism. The concepts of "True scholarship" (Shin no gakumon)

and "The Study of Loyal Death" (Chushi no gaku) met the needs of those students who

seriously sought the meaning of their potential and/or imminent death while pursuing their

scholarship in history.44 A former student recalled that he was attracted to Hiraizumi's

spiritual lectures because of Hiraizumi's absolute confidence (Zettai teki na jishin).45

On November 15, 1943, at Tokyo Imperial University, Shukokai, the patriotic

student organization, of which Hiraizumi had been in charge since 1931, organized a

farewell party for its members who were about to depart for battle. More than 100

members attended,46 and Hiraizumi made a farewell speech. Shortly after the event, the

campus of Tokyo Imperial University was virtually empty. Hiraizumi played the role of a

Dendoshi (preacher or evangelist) while putting "spiritual" history into practice. He

expected his students to have the spirit of Kusunoki Masashige in their hearts, and to be

ready to give their lives for the Imperial Nation. He had high expectations in terms of the

44 Hiraizumi wrote "Serving One Day Today Equals Ten Years of the National Destiny" (Ichinichi no hoko junen no koku'un) for the weekly journal Asahi on December 5, 1943, three days before the second anniversary of Japan's successful attacks on various places including Hawaii and Malay on December 8, 1941; see Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Ichinichi no hoko junen no koku'un,"Asahi, 5 December, 1943. 45 See Gakuto shutsujin no kiroku. 46 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 220 standards of spirit and morality they were to uphold. Even so, as their teacher and mentor, he must have been sad to see them leaving for war with no hope of returning.

In 1944 and 1945 Hiraizumi became increasingly active in sending off pilots of the

"Special Attack" corps (Tokko tai-in). He gave lectures to them right before their departure.

The war was escalating, and Japanese troops were desperately fighting the final battle of

Okinawa. Many young pilots were sacrificing their lives for the defense of the Imperial

Nation in a hopeless battle against the American troops. Hiraizumi had a busy schedule. For example, in January 1945, he delivered a lecture for 1,500 officers of the Akebono, in

Ushina, Hiroshima City. After finishing his lecture, he went to Edashima Kanagawa prefecture. Then, while giving his lecture at Kaigun hei gakko, he was asked by Ito taisa of the Headquarters of Aviation (Koku honbu) to give a lecture at Kaminoike. He stopped his lecture before the afternoon in Iwakuni and attempted to travel to Kaminoike; there were breaks in the railway lines because of bombings, so the train stopped in Kyoto and finally arrived at 7pm on January 21, 1944. Hiraizumi visited Kaigun kokutai in Kaminoike,

Ibaraki prefecture, on January 23, 1945. Of this lecture, he said:

The lecture lasted from 3:30 to 5:30.... The audience consisted of some hundreds, both officers (shikan) and petty officers (kashikan). They were all pilots. I was told that one third of them were the members of the Special Attack Forces (Tokko tai-in: Kamikaze). What surprised me the most was that those people left Konoike immediately after my lecture, and they all flew to the frontline on that evening. Among them, there was Sub-Lieutenant Ogata Jo, a Dogaku of Seiseijuku in Kyoto. He left bracing (Sawayaka) words and scattered in the sky of Okinawa as if he were a flower [of Sakura: Cherry blossom]. 47

47 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higeki Juso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppan bu), pp. 622-23. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 221

Hiraizumi inevitably faced the death of his students in the Imperial Navy as the war

intensified in the Pacific. Many died in the Philippines and at Okinawa. Utsunomiya

Shuichi rode in the suicidal submarine Tenkai and died in the Palau islands in the Pacific.

Ogata Jo died in the sea south of Kyushu on March 21, 1945.48 Ueda Mataji, a student of

Hiraizumi, produced the first academic book on Edmund Burke in Japan in 1938 and was

appointed to a professorship in Western History at Kenkoku University in Manchukuo in the latter half of the 1930s. Ueda died on the main island of Okinawa on May 15, 1945.49

Fukuda Shaki, who studied under Hiraizumi at the Kyoto branch of Seiseijuku, also died in

Okinawa on June 11, 1945.50 These are a very few of the countless numbers of his

students who found places to die in the Pacific in the latter part of the war.

Although he can be seen as personally responsible for directing the youth to die,

Hiraizumi must have had a sense of mission in comforting and encouraging the young

pilots who (as both he and they knew) would never come home alive. After listening to

Hiraizumi's lectures, they may have had a sense of "historical" mission in taking part in

suicidal attacks on American battleships. In any event, many young people died in the

image of the imperial loyalists and the Bukumatsu shishi in the final period of the Great

East Asian War. As a result, they "live inside history eternally," and all are remembered as

those who participated in "history" and sacrificed their lives for the Imperial Nation.

When Hiraizumi met Ogata and asked him whether he could do anything for him, Ogata said, "I am fine. I, Ogata, will act according to your teaching. Please do not worry about me." See Yasukuni jinja, ed., Izasaraba wareha mikuni no yamazakura: Gakuto shutsujin gojushunen tokubetsuten no kiroku (Furusato Yasukuni no. 3; Tokyo:Tentensha, 1994), p. 46. 49 Miyazaki Eriko, Kenkoku daigaku no minzoku kyowa (Tokyo: Kazama shobo, 1997), p. 297. See also Yamane Yukio, Kenkoku daigaku no kenkyil (Tokyo: 2003), p. 339. 50 Yasukuni jinja, ed., Sanga no kokoro to chinkon no makoto: Daitoa senso shusen gojunen ten (Furusato Yasukuni no. 4; Tokyo: Tentensha). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 222

The Imperial Nation on the Way to Defeat: 1944-1945

Spiritual history played an important role in the way Hiraizumi explained Japan's imminent defeat in 1944-1945. He reflected on the path Japan had taken since 1931 and tried to show the direction that Japan must take in the future - always within the context of the spiritual history which he had disseminated since his return from the West in 1931.

In "Haru ni akete," published in the newspaper Mainichi shinbun, on January 1-2,

1944, Hiraizumi predicted that this year would become the year of hardship, but that these difficulties would refine the moral character of the nation. In facing and overcoming hardship, he said, the Japanese could embody the imperial ideals demonstrated in Emperor

Jinmu's eastern expedition before the declaration of the nation's founding.51 In this way, he strove to help prepare the Japanese nation to cope with what would come.

He delivered a number of lectures directly on the subject of Seishin (G Geist: E

Spirit), as for example, "The Spirit of the Great East Asian War," at the convocation ceremony for the 57th class of the Cadet Academy of the Imperial Army on March 29,

1944.52 On this occasion, Hiraizumi discussed Suganuma Teifu, who inherited the spirit of

Hashimoto Sanai through Saigo Takamori and later wrote the History of Commerce of

Great Japan {Dai Nihon shogyo shi) and A New Japan's Dream on its Enterprises toward the South (Shin nihon no tonan no yume). As has been noted, Suganuma was a key figure in the formation of Hiraizumi's view of the Great Asian War. Hiraizumi had faith in the

idea of sustaining his nearly defeated nation by remembering the Seishin of Hashimoto

Sanai. For instance, he wrote "Hashimoto Keigaku Sensei as Leader" for the journal

Genron hokoku (February 1944). In it, he reminded his readers and himself that Hashimoto

51 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Haru ni akete (jo)" Mainichi shinbun 1 January, 1945; Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Haru ni akete (ge)" Mainichi shinbun 2 January, 1945. 52 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Daitoa senso no seishin," Rikugun shikan gakko kiji 81 (January 1945). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 223 was a visionary who showed the direction the nation should go during the 19th century national crisis.53

Hiraizumi delivered a lecture at the memorial service before the grave of

Hashimoto Sanai (Hashimoto Sanai Bozensai) in Fukui City, Fukui prefecture on May 7,

1944.54 In this lecture, Hiraizumi warned the audience that they were not there to brag

about the great man from their home prefecture in this time of national crisis. He recalled that the Seishin of Sanai had been forgotten for a long time, but had been revived around

1931, at the time of the Manchurian Incident. He described the Japan's current

international situation in the context of Hashimoto's analysis of international affairs of the

late Edo period, pointing out that the Seishin of Hashimoto had guided Japanese leaders in

both the Sino-Japanese Incident and the Great East Asian War. Hiraizumi again called for the "spiritual" consolidation of his nation in his home prefecture by remembering

Hashimoto.55

On December 27, 1944 Hiraizumi published "Goso no kisho wo kenji shite" in the

newspaper Tokyo Shinbun. He said that Emperor Godaigo visited Oki before he

accomplished the Kenmu Restoration. In addition, he reminded his readers that Emperor

Jinmu had gone through struggles with his eastern expedition (Gotosei) before he declared

the founding of the nation of Yamato. Both Emperors had unshaken determination to

accomplish their ideals. Hiraizumi said the Japanese must possess the same type of

53 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. "Shidosha to shite no Hashimoto Keigaku sensei," Genron Hokoku 2.2 (February 1944). 54 Since his early years in Tokyo, Hiraizumi had been determined to revive the Seishin of Hashimoto Sanai, the man of high aspiration from Fukui-Echizen domain, Hiraizumi's home prefecture. To do so, at Hojinkai, he restored Keigakukai, the organization to manifest the Seishin of Hashimoto. The organization held an event to honor Hashimoto every year. Hiraizumi played a crucial role in the promotion of Hashimoto before and after 1931. Other leaders, including Kato Haruhiro of the Kantai faction of the Imperial Navy, was also active in this endeavor. 55 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Jinan ni shite Keigaku sensei wo omou (Fukui: 1944). Kiyoshi Veda Part Three: Practical Application 224 character as the Emperors had demonstrated.56

Hiraizumi always believed that great men and their literary works shape the course of history. He had confirmed this view of history when he visited the West from 1930 to

1931. In the year Japan was on its way to defeat, Hiraizumi returned to Jinno Shotoki, the most revered book among the proponents of the southern court view of history. Hiraizumi wrote "The Great East Asian War and Jinno Shotoki," which was published in Jinno

Shotoki (February 1945),57 six months before the defeat of the Imperial Nation on August

15, 1945. In this article, Hiraizumi began by saying that mysterious negotiations were undertaken between Japan and the United States in the year 2601 (1941) of the imperial calendar. At these negotiations, Japan kept its patience despite the rudeness of the United

States and the United Kingdom, who ignored Japan's efforts and provoked the outbreak of the Great East Asian War. He said that many self-sacrificing soldiers in the Pacific

remembered Jinno Shotoki and inherited the Giretsu (nobility of soul) of 600 years ago and

had acted according to the Seishin of the book. Hiraizumi also pointed out the increase in war production. On this point, he emphasized the significance of Seishin and insisted there was no contradiction between Seishin and science (kagaku). Seishin was the source of

everything else, including science. Finally, Hiraizumi noted that the Japanese, who were

inheritors of the Seishin of Jinno Shotoki, were shining with the light of honour even as

they felt the burden of responsibility.

By February 1945, Hiraizumi must have known the defeat of the imperial nation

was inevitable. Nevertheless, he compared the hardships of the Japanese people in the

early summer of 1945 with the struggles of the Japanese during the Mongolian attempts to

56 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Goso no kisho wo kenji shite," Tokyo shinbun, 27 December, 1944. 57 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Daitoa senso to Jinno Shotoki," in Hakusan hikui jinja, ed. Jinno Shotoki (Tanho shobo, 1945). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 225

conquer Japan. Hiraizumi wrote the self-explanatory "Our ancestors fought in such a way:

Follow Takefusa: to cope with the Mongolian attempts to invade Japan was more a

struggle" (Warera no sosen ha kaku tatakatta: Takefusa ni tsuzuke: Genko wo motto kurushikatta) for the newspaper Mainichi shinbun on June 7, 1945.58 In sum, Hiraizumi

Kiyoshi was already looking to the well-being of the Imperial nation after the Great East

Asian War. He was determined to maintain the continuity of the ideals of the Great East

Asian War after Japan's defeat and to portray Japan's defeat in the light of the "tragic history" (Hishi) of the southern court in the 14th century. People would remember the

imperial loyalists of the Great East Asian war in the same way as they had remembered the

imperial loyalists of the southern court. In this way, the Seishin with which Hiraizumi had resolved to rescue the Imperial Nation in 1931 would survive into postwar Japan. In

Hiraizumi's eyes, "the state," "the culture," and the predominant value of prewar period

ceased in 1945, but Seishin and "history" would (and must) go on, as they had done on

numerous other occasions in the Nation's History.

Hiraizumi probably had shifted his position from resistance to collaboration with

the Americans, as shortly before Japan's defeat, some government officials, his

sympathizers and students, such as Matsudaira Yoshitami (Lord of the Fukui-Echizen

domain and Ministry of the Imperial Household), and Tomita Kenji (Ministry of Internal

Affairs) may have privately informed him of an American decision to keep the imperial

system intact.59 At this point, he was determined to defend the National Polity after

58 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Warera no sosen ha kaku tatakatta: Takefusa ni tsuzuke: Genko wo motto kurushikatta," Mainichi shinbun, 7 June, 1945. 59 Hiraizumi wrote about his lat minute-contacts with his confidants right before Japan's defeat in 1945 in his autobiography Higekijuso. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higeki juso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1985). Historian Hata Ikuhiko suggested this view in "Mohitotsu no 2.26 jiken: Hiraizumi shigaku to seinen shoko. " Seiron 236 February 1992. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 226

Japan's defeat, the latest critical juncture in the Nation's History of Japan. (These men and others like them were concerned because for the first time Japan had been defeated by a foreign nation; hence, there was a possibility of being conquered and colonized.)

Hiraizumii decided to remain an imperial loyalist, in a bid to defend the Imperial nation and expected his students to follow this direction. Hatanaka and three other officers who belonged to the faction of Anami Korechika, the last Ministry of Army and

Hiraizumi's students, were determined to fight a final battle with the Americans on the main island of Japan. But Hiraizumi said nothing when Hatanaka sought his advice. The four were disappointed by their mentor's response.60 There seems to have been a cleavage between Hiraizumi and the officers at this point.

The Kyujo Incident demonstrated the chasm between "spiritual" history and the reality of history. When Japan was defeated on August 15, 1945, it was not yet defeated in the minds of some young officers of the Imperial Army, at least within the framework of the "spiritual" history that Hiraizumi Kiyoshi had taught them. They were all loyal to

Anami Korechika (1887-1945), the last minister of the Imperial Army and a student of

Hiraizumi. They all wished to fight a final battle on the main island of Japan against the allied forces.61 Four of them stormed into the imperial palace and asked for the record of the voice of the Emperor announcing the surrender of Japan. They were soon captured; two committed Seppuku (cutting one's own stomach open with a sword.).62 The historian Hata

60 Nishiuchi Tadashi and Iwata Masataka, see Nishiuchi Tadashi and Iwata Masataka, Otakebi: Daitoa senso no seishin to Kyujo jiken (Tokyo: Nihon kogyo shinbunsha, 1982). 61 Hiraizumi did not agree; for him, since the Imperial Rescript was already issued (i.e., for Japan's surrender), he had no choice but to follow it. It was said Hiraizumi was already informed of the allies' decision to preserve the imperial system in Japan after the war, and this may have influenced his decision. 62 For the account of the event by its two survivors, Nishiuchi Tadashi and Iwata Masataka, see Nishiuchi Tadashi and Iwata Masataka, Otakebi: Daitoa senso no seishin to Kyujo jiken (Tokyo: Nihon kogyo shinbunsha, 1982). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 227

Ikuhiko pointed out that they acted according to the concept of "remonstrating the master"

(Chokkan)63 and "the morality of Kan" (Kan no dotoku), as advocated by Tani Jinzai

(1663-1718), 64 a student of the Nangaku branch of Yamazaki Ansai's school of Kimon.

When those four men surrendered, the war was over in the context of both lived history and "spiritual" history. Anami Korechika committed Seppuku and died as a token of his grand apology to the Emperor.

Did the defeat of Japan harm the effectiveness of spiritual history? The answer is yes and no. Yes, in the sense that the allied forces intentionally rid Japan of the history education and the ethical and moral education of the war period in an attempt to prevent a revival of Japanese militarism. No, in the sense that the southern court view of history glorified the "tragic history" (Hishi) of the southern court while praising the great ideal for which the imperial loyalists died. The point here is not the outcome of their action but the actions (Gyo) themselves. None of these imperial loyalists survived to see the realization of the ideal for which they died.

In the postwar period, Hiraizumi resolved to assert that Japan was defeated -just as many imperial loyalists of Showa Japan had died. However, as he pointed out, the ideals of those who died could survive into the postwar period and serve as the source of unprecedented change in the postwar world. For this reason, he argued, it was part of the tradition of Japan to express thankfulness to those who sacrificed their lives to actualize an

63 How should Chokkan, a Japanese feudal concept, be translated into English? The Chinese character Choku means direct. Kan is used for the Japanese verb Isameru. According to Kenkyusha 's New Japanese-English Dictionary, one of the most comprehensive dictionaries of such kind, provides such definition: remonstrate [expostulate](with a person on his folly; admonish (a person against doing something). Remonstrate [reason] (with a person against ). See Koh Masuda, ed., Kenkyusha's New Japanese-English Dictionary (Tokyo: Kenkyusha, 1974), P.554. 64 According to Hata, Hiraizumi taught the concept of Chokkan to Takashita Masahiko when they were alone. See Hata Ikuhiko, "Anami Korechika," in Hata Ikuhiko, Shdwashi no gunjin tachi (Tokyo: Bungei shunju, 1982), P. 22-4. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Three: Practical Application 228 ideal. Now it was the responsibility of those who "shamefully" (in the sense that they failed "to obtain the place to die" in the way their comrades-in-arms [Senyu] had) survived the war to carry on the spirit of these loyalists. Hiraizumi was determined to spread this

"religious" message and the sanctified image of the Great East Asian War.

When one observes the life of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, one is struck by the fact that there is no discontinuity between the prewar and the postwar periods. Interestingly and ironically, this intellectual consistency of Hiraizumi became an invaluable asset for the

American "occupiers" of Japan in their fight against the growing influence of communism, an ideological enemy of both Hiraizumi and the Americans, in the war-devastated nation.

He collaborated with his former enemies for the defense of the Japanese imperial line. To him, this would ensure the continuity of "history" into the postwar period. The devout follower of Shinto, the purged wartime writer, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, once again sincerely prayed for the continuity of the Imperial Nation.

Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 229

CHAPTER EIGHT

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and Postwar Japan:

The Restoration of Dogi (the Way of the Just): 1945-1984

Japanese soldiers, as Chapter Seven made clear, fought bravely against the Americans in the Pacific, evoking the image of their medieval ancestors who repelled Mongolian invaders. In the earlier war, according to the Nation's History of Japan, the arrival of

"divine winds" (Kamikaze) damaged the Mongolian and Korean fleets in Hakata Bay on the island of Kyushu and defended the divine nation. In the later war, after tens of thousands of casualties in Asia and at home, the "divine nation" was defeated by foreign nations for the first time in more than 2,600 years. The imperial calendar stopped at 2605 on that day. This time, the "divine wind" did not rescue the "divine nation" (Shinkoku).

Instead, the winds and lights of the atomic bombs dropped by the American B-29s hit the cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The continuity of Kokutai was called into question, and the concept of Seishin which Hiraizumi had disseminated during the war was weakened, if not shattered. The Nation's History of Japan faced its most difficult challenge.

It perhaps goes without saying that it is important to know Hiraizumi in order to know prewar Japan. But the activities of Hiraizumi and his students after the war are equally significant, especially if we wish to observe the development of postwar Japan from the point of view of the "conservative" (traditionalist) camp. For despite the loss,

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi did not change his ideas in the postwar era. Rather, he carried on with his prewar views of "history" and the state in postwar Japan, even though it was supposed

Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 230 to become a democratic society virtually overnight.

This chapter discusses the four key objectives of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's postwar activities. First, he sought to ensure the continuity of the "history" of Japan (the Nation's

History). He was determined to carry on his prewar view of the imperial nation, assisted by

"spiritual" history (including the Southern Court view of history). Second, he was determined to search for "a true cause of the Great East Asian War." Hiraizumi disagreed with the judgment of the Tokyo War Crimes Trial (1946-1949); he was determined to discredit its validity from a "historical" point of view; he even applied American historical scholarship to strengthen his argument. Third, he resolved to restore the Way of the Just

(Dogi no fukko) to solve the problems of postwar Japan. These three objectives were all directed towards a fourth objective: namely, the defence of the imperial nation (Kokoku goji). The country had a new constitution, in which the Emperor was neither a living god

(Arahito garni) nor the nation's sovereign; even so, Hiraizumi strove to revive "the ancient imperial system" in the new political reality of postwar Japan.

The Continuity of Hiraizumi's Prewar View of "History" in the Postwar Era: 1945-1952

Hiraizumi resolved to continue his prewar view of history into the postwar period. He still believed that each nation had its own cultural particularities and historical development

(see Chapter Four). Therefore, he could not imagine not carrying on with the Nation's

History to preserve the spirit of the nation, thereby defending National Polity, albeit in a newly democratic Japan. In fact, Hiraizumi's main concern in the postwar period was the defence of National Polity, whereby each imperial subject must act according to the moral principle of Chu. But one needs the Way of Gi to realize Chu. Therefore, just as he had

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 231 done during the war, Hiraizumi taught his students about these ethical and moral principles which derived from the southern court view of history.

Hiraizumi believed that the Japanese must possess these principles as imperial subjects in order to act loyally for the defense of the imperial nation, even in its democratic era. He believed that democracy was merely another political mode that would come and go from era to era. However, Hiraizumi and his students were concerned that the new political system would eventually cause an alternation of the National Polity. To prevent this from happening, the "imperial loyalists" of the postwar period must ensure that the

"historical" view persisted in the defeated nation.

When Japan was defeated on August 15, 1945, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi wrote a letter of resignation from his professorship at Tokyo Imperial University directly to Prime Minister

Suzuki Kantaro (1867-1948). He visited the residence of Matsudaira Yoshitami, the last minister of the Ministry of Imperial Household, for one last time on August 20, 1945, before taking a night train to Fukui from Ueno station.1 Nishiyama Toku, a student who helped Hiraizumi pack (later a professor at Kogakukan University), wrote about the resignation of Professors Hiraizumi Kiyoshi and Nakamura Koya for Shigaku zasshi?

Hiraizumi returned to Hakusan Shrine where he had spent the first 13 years of his life - to where he had started.3

The day after his arrival, he began to work. He cultivated the land and harvested food for himself and his wife Hayako. Although he was even preparing himself for death from starvation, he was fortunate in comparison with those who were trying to survive in

1 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrinnenpu (Tokyo: Shikaseiban, 1964), p. 57 2 Nishiyama Toku, "Hiraizumi, Nakamura ryo hakushi no taishoku," Shigaku zashi 56.6 (June 1945): 659-60. 3 When he arrived, he found out that his sister Chiyo had passed away a few days before.

Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 232 the big cities in the midst of chaos after the defeat. The great nature of Mt. Hakusan embraced Hiraizumi, whose heart was wounded and whose body suffered from exhaustion.

Hiraizumi wrote and delivered a series of lectures advocating the idea of dying for the nation to live eternally inside history to young men who were about to depart for and die on the battlefield. However, he himself survived the defeat of the imperial nation and went on living in the postwar period. How did he reconcile himself with this irony? Did

Hiraizumi ever feel a sense of remorse about the role he played as "spiritual" historian during the war?

He briefly touched upon the issue in his autobiography published in 1980. He wrote retrospectively that because he lectured about the National Polity of Japan (Nihon no

Kokutai) and "the Way of the Japanese" (Nihonjin no michi) before hundreds and thousands of young men, including the Kamikaze pilots before their departure, he stayed in his house in the central part of Tokyo, even though air raids were intense here, and many left for the suburbs. Further, he expected his family to die with him, and did not send them and their possessions to the countryside.4 He wanted to utilize his books until the very last minute, so they too were kept in Akebonocho.5 In the end, his house was hit by a bomb, and many books were lost in the resulting fire.

Hiraizumi Wataru, his son, a diplomat, and the Minister of Science and Technology in the administration of Prime Minister Sato Eisaku (1901-75),6 recently recalled that on his father's desk, the number of pictures of students increased one by one during and after the

Hiraizumi Wataru wrote that he and his family stayed in Tama near the end of the war. His father sometimes visited them with his student M (Probably Murao Jiro, later the Chief member of the school textbook censorship committee in the Ministry of Education), but for the week before Japan's defeat, his family heard nothing from him. See Hiraizumi Wataru, "Chichi Hiraizumi Kiyoshi no tsukue ni okareta shashin" Bungei shunju 83.12 (September 2005). 5 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980), P.33-4. 6 Sato was the brother of Prime Minister of Kishi Nobusuke. Kishi and Hiraizumi Kiyoshi were both members of Kokoku Doshikai during their undergraduate years at Tokyo Imperial University.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 233 war. His father was hurt by the loss of the lives of his students.7 as indeed, anybody would.

Nonetheless, in his postware lectures and writings, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi did not express his regret for the consequences of Japan's military actions or for the victims of Japan's wartime ideology, in which he played a significant part.8 For better or worse, he knew where he stood, and he romanticized Japan's defeat in the Great East Asian War.

After the war, Hiraizumi resumed his study of the southern court view of history. In fact, the revitalization of the popular sentiments that had nurtured the development of the southern court view of history in previous centuries seemed most needed to help the people of the defeated nation regain a sense of confidence in the ideals of the Great East Asian

War. In the mind of Hiraizumi, perhaps, the defeat of Japan in this war and the defeat of the southern court became one and the same from the perspective of the "ethical and moral" principles, if not historical facts.

However, instead of openly resisting the victors, he resumed his reading of classics sympathetically describing Kusunoki Masashige, the defeated, and teaching about him to his family, to the disciples who visited Hakusan to seek guidance from their mentor, and to the locals in Fukui prefecture. To this end, Hiraizumi held a gathering with family members and some followers at his home on September 1, 1945. At this informal meeting he began reading the 40 volumes of Taiheiki (1371), a book supporting the legitimacy of the Southern Court, whose ethical and moral principles had served as the basis of

"Japanese Spirit" (Ninon seishin) before Japan's defeat. Four people attended the meeting besides Hiraizumi. The participants included Akira, his oldest son, and Muroki, who later

7 Hiraizumi Wataru, "Chichi Hiraizumi Kiyoshi no tsukue ni okareta shashin" Bungei shunju 83.12 (September 2005). 8 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi said in his postwar public lecture a few times that "we could repossess the lost overseas territories. However, we can never have back the lives of the talented youth died in the battle. We must educate the youth and reconstruct the nation." This statement exemplifies that he felt sadness and grief about the loss of the lives of the young soldiers, including his students.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 234 became the head of the National Police Agency (Keishicho). On the third day of the meeting, Hiraizumi expressed his principal concern during a discussion with a local disciple, Kishima Masaaki: "We must sincerely resolve on the defence of the National

Polity of the Imperial nation (Kokoku no kokutai goji). Otherwise, even the defence of the

National Polity in name might possibly disappear in future."9 Evidently, Hiraizumi was not sure whether the National Polity would survive, even though he must have been informed of the survival of the imperial system - "imperial" in name, if nothing else. (His doubts eventually led him to become involved in the constitutional debates of the 1950s and 1960s.)

Hiraizumi held similar study meetings with his disciples every year after that. In

1947, Tokinoya Shigeru, Muroki, and Hiraizumi Wataru participated in the session.

Although this was a small group, these three came to have a considerable impact on the course of the nation. As mentioned above, Muroki became head of the Agency of Police;

Tokinoya became a member of the censorship committee of the Ministry of Education;

Wataru became a diplomat and Minister of Science and Technology under the administration of Sato Eisaku. In particular, Muroki and Tokinoya became directly involved in history-related issues (see Chapter Nine).

Hiraizumi did not bring much with him when he came home after the war. He lost many of his personal possessions in the American air raids of April 13, 1945.10 Even though many of his books were burnt, he sent a complete set of 397 volumes of Dai Nihon

Shi (1657-1906), which he had purchased at the book store for old and used books in front of the Red Gate (Akamon) of Tokyo Imperial University, to Fukui. He later recalled how

9 Kishima Masaaki, "Anama kara Nagataki e," in Kobayashi Kenjuro, ed., Shojinzaka wo noborite (Fukui: Shojinzaka wo noborite kankokai, April 1971), p.48. 10 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 235 difficult it was for him and the villagers who assisted him to carry all these books on the long old stone road before the shrine's gate. One villager told him that he was the happiest man because he could read all the books in the midst of the nation's defeat.

At this low point in his life, Hiraizumi began to serve the gods of Hakusan as Chief

Priest of the shrine on January 1, 1946. He had to deal with financial pressures imposed upon him by the Allies forces: his bank account was frozen on February 17, 1946;" and he prepared himself to be called upon by SCAP as a war criminal (Senpan). Hiraizumi finished a short essay, Rinka yiikan, on June 28, 1947. In it, he described his life at

Hakusan Shrine. Rinka yukan demonstrates his sense of loneliness and alienation. Yet as he returned to the great nature of Mt. Hakusan and withdrew from all public positions in

Tokyo, he finally had time to reflect on himself and the role he played during the war. At the same time, he was now able to pay close attention to the small details of life. He described various types of flowers and animals that appeared in the precinct of Hakusan

Shrine and the garden of Gense-in inside the precinct, and he praised "the exceptional quality" of the water gushing from the spring within the precinct.12

The GHQ sent personnel to Hakusan Shrine, escorted by Japanese police. They had learned that Hiraizumi was well-respected among the officers of the Imperial Army and the

Imperial Navy. The American officers asked Hiraizumi to tell these officers not to resist but to cooperate with the GHQ.13 While they were there, Hiraizumi told the American officers that his house was older than their nation; he also taught them about the Nation's

History of Japan. After this, they became friendlier. In this way, as he recalled, "history"

11 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p.60. 12 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. "Rinka yukan no ki," in his Kanai no omoide (Tokyo: Kajima shuppan sha, 1983). 13 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1984). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 236 protected him. After the preservation of the imperial system was guaranteed and

Emperor Hirohito was not indicted by the military tribunal, Hiraizumi shifted his views

from absolute resistance to collaboration. Although he might not have agreed with

liberalism and democracy, it was fortunate for the imperial loyalist Hiraizumi that Japan was under the occupation of the Allied forces, not Soviet Russia, which would have

abolished the imperial system. In fact, the Americans and Hiraizumi had a new common

enemy in the war-devastated nation: the encroachment of communism among the Japanese people, who were ideologically lost after Japan's defeat. Although it was not perfect in the

eyes of its supporters, the imperial system must be protected in the democratic system.

Nevertheless, Hiraizumi was purged as a wartime writer15 on March 20, 1948.16

Although he was no longer allowed to assume a public position, he soon resumed his

"spiritual" practices. In this way, his prewar spiritual and historical activities were

protected under the religious practice of Shinto and ancestral worships in the midst of the

American occupation. In May 1948, the festival for Nanko (Kusunoki Masashige) was

held in Tokyo, Osaka, Sendai, Hitachi, Nagano, and Heisenji. The festival for the Kimon

was held in Heisenji and Tokyo on October 17, 1948. Both festivals grew tremendously,

even during the seven years of American occupation; for some reason, SCAP overlooked

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Higekijuso (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1984). 15 General Headquarters of Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, "List of Authors Purged, as of August 1948," in Removal and Exclusion of Undesirable Personal from Public Office (E.O. 12065 3-402/NNDG NO.775020), p .2. It is written as Hiraizumi Sumi or Cho. Whoever made this list could not pronounce Hiraizumi's first name, Kiyoshi, correctly. Some Japanese historians worked to include Hiraizumi on the list of wartime writers. Miwa Kimitada wrote that according to "Memorandum of Conversation, October 22 1945," in Joseph C. Trainer Collection (a property of Hoover Institute of War and Peace at Stanford University), three members of Rekishigaku kenkyukai (The Society for study of history) divided university professors in prewar Japan into the categories of "the progressive" (Shinposei) and "the reactionary" (Handosei) and brought Hiraizumi Kiyoshi as the top of the list of the "reactionary" university professors. Tsuji Zennosuke, Itazawa Takeo of Tokyo Imperial University, and Nishida Naojiro of Kyoto Imperial University, were among those on the list. See, Miwa Kimitada, Kyodotai ishiki no dochakusei. (Tokyo: San'ichi shobo, 1978), P.121-2. Ironically, their dichotomous view of university professors resembles Hiraizumi's dichotomous view of imperial loyalists (Chushin) and rebellious subjects (Gakuzoku). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 237

Hiraizumi and his disciples' activities. Hiraizumi wanted to make sure that the Seishin of these two men would be revered and manifested in postwar Japan. He considered it essential for the restoration of the Way of Gi and absolute loyalty of Chu to the Emperor.

They were also essential to the defence of the National Polity from democracy, liberalism, and communism.

Hiraizumi resolved to continue the Seishin that runs through the great work of Dai

Nihon Shi, which clarified the National Polity of Japan from the standpoint of the theory of

Taigi Meibun. Equally important, the work clarified the southern court view of history within this historical context. Hiraizumi was determined to carry on with the ethical principle of Gi and the moral principle of CM in the war-devastated nation, because they defined the nature of the relationship between individuals and the state before 1945.

Hiraizumi believed that these values were kept alive in the Japanese classics. Hence,

Hiraizumi read them quietly at Hakusan Shrine, a place with a strong historical tie to the

Southern Court, as mentioned in Chapter Two.

Hiraizumi did not completely isolate himself and soon began to reach out to those who were eagerly seeking the Way and looking for answers to the question of Japan's future. Upon request, Hiraizumi visited neighbouring villages and cities in Fukui prefecture to give talks in the early stages of the postwar period. People wanted to know where Japan would go from here. They felt honoured listening to a former professor of the

Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University and a famous man from their home prefecture. They wanted to hear his opinions about the postwar period from a "historical" point of view. Hiraizumi was pleased that ordinary people were genuinely concerned about the future of the nation in the midst of the American occupation. On October 29, 1950, he completed a series of lectures to a group in Katsuyama, to whom he had been lecturing

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 238

17 once a week for almost two years.

The Search for "the True Cause" of the Great East Asian War

The Tokyo War Crimes Trial which took place from 1946 and 1948 was modeled after the

Nuremberg Trial in Germany, and Allied forces used it to punish the wartime Japanese leaders for crimes against peace and humanity. When judgment was passed on November

12, 1948, Hiraizumi and his wife Hayako learned about it on the radio in Fukui prefecture.

Unimpressed, Hayako told Hiraizumi that the trial was "a monkey's playing theatre."

And Hiraizumi wrote a number of poems expressing his feelings.19 Hiraizumi and his wife did not see the trial as a legal procedure, but as a continuation of the war.

The judgment was personal for Hiraizumi because he had been a historical actor who assisted the leaders of wartime Japan. Moreover, he had worked with those leaders who were punished most severely. General Tojo Hideki (1884-1948) had personally requested Hiraizumi to re-organize the school curriculum on the Nation's History at the

Cadets Academy of the Imperial Army in 1933-1934. Hiraizumi got to know Konoe

Fumimaro (1891-1945) and Kido Koichi (1889-1977), two conservative young Imperial

Court members, at the first meeting for the founding of the Association of Great Asia in

January-February 1933. Yasui Eiji and Tomita Kenji, Hiraizumi's sympathizer and student respectively, were cabinet members in the Konoe administration. Itagaki Seishiro

(1885-1948) of the Imperial Army tried to recruit Hiraizumi to assume the presidency of the Kenkoku University in Manchukuo. Konoe asked Hiraizumi to assess the character of

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964). 18 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanai no omoide (Tokyo: Kajima shuppan sha, 1982). 19 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Hakusan seifu cho (Private publication). This is a collection of poems by Hiraizumi.

Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 239

Itagaki before Itagaki was appointed to the Minister of the Imperial Army under the Konoe administration. Arima Ryokitsu of the Imperial Navy asked General Araki Sadao

(1877-1966) to recommend Hiraizumi to the Ministry of the Imperial Household for the delivery of lectures before Emperor Hirohito in 1932. General Matsui Iwane (1878-1948) and Hirota Koki (1948-1948) were both members of the Association of Great Asia, of which Hiraizumi was also a member.

Hiraizumi also exchanged personal letters with Okawa Shumei (1886-1957), the only ideologue indicted at the trial. Okawa considered Hiraizumi his mentor in the Nation's

History of Japan. When Okawa was in jail for his involvement in the May 15 Incident of

1932, Hiraizumi wrote to him several times. Hiraizumi's family was acquainted with

Okawa before 1945, and ties were maintained after the war. Wataru, the third son of

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi went to see Okawa and had lunch with him on October 9, 1948.20

The allied forces treated favourably the members of the liberal camp of the

Imperial Court and the Joyaku faction of the Imperial Navy. The chief prosecutor, Joseph

Keenan, invited Wakatsuki Reijiro (1866-1949), Yonai Mitsumasa (1880-1948), Okada

Keisuke (1868-1952), and Ugaki Kazushige (1868-1956) to a retreat known for its hot springs in Atami, near Tokyo.21 Hiraizumi was highly critical of the men who accepted the invitation from the former enemy while their fellow countrymen were standing trial.22

Meanwhile, the in-fighting of the Imperial Army persisted into the war crimes trial, and was orchestrated by the allied forces. The members of the K5do faction, such as

General Mazaki Jinzaburo (1876-1956), who had been defeated by the Tosei faction during

Okawa Shumei Kenshokai, ed., Okawa Shumei Nikki: Meiji36nen ~Showa24nen (Tokyo: Iwasaki Gakujutsu shuppan sha, 1986), p.489. Wakatsuki Reijiro, "Shusen, Tokyo saiban." Wakatsuki Reijiro Jiden: Fukoan Kaikoroku: Meiji, Taisho, Showa Seikai Hishi (Tokyo: Yomiuri shinbunsha, 1950). 22 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. "Keenan kenji no shotai." in his Meiji no koki (Tokyo: Nihongaku kyokai, 1980).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 240 the February 26 Incident, willingly provided information to the prosecution and had an impact on the shaping of the view of history on which the trial judgment was based. A

Japanese historian has pointed out that the Kodo faction used the trial to get revenge on the

Tosei faction.

The men who had worked closely with Hiraizumi during the war trusted him. He received confidential information from them and never betrayed their trust; furthermore, he did not leak information after the war.24 On the one hand, Hiraizumi had to struggle with the dilemma of not telling the truth when some aspects of the truth about the wartime leadership became public as a result of the trial. On the other hand, some aspects of the truth were misinterpreted and misrepresented to the court. As a result, Hiraizumi disagreed with the view of history on which the trial's judgment was based. But because he would not betray a confidence, he could not fully explain why he disagreed. Some key facts which could explain his position remained with him. Hiraizumi said: "Do not think that you learned history by studying the judgment of the trial."25 Some facts will be revealed when Hiraizumi Diary, his private dairy, becomes public, hopefully in the near future.

Two more incidents encouraged Hiraizumi to pursue the study of the war. Some of his students and followers began to ponder the meaning of the war, seeking an explanation for the particular view of the war on which the trial judgment was based. They invited their mentor to Katase, Hanabusa, Katsuyama, Ono, and Fukui, as early as 1949. They wanted to know why the war began, why Japan was defeated, and what would happen now. Then,

23 Professor Awaya Kentaro, Rikkyo University, and Professor Yoshida Yutaka, Hitotsubashi University, made this point after researching in Washington DC. 24 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Maiju shukuga kai ni okeru shaji: Seishin kihaku naki mono ha horobu," Kanai no omoide (Tokyo: Kajima shuppan kai, 1983), p. 92. 5 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi "Shintoku," in his Kanrin shihitsu (Tokyo: Tachibana shobo, 1944), p.241. 26 Some people are already reading this material and quoting from it. A good example is Yoshioka Isao, Kuroki Hiroshi. (Gifu: Kyoiku shuppan bunka kyokai, 1979.) This is one of a few cases in which Hiraizumi Diary was quoted. Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 241 in 1949, Hiraizumi visited Tokyo for the first time since he had left for Fukui in 1945. He met the English poet Blunden at the British Embassy in Tokyo on March 28, 1949.27

Blunden encouraged Hiraizumi to write about the War: "Beside you, who else could write the truth? We can not know the truth solely based upon American propaganda." Blunden told Hiraizumi to represent "the true voice of Japan." Hiraizumi was encouraged by his acquaintance from Britain to find the truth. At the same time, he followed the urging of the ordinary people of his home prefecture and their sincere concern for the nation's well-being.

Thus, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, a historian of Japanese medieval history, and a historical actor during the war, became a student of modern history on the Second World War (the

Great East Asian War) after the Tokyo Trial. He sharpened his views through selective study of American historical scholarship, looking at work by wartime progressives, isolationists, and the postwar new left, as well as a number of other Western writers.28 One major work was President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War 1941 by Charles A. Beard

(1874-1948). The book argues that President Roosevelt knew of the planned attack on

Pearl Harbour in advance, and since he wanted America to join the war, he did not reveal the information. The men shared the view that Roosevelt was responsible for provoking

Japan to attack Pearl Harbor so that the US would enter the war against Nazi Germany in

Europe and defend Britain from Hitler. But they were quite different in their orientation; nor did their motives coincide.

27 Hiraizumi met Blunden while visiting Britain in 1931; see Chapter Four. 28 Before 1945, Hiraizumi tried to justify Japan's military action from the standpoint of a moralist and spiritualist, even though his real assessment remained unexpressed in his writings. As a result, his criticism of the Tokyo Trial's view of history was no longer abstract, nor solely moralistic, and certainly not bluntly subjective. Rather, it added a touch of objectivity to his view of the war. 29 Charles A. Beard, President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War 1941: A Study in Appearances and Realities (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 242

Beard was a progressive, an isolationist, and a revisionist. More specifically, he was sympathetic to the socialist movement as a student at the University of Oxford in England.

Back home in America, he was a committed isolationist; he opposed America's entry into the war, mainly because he was a keen supporter of President Roosevelt's New Deal policy, whose primary objective was to reform and improve the American social welfare system.

Beard thought that if America entered the war, the pace of the program would slow down.

Thus, he was critical of Roosevelt's decision to enter the war. Nevertheless, he did not support Japan's cause in the Great East Asian War. Although Hiraizumi believed that great men and their books shape history, he seems to have misunderstood Beard's intention and borrowed (incorrectly and for his own purposes) his historical interpretation of the military confrontation between Japan and the United States at Pearl Harbor.

His Activities after Japan's Independence in 1952

Japan gained its independence from the Allied Forces in April 1952. Hiraizumi wrote about this in "The Character of Independence," published in Tori in June 1952. In the article he commented on the nature of Japan's independence, saying that while it was welcome, it had not been "earned" but rather, "allowed." Fundamental to independence is its character

(Kisho) and spiritual rigor (Kihaku):30

It is not true independence if we keep a colonial mentality of severity and dependence. The character of independence is characterized by the following criteria: to believe in the Way (J: Michi) sincerely, to live in the Way without doubt, to die for the Way without regrets, not to be subdued by armed force and violence, not to be frightened by the majority, to have a spirit that will not be threatened by a large

30 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Dokuritsu no kisho," Tori 2.6 (June 1952): 2.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 243

number. Without this morale, how can we think of independence?

Hiraizumi was determined to follow the Way in the midst of the misery of Japan's defeat.

Moreover, he expected the Japanese nation to follow his lead.32

Hiraizumi put all his energy into the restoration of the Way of the Just in postwar

Japan. He was convinced that he could solve the newly emerging social problems by restoring the Way of Gi which had encouraged imperial loyalists at critical junctures, such as the Kenmu Restoration and the Meiji Restoration in the Nation's History. To this end, he believed that each Japanese must repossess the ethical principle of Gi so that he could act loyally for his master (Kun), thereby clarifying National Polity in democratic Japan.

What was his definition of Gi in the prewar period? Hiraizumi began with the spread of the Just (Gi) as defined by Yamaga Soko (1622-1685), whose teachings were passed on by Yoshida Shoin (1830-1859) and Admiral Nogi Maresuke (1849-1912).

Hiraizumi was convinced that the Japanese must possess the ethical principle of Gi to serve the master (Emperor) loyally according to the ultimate moral principle of Chu, even at the cost of one's life. This requires Gi or GiyiiP As shown in Chapter Five, in the prewar years, Hiraizumi defined the Imperial Nation as the nation of the Way of Gi (Dogi no kuni) and had promoted this concept since the Sino-Japanese Incident in 1937. This definition of the relationship between master and subject was also applied to the relationship between individuals and the state in prewar Japan.

The SCAP banned such teachings after the war because this type of relationship

31 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Dokuritsu no kish5," Tori 2.6. (June 1952): 4. 32 After 1952, when Japan regained its independence from allied occupation, Hiraizumi began to re-affirm the legitimacy of the Great East Asian War from the standpoint of the Way of the Just (Dogi) and openly expressed his discontent with the judgments of the Tokyo War Crimes Trial. He had also promoted the Way of the Warrior (Bushido) since 1933 when Japan withdrew from the League of Nations (see Chapter Four). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 244 between individuals and the state involved the concept of dying in the service of one's master. But Hiraizumi was convinced that this policy of the occupation period must be reversed in independent Japan. One year after Japan's independence, Hiraizumi wrote "The

Un-subdued Soul" (Fukutsu no tamashii) for Tori in January 1954.34 In it, Hiraizumi said that fighting on the battlefield was not something one should do with thoughts of winning or losing. Since ancient times, great military leaders (Meisho) had stood on the battlefield without such calculation and often were defeated. He named Kusunoki Masashige, Nitta

Yoshisada, Nawa Nagatoshi, and Kitabatake Akiie as examples. Winning or losing was not worth thinking about, he said. Rather, what was important was that Seishin be awakened by the Way or defeated for the Way. Further, one must not become overconfident by winning

or subdued by defeat.

Hiraizumi criticized the current situation in Japan, noting that when Japan was

winning and its armed forces were confidently advancing, everyone was happy. When the

nation was defeated, however, some scolded state authorities, calling the war "a stupid

war." The present situation, he noted, was ugly. People were selling their souls to obtain

food and clothing, and the use of the name Pan Pan should not be limited to women who

prostituted themselves to the American troops in order to survive.35 Hiraizumi argued for

"the revival of Japan" in substance - reminiscent of his efforts to accomplish the

restoration of Japan (Nihon chuko) in 1934 by following the historical example of the

Kenmu Restoration of 1334. Hiraizumi wrote:

34 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Fukutsu no tamashii," Tori 4.1 (Kyoto: Torikai, 1954): 6-9. 35 During the American occupation, many young Japanese women (Pan Pan) sold their bodies to American GIs to survive, including in Tokyo. Here, Hiraizumi criticizes Japanese intellectuals, who changed their intellectual and political positions overnight, calling their acts Hensetsu (sudden change of principles). Hiraizumi also drew historical examples from Japanese medieval history and the Germany philosopher Fichte, who asked his fellow Germans not to be subdued by the French when Germany was Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 245

Only by accepting our Kami as Kami, our master (Kun: in the context, probably the Emperor) as the master, our parents as the parents, our Way (Michi) as the Way, Only by not doubting it, not being frightened by so doing, not being subdued, there paved the way for the revival of Japan (Ninon no fukkatsu). I hope to make this year the year of the re-awakening of the soul of Japan.

In the above passage, Hiraizumi summarizes the objective of his present activities in the

Imperial Nation, which at this point, was independent in name only. In short, the revival of

Japanese Seishin was indispensable to gain true independence. Thus, although lacking an official state position, Hiraizumi was on his way to taking part in the reconstruction of

Japan (Nihon no fukko) as early as 1954 - without changing his views at all.

-30 Hiraizumi remained very active in the Shinto community in postwar Japan. He founded the Association for the Study of the History of Shinto (Shinto shigaku kai) to provide opportunity and a place to present Japanese history from the point of view of

Shinto. He also founded the academic journal Shintoshi kenkyu in January 1953. For the first volume, Hiraizumi wrote "The Independence of Shinto" (Shinto no jishusei). In this article, he was very critical of the American policy towards Shinto in occupied Japan. By

1948, Hiraizumi resumed two festivals: Nankosai and Kimonsai. As explained in previous chapters, Nankosai was the festival for the manifestation of the Seishin of Kusunoki

Masashige, the imperial loyalist of the southern court. Kimonsai was the festival for the manifestation of the Seishin of Yamazaki Ansai and his school of Kimon, which his defeated in the Franco-Prussian War in the 18l century. 37 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Fukutsu no tamashii," Tori 4.1 (Kyoto: Torikai, 1954): 6-9. 3 He went home to Fukui prefecture and became Chief Priest of Hakusan Shrine. In the Shint5 community, he could express his opinions on some aspects of postwar Japan, "strictly" from a religious point of view. Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 246 students formed after his death. Throughout the following years, Hiraizumi continued to write and speak about the subject. He gave a lecture "The Independence of Shinto" (ShintS no jishusei) in January 1953 39 and wrote "The Fundamental Principles of Shinto" in

September 1958.40 The Association of the Shinto Shrines of Chiba prefecture organized in

August 1966 a 20-year anniversary lecture and meeting for the founding of the Agency of

Shinto Shrines. Hiraizumi was invited to this meeting and delivered the lecture "The

Fundamental Principles of the Rise of the State" (Kokka koryu no genri).41

Seiseijuku, Hiraizumi's private school, had united his students from various segments of the society throughout the 1930s and until 1945. Although the school was closed after the war, Hiraiumi resumed what he called Seisei lectures at Hakusan Shrine in

Heisenji in Katsuyma City on September 1, 1945, less than a month after Japan's defeat. In the postwar period, some of Hiraizumi's students, with the approval of Hiraizumi, founded the Association for the Study of Japan (Nihon gaku kyokai),42 a prototype of Seiseijuku.

Hiraizumi wrote in Kanrin nenpu that they would "move the First Academy of Seisei to

Koenji of Suginami district and restore it." He added that "65 Dogaku participated" in this effort.43 Hiraizumi wrote a letter to Okawa Shumei on October 22, 1956, telling him about founding Nihongaku kyokai by combining the various branches of his academy (juku) in

Tokyo, Osaka, and Mito.44

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Shinto no jishusei," Shintoshi kenkyu 1.1 (January 1953). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Shinto no ganmoku," in Senke Sensei kanreki kinen Shint5 ronbunshu hensan iinkai, ed., Senke sensei kanreki kinen Shinto ronbunshu (Tokyo: Shinto gakkai, September 1958). 41 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kokka koryu no genri (Chiba: Chibaken jinjacho, 1966). 42 The study of Japan does not mean Japanese studies in the west. It probably means the Study of Japan (Nihon no gaku), which Tani Jinzan (1663-1718), a student of the Kimon and a leader of Nangaku in Tosa. Hiraizumi and his students actively promoted this notion of the Study of Japan during the latter half of 1930s. Ozankaku published the series on the Study of Japan (Nihongaku sosho) in Tokyo during this period. 3 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p.80. 44 Okawa Shumei kankei monjo kanko kai, ed., Okawa Shumei kankei monjo (Tokyo: Fuyo shobo shuppan sha, 1998), pp. 765-66. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 247

Nihongaku kyokai organized various events for its members. One such event was its summer youth camp at Sondokan,45 founded under the governorship of Yasui Eiji in Osaka in 1935. It was held near the top of Mt. Kongo, where Kusunoki Masashige bravely fought for Emperor Godaigo during the northern-southern court period. Chihaya Tanrenkai

(meeting for self-cultivation at Chihaya) was first held in July and August 1954.46 In 1957,

Hiraizumi undertook to reform education through this event.47 This camp was held for three days each summer. Young people came from all over Japan to hear lectures by

Hiraizumi's former students, who were now accomplished scholars, professors, and high school teachers who embraced the "history" which Hiraizumi taught during the war.

Hiraizumi also founded two journals: Tori and later Geirin. In these journals,

Hiraizumi, his students, and his sympathizers, freely expressed their views on the past, present, and future of Japan, dealing primarily with the need to revive the past. Tori changed its name to Nihon in 1956. In October of that year, Hiraizumi asked Okawa

Shumei for permission to use the name Nihon because Okawa had previously published a journal by that name.48 As a young historian, Hiraizumi was given an opportunity to publish articles in this journal after his return from the West. On December 21, 1956

Hiraizumi wrote to Okawa, expressing his appreciation for permission to use Nihon.49

Today, Nihon and Geirin are published by private organizations, Nihongaku kyokai in

Tokyo and Geirinkai in Kyoto respectively.

Yasui Eiji, Governor of Osaka, was sympathetic to Hiraizumi and made enormous efforts in the founding of Sondokan, 1935-1936 (see Chapter Four). 46 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p. 77. 47 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p..82. 48 Okawa Shumei kankei monjo kanko kai, ed., Okawa Shumei kankei monjo (Tokyo: Fuyo shobo shuppan sha, 1998), pp. 765-66. 49 Okawa Shumei kankei monjo kanko kai, ed., Okawa Shumei kankei monjo (Tokyo: Fuyo shobo shuppan sha, 1998), p. 766.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 248

Hiraizumi was invited to Mito Ibaraki prefecture on May 15, 1954, to give the lecture "Toko sensei, whom we revere in a national crisis."50 In the lecture, Hiraizumi praised Fujita Toko (1806-55), an eminent scholar of the late Mito school of history and called for the continuation of Mito's tradition of true scholarship (Shin no gakumon).

Nagoe Tokimasa, a native of Mito, a student of Hiraizumi at Tokyo Imperial University during the 1940s, and a member of Seiseijuku, played a leading role in the restoration of

Seiseijuku in Mito. In this, they were going against the Americans, for after Japan's defeat,

America had tried to ensure there would be no revival of the study of Mito (Mito gaku) in postwar Japan.51 This organization and other related organizations have recently made efforts to republish their mentor's prewar writings (banned after the war). This type of thing is not peculiar to Hiraizumi's students. Rather, it has been the trend among the prewar nationalistic schools of history, philosophy, and other disciplines in Japan.52

Hiraizumi needed financial backers to conduct his postwar activities. One such supporter was the president of Idemitsu Kosan, one of the major oil companies in the nation.

Hiraizumi was introduced to him by Ito Heitaro on March 22, 1949.53 On August 10, 1952,

Hiraizumi visited Tokyo, after which he went to see the president in Karuizawa, a summer

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Jinan ni aogu Toko sensei," in Nihongaku kyokai Mito shibu, ed., Hiraizumi Kiyoshi Sensei to Mito (Mito Seiseijuku soritsu sanjushunen kinen shuppan) (Mito: Nihongaku kyokai Mito shibu, October 1985). 51 Nagoe Tokimasa, Mito no Nihongaku (Mito Seiseijuku yonjushunen kinen shuppan) (Mito: Seikonkai, April 1996). 52 On this point, Kano Masanao, Professor Emeritus of Japanese history at Waseda University in Tokyo, told the author was that, unlike Japanese Marxists who forgot about what was censored by the American authority during the period of occupation, Japanese nationalistic writers remember exactly what was censored. They and their students kept the records confidentially throughout the period of hardship, determined to republish them when the opportunity arose. Even though many died, their students kept the records, and after more than 40 years, they edited and published them. Another good example for the trend was represented by the students of the prewar Kyoto school. 53 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p.65.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 249 resort in Nagano prefecture.5 On May 9, 1953, Hiraizumi, a Shinto priest, was invited to an event praying for Nisshomaru, the company's oil tanker, which was departing for Iran.55

Shimomura Sadamu (1887-1968), a former Minister of the Army, wrote in Kaiko that Hiraizumi delivered a lecture to a group of 60 eminent businessmen from Idemitsu

Kosan and government officials at Tokyo Industrial Club on October 7, 1954. After the meeting, these officials decided to establish a place, including a lecture hall, where people could learn from Hiraizumi.56 Hence, Hiraizumi History Research Center (Hiraizumi rekishi kenkyu shitsu) was founded in Ginza Tokyo.57 Hiraizumi organized his first lecture meeting there on November 8, 1954. In 1955, Ginza lecture meetings were held on

February 7 (170 participants), on May 16 (200 participants), on November 8 (150 participants). Similar lectures continued until the tenth meeting on November 14, 1960. The

11th Ginza Lecture meeting was held at Otemae Palace Building on November 20, 1961.

The 12th and probably the final session took place on November 20, 1962. In these lectures,

Hiraizumi presented his views of history and the form of the state. Takeshita Masahiko, a former officer of the Imperial Army, a former student of Hiraizumi, and later the Chief of

Staff of the National Ground Self-Defence Force, attended Hiraizumi's lecture at Idemitsu

Kosan on April 17, 1956, and was surprised that Hiraizumi continued to deny democracy, which, Hiraizumi firmly believed, did not accord with the National Polity at all.

Hiraizumi's connection with Idemitsu Kosan continued for many years. He attended the ceremony for the founding of the Cultural Association of Reconstruction of Japan

5 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p.72. 5 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p.74. Shimomura Sadamu, "Hiraizumi sensei no shusho: Tokyo ni kenkyujo kaisetsu saru," Kaiko 3 (March 15 1954): 8. Kaiko is the official journal of Kaikosha, a social club for former officers of the Imperial Army. It still exists as a powerful organization today. 57 While he was in Tokyo, he lived with his wife in a house in Shinagawa at the discretion of their relatives, most likely the Kajima family. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 250

(Saiko Nihon bunka kyokai) at the Industrial Club on June 11, 1961. And the president of

Idemitsu Kosan visited Hakusan Shrine on May 15, 1963. The relationship shows that some business leaders remained sympathetic to "spiritualism." They endorsed Hiriauzmi and his spiritualism in the shaping and strengthening of the Seishin of corporation (Kigyo seishin) while Japan was experiencing an unprecedented economic recovery and growth. This is an often-overlooked aspect of the growth of the postwar Japanese economy.

Hiraizumi had respected and trusted Tokutomi Soho (1863-1957) since the 1920s.

Although they had little communication throughout the war, after Japan's defeat in 1945, they resumed their contact. During and after the seven-year American occupation, while they were being purged as wartime writers, they exchanged 20 letters. In these letters,

Hiraizumi expressed his feelings, including his loneliness and his hopes for the future of the nation. When Tokutomi Soho passed away on November 2, 1957, Hiraizumi wrote

"Tokutomi Soho Sensei" for Kokuminshi Kaiho. In it, he said that all his teachers were born in the Meiji period and none survived into the postwar period, except Tokutomi sensei.

He also noted that SCAP was strict about refusing to free wartime writers, announcing its decision not to free Tokutomi Soho and Hiraizumi on June 14, 1956. Hiraizumi felt honoured to be in the same position as Tokutomi sensei. He respected the fact that

Tokutomi continued to nurture his soul by reading Chinese classics and the writings of the ancients in the midst of Japan's defeat. Having the ancients as his friends, he said,

Tokutomi sensei maintained his principles (Seisetsu wo mamoru) throughout the postwar period.58

While Hiraizumi was doing research and delivering lectures at Hiraizumi History

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Tokutomi Soho sensei," Kokuminshi kaiho 4 (June I960): 1-4. The article originally appeared in Nihon (December 1957). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 251

Research Center in Ginza, he edited and published 100 volumes of The History of Early

Modern Japanese Nation (Kinsei Nihon kokumin shi). He began work on the project on

February 11, I960.59 He also participated in the publication of The Summary of the History of Early Modern Japanese Nation (Yoyaku Kinsei Nihon kokumin shi); this project started on May 6, 1961. Hiraizumi published The Commentary on the History of the Early Modern

Japanese Nation in March 1963.60 In a lecture commemorating the publication of The

History of Early Modern Japanese Nation at Yomiuri Hall in Tokyo on September 19,

1961, Hiraizumi talked on Senko no shinkyo wo kaitaku su. He said that although the period of Meiji was a brightly shining era, there was an aspect of tragedy as well. On one hand, the Meiji era produced a number of talented men. On the other hand, tragedy derived from the mass executions of the Ansei era in which many shishi were killed. In the same way, he said, the Japanese cried after the Great East Asian War, not because of the loss of half of Japan's territories, but because of the loss of countless talented young people. Lost territories could be repossessed, but those who died in the war could not return. He hoped that Japan would produce many more talented young people and reconstruct itself.61

He gave a lecture, "Two mysterious books: Shotoki and Kokuminshi" at the

Imperial Hotel in Tokyo on April 8, 1963. In it, he compared Kokuminshi to Jinno shotoki, a Bible for the proponents of the southern court view of history and a book that Hiraizumi had revered since his early years in Fukui prefecture (see Chapter Two). Hiraizumi said that both books were written while their authors were suffering hardship. Jinno shotoki was

59 February 11 was considered Kigensetsu before Japan's defeat in 1945, and it became the National Founding day (kenkoku kinenbi), partly as a result of Hiraizumi and his students' efforts to keep this day as the beginning of the imperial nation according to Japanese mythology. Of course, they did not consider it mythology but history. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kaiketsu Kinsei Nihon kokumin shi (Jiji shinsho) (Tokyo: Jiji tsushin sha, 1963). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Senko no shinkyo wo kaitaku su (Tokyo: Kinsei nihon kokumin shi kanko kai, October 1961). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 252 written when Kitabatake Chikafusa was defending Oda castle during the medieval period.

Tokutomi Soho took 35 years to complete Kokuminshi. He started at the age of 56 and finished at the age of 90. He received no support from the government or the university, and he completed 100 volumes of Kokuminshi on his own, even when society treated him harshly because he was identified as a wartime writer. Hiraizumi believed that because

Kokuminshi was written in the midst of hardship, not under the protection of government, it would "make a great contribution to paving the way to opening the future of Japan."62

To emphasize this point, Hiraizumi delivered a lecture, "The Majesty of History," at the Imperial Hotel in Tokyo on November 2, 1963, celebrating four great books in the history of Japan: Nihongi (Nihon shoki) in ancient times, Jinno shotoki in the medieval period, Dai Nihon shi in the early modern period, and Kokuminshi in modern times. He recalled that Soho had asked him to take care of the manuscript of Kokuminshi because he did not think the volumes would be published while he was alive. However, with the support of Hasegawa Saiji, President of Jiji Press and a loyal supporter of Hiraizumi in the postwar period, the 100 volumes appeared in print. They were widely distributed nationwide, and those who had "aspiration," read them enthusiastically. Hiraizumi was convinced that Kokuminshi would play a role in the nation's revival. The book, he said, would determine the nation's destiny, in the same way as Nihon shoki (720), Jinno shotoki

(1339), and Dai Nihon shi (1657-1906) had in previous centuries.63

Hiraizumi visited Tokuyama, on the island of Shikoku, on February 15, 1957. This was where a naval base of the Imperial Navy was located before 1945, and where Kuroki

Hiroshi had invented the suicidal submarine Tenkai near the end of the Great East Asian

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nidai kisho: Shotoki to Kokuminshi (Koen shirlzu 198) (Tokyo: Naigai chosa kai, 1963), pp. 12-13. 63 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Rekishi no songen (Koen shirlzu 204) (Tokyo: Naigai chosa kai, 1963), pp.51-53. Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 253

War. On March 26, 1961, Hiraizumi attended a memorial ceremony for those who died in

Tenkai, at the island of Otsu near Tokushima. Then, on September 6, 1970, he went to a festival for Tenkai at the Nanko shrine (Nank5sha) in the town of Gero in Gifu prefecture.

Kuroki was born in Gero, and his family still lived there. At the festival, Hiraizumi delivered a lecture on "The Revival of the Soul" (Tamashii no fukkatsu).64

The Vietnam War in the 1960s provided prewar Japanese nationalistic historians, such as the essentialist Hiraizumi, with an ideal environment in which to re-affirm their pre-1945 views of the war more openly. Because of the American acts of war in Vietnam,

Japanese nationalists, as well as others in Japan, considered that the Second World War victors who judged the wartime Japanese leaders at the Tokyo War Crimes Trial had defeated themselves by acting in the same way as those they had judged. These views

sounded legitimate to many Japanese, and were strengthened by increasing international criticism of the American policy in Vietnam. During this period, another prewar nationalistic school of history, the Nihon Roman-ha (Hayashi Fusao and Kamei

Katsu'ichiro), presented its version of Daitoa senso kotei ron. One of most representative works was A Theory of Affirming Great East Asian War (1964).65 And Ueyama Shunpei of the Kyoto School of Philosophy published A Significance of the Great East Asian War

(1964).66

A commentary on Hiraizumi's search for a "true cause of Great East Asian War" is

presented in the last chapter of The History of Japan for Youth (1970). The author

compares Hiraizumi's view of the war, as expressed in Tenpei ni teki nashi (1943), with his

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Tamashii no fukaktsu," Nihon 20.11 (1970). Hayashi Fusao, Daitoa senso kotei ron (Tokyo: Bancho shobo, 1964). Ueyama Shunpei, Daitoa senso no igi (Tokyo: Chuo koron sha, 1964). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 254 view nearly 30 years later, in Shorten Nihon shi (1970). The author wishes to demonstrate the intellectual persistence and continuity in Hiraizumi's understanding of the war. The comparison makes it clear that his opinions did not change, even after Japan's defeat in 1945, the Tokyo War Crimes Trial of 1946-1948,68 and the American occupation of Japan from 1945 to 1952.

At the age of 80, Hiraizumi was invited to the annual meeting of elite Konoekai of

Ishikawa prefecture at the Awazu hot springs on July 7, 1974. One hundred and twenty members attended his lecture; all were moved by it. There was a social gathering after the lecture, and each member had an opportunity to thank Hiraizumi personally. Kobayashi

Yuichi, a graduate of the Cadet Academy of the Imperial Army, wrote that he sat next to

Hiraizumi during that event as well as at breakfast the next morning. Hiraizumi asked him about his former students at the Cadet Academy and said happily that some had visited him at Hakusan shrine. Hiraizumi also said: "As long as my life lasts, I will search for and clarify the true cause of Great East Asian War and furthermore leave it in writing for future generations."69 Hiraizumi's efforts in the pursuit of a true cause of the War finally reached fruition. His complete study of the War was published as The Tragedy and Ideal of Japan in 1977.70 When he wrote the preface, he was 82 years old, and his sight was rapidly weakening. His students, such as Tanaka Takashi, Iboshi Hideo, Murao Jiro, and Kondo

Hirazumi Kiyoshi, Shonen Nihon shi (Tokyo: Jiji tsushin sha, 1970). Hiraizumi maintained his prewar view of the war throughout the postwar period. Before the war, he had already made his position clear on the three major points of contention regarding the interpretation of the Great East Asian War. The prosecutors and defendants fought over these points at the War Crimes Trials. More importantly, the Japanese themselves debated the points and the judgment passed on them at the Trials. These divisions in interpretation of the war left a permanent mark on postwar Japanese historical scholarship. Modern historians still cannot reach consensus after more than 60 years. Arguably, this is one reason why the Japanese have yet to conclude their postwar period (Sengo) in 2008. Koyayashi Yuichi. "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei no goshosoku: Dait5a senso no shin'i kyumei wo yosei no shimei to shite goshojin," Kaiko (August 1974). Kaiko is the official journal of Kaikosha, a social club for former officers of the Imperial Army. It still exists and is a powerful organization. 70 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Nihon no higeki to riso (Tokyo: Hara shobo, 1977). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 255

Keigo, helped their life-long mentor in the editing of the book.

On July 8, 1978, Takigawa Masajiro (-1992), former professor at Kenkoku

University in Manchukuo, and defence lawyer for Admiral Shimada Shigetaro (1883-1976) of the Imperial Navy at the Tokyo War Crimes Trial (1946-8), made a trip to see Hiriazumi in Hakusan shrine in Fukui. Takigawa "witnessed how the Allied, as victors, judged Japan as the nation of invasion ("Shiryakukoku)" and he was enraged by this. As a result, he wrote To Judge the Tokyo Trial (Tokyo saiban wo sabaku) in 1952, the year Japan gained its independence. The book was re-published last year and quickly sold out.71 The conclusion of the book shows the author's agreement with the views of Hiraizumi.

Takigawa writes: "When [my] conversation with Hiraizumi touched upon the actual circumstances of the leadership in wartime Japan, Hiraizumi fired out of the tip of his tongue and his remarks thrust into the core of my heart."72

71 Takigawa Masajiro, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi hakushi ni kaiken shi hakusan jinja ni modem no ki," Nihon (Tokyo: Nihongaku ky5kai), P.39-40. Takigawa Masajiro, "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi hakushi ni kaiken shi Hakusan jinj a ni modem no ki," Nihon (Tokyo: Nihongaku kyokai), P.39. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 256

CHAPTER NINE

The Postwar Activities of Hiraizumi and his Students

This chapter takes a close look at Hiraizumi's ties with his students (Dogaku) after the war.1 A large number of the relationships that had developed in the prewar period lasted

after the war ended. Many of his students were young during the war and were not in positions of power when Japan was defeated on August 15, 1945. As a result, they were not purged by SCAP. Although they did not stay in mainstream postwar academia at the

University of Tokyo, they ended up well-placed in other segments of Japanese society: in

their former domains, in Juku (Seiseijuku), in the Shinto establishment, the National

self-defense forces (Rukujo [Army], Kaijo [Navy], and Kokutai [Air Force]), academia and

education, the Ministry of Education, and the Police.2

This chapter also shows the continuing influence of spiritual history (including the

southern court view of history) through the efforts of Hiraizumi and his students. In their

opinion, this view of history could resist the "isms," including Marxism, liberalism, and

democracy, which challenged or would potentially challenge Japan's National Polity

(Kokutai). The Way of the Subjects (Shindo), based upon ethical and moral principles,

1 There were some terminations in the mentor-student relationship due to occurrences like the KyQjo Incident right after the war; a few students, including Takeshita Masahiko, left Hiraizumi after the war. 2 Hiraizumi developed ties with the Liberal Democratic Party (Jiyu minshu to), partly because he had been acquainted with Kishi Nobusuke since they were undergraduates at Tokyo Imperial University; both joined Kokoku doshikai, a patriotic student organization. Also, Hiraizumi Wataru, his third son, was running for office, and Hiraizumi gave lectures to his constituents during election campaigns.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 257 which derived from the southern court view of history and their image of the National

Polity remained absolutely essential to them; they defended the Seishin of the nation while

debating history-related issues. Hiraizumi and his students were involved in major

history-related national debates throughout the postwar period. Their prewar views of

history and nation were reiterated in such debates as the date for the national-founding day,

the postwar Japanese constitution, the Japanese national anthem (Kimigayo) and flag

(Hinomaru), the history school textbook trial (the Ienega trial) as a domestic and an

international issue, and finally, the issue of Yasukuni Shrine. Tanaka Takashi, a student of

Hiraizumi at Tokyo Imperial University, a member of Seiseijuku, and President of

Kogakukan University after the war, has identified their efforts as an attempt to restore the

state of the Way of Gi (Dogi kokka no fukko).3 This chapter tries to see those issues

through the eyes of Hiraizumi and his students who were directly involved in these debates

throughout the postwar period.

This project began as an effort to trace the historical origins of history-related

issues in postwar Japan. This chapter (and the dissertation generally) is not intended to

identify the Hiraizumi School as the sole source of historical controversy in the postwar

period. However, some conservative segments of postwar Japanese society invited

Hiraizumi and his students to maintain and to work towards their wartime objectives.

Thus, Hiraizumi's view of spiritual history (the southern court view of history) and its set

of moral and ethical principles {Chu and Gi) continued to be influential in Japan, especially

through his students, even though postwar Japanese society as a whole saw the southern

3 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. "Kimigayo," Tori 5 (1955): 2-5.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 258 court view of history and its set of ethical and moral principles as something belonging to the prewar period.

Kigensetsu and the National-Founding Day Debate

The Imperial Calendar of Japan stopped at 2605, and was replaced by the Western calendar of 1945. Before that, Hiraizumi had often discussed Japan's historical continuity, saying that Japan was the only nation that had never been interrupted by revolution, and that the

Seishin of the nation continued to exist because of "the moral correctness" of Japanese emperors and countless number of imperial loyalists, not to mention "Japanese morality."

In order to ensure the continuity of the "history" of Japan in the postwar period,

Hiraizumi and his students insisted that the Japanese return to the Imperial Calendar. More

importantly, they must recognize the first day of the Imperial Calendar as the beginning of

Japan as a nation, as described in Nihon shoki (720). Members of the Shinto community

initiated a movement for the revival of Kigensetsu. Hiraizumi and his students took part,4 wrestling with those who deemed it mythological rather than historical. Hiraizumi gave a

lecture for the commemoration of Kigensetsu in Yokosuka in 1956. He was also invited to

Kumamoto-city in Kumamoto prefecture by Nichinichi newspaper and discussed "History that was Twisted" at Kumanichi Hall on February 26.5 He came back to talk about "The

founding of the Nation of Japan" on February 10, 1958. In their defense of Kigensetsu,

4 For a tie between Hiraizumi and the Agency of Shinto Shrines, see "Kigensetsu fukkatsu undo no igi to sono sekai," in Jinja shinpo seikyo kenkyu shitsu,ed., Kindai jinja Shinto shi: Jinja shinpo sokan sanju shunen kinen shuppan (Tokyo: Jinja shinpo sha, 1976), pp. 254-55. With regards to the opinion of the proponents for the legalization of the date, see Nihon bunka kenkyu kai, ed., Jinmu tenno kigen ron (Tokyo: Tachibana shobo, 1958). For accurate information on the process of the movement, see Kigen setsu hosan kai, ed., Kigensetsu hosan shoshi. 5 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Rekishi ha mageraretari (property of Kumamoto prefectural library). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 259

Hiraizumi and his students contributed articles to Theory of the Accession of Emperor

Jinmu (1958),6 a book which comprehensively represents their views on this issue.

There was a debate on deciding the date for the national founding day (Kenkoku

kinenbi). Tanaka Takashi, a student of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, was a key figure in this debate,

publishing "National Founding Day and February 11" in Shukan Jiji on December 3, 19617

and The Awakening of the Heart to Love the Nation: Independence and Freedom (1962).

He was invited to the Inquiry Commission on the National Founding Day (Kenkoku

kinenbi shingi kai) as witness (Sankoin) on November 4, 1966, where he submitted a

report "A Historical Analysis with Regards to the Day for the Commemoration of the

Founding of the Nation." Nishiuchi Tadashi, a member of Seiseijuku, Professor of Math

at the Cadet Academy of the Imperial Army, and Fellow of the Research Center for Total

War (Soryokusen kenkyujo), contributed to the discussion as well, writing The

Commemorative Day for the National Founding: A Summary of the Period after the

Abolition of Kigensetsu, Science, History, and Mythology in 1966.

Hiraizumi's students won the battle, and February 11 became the official date for

the founding of the nation. When this was decided, Tanaka and Torisu immediately phoned

Hiraizumi; he was pleased to hear about the decision and his students' absolute

commitment to the defense of "tradition" (Dento) and "history"(Rekishi). The day was

celebrated for the first time in 1967. Students at the University of Tokyo and Tokyo

6 Nihon bunka kenkyu kai, ed., Jinmu tenno kigenron (Tokyo: Tachibana shobo). 7 Tanaka Takashi. "Kenkoku kinenbi to nigatsu juichi nichi: Nihon kokka koryu no zencho," in his Kokokushikan no taiketsu (Ise: Kogakukan shuppanbu, 1984), pp. 64-80. Tanaka Takashi, Aikokushin no mezame: Dokuritsu to jiyu no tameni (Tokyo: Teibundo, 1962), pp .241-48. 9 Tanaka Takashi, Kenkoku kinen no hi ni kansuru rekishiteki kbsatsu: nigatsu juichinichi setsu wo shiji suru ronkyo ni tsuite: Sankonin Tanaka Takashi. This was a report which Tanaka submitted to Kenkoku kinenbi shingikai at Residence of Prime Minister on November 4, 1966. 10 Nishiuchi Tadashi, Kenkoku kinen no hi: Kigensesu no haishigo wo sokatsu, kagaku to rekishi to shinwa (Tokyo: Kinseisha, February 1988). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 260

University of Education protested this "renewed" tradition, however. In response to their protest, Hirata Toshiharu, a former student of Hiraizumi and now Professor of the Nation's

History at the University of Defense (Boei daigakko), wrote The National Founding of

Japan and February 11 in 1967.11

Hiraizumi and the Police in Postwar Japan

The growth of communism and other systems of thought challenging the National Polity

(Kokutai) was a serious concern for state authorities after the war. In addition, student activism spread on university campuses all over Japan during the 1960s and 1970s.

Because of the potential for violence, it was generally understood that Japanese police must continue to prepare for potential death during service. Hence, Hiraizumi continued to reprise the role he had played during the 1930s and 1940s. More specifically, his spiritual lectures prepared police officers to serve state authorities, even at the cost of their lives. In

Hiraizumi's eyes, the police were indispensable for defending "the Imperial nation" as it had been before 1945.

Although Hiraizumi did not have an official institutional tie with the Agency of

Police after the war, Muroki, who became head of the Agency of Police (Keisatsucho) was a loyal student in the postwar period. As mentioned earlier, he attended the first Seisei meeting for reading Taiheiki at Hakusan Shrine. Some of Hiraizumi's students were also involved in history education at Police schools. For instance, Nagoe Tokimasa, head of the

Mito branch of Seiseijuku after the war, was Hiraizumi's student at Tokyo Imperial

University and at Seiseijuku. He wrote the history textbook Kyodoshi Teiyo (1954) for the

11 Hirata Toshiharu, Nihon no Kenkoku to nigatsujuichi nichi (Tokyo: Koyo shobo, 1967). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 261

Police School of Ibaraki Prefecture.12 It is interesting to note that the School's President was Kikuchi Takeo, head of the Kikuchi family, whose family spirit (Ie no seishin), which represented Chii and Gi (loyalty and the Just), was highly praised by both Hiraizumi and the state authorities before 1945. Hiraizumi personally knew him quite well. They may have met at a meeting of Teikoku zaigo gunjin kai; they certainly met when Hiraizumi researched the history of the loyalty of the Kikuchi family in its home domain in Kyushu, as Takeo escorted him throughout the trip.

In any event, the Agency of Police invited Hiraizumi to write articles for official police journals. In "The Truth of History," published in Jikei in August 1956,13 he presented his view of the Great East Asian War. Importantly, Hiraizumi was invited to the

Police Academy (Keisatsu daigakko) on April 23, 1962.H The University was an offspring of the prewar Training Center of Police (Keisatsu koshujo). Here, Hiraizumi advised future police leaders to cultivate themselves and seek internal strength from reading classics.

Hiraizumi's also wrote "Policemen who are Revered" for Friends of Policemen in January

1971. In it, he noted that the police he met when he visited the Training Center for Police during the war were now heads of districts or had assumed other key positions. Some of these still thanked Hiraizumi for his lectures.15 Thus, even without an official public position, Hiraizumi continued to serve the Police, resuming the thread of his prewar lectures and articles, virtually without interruption.

Nagoe Tokimasa, Kyodoshi Teiyo (Mito: Ibaraki ken keisatsu gakko koyukai, August 1954). 13 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Shinjitsu no rekishi," Jikei 38.8 (August 1956). 14 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p. 92. 15 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Ikei sareru keikan," Keisatsukan no tomo 115 (Tokyo: Keisatsukan no tomo no kai, January 1971), p. 2. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 262

Hiraizumi and the National Self-Defense Forces

Through his Seiseijuku connection (perhaps even through Shukokai to some extent),

Hiraizumi maintained his relationship with the former officers of the Imperial Army and

Navy. Because many were still very young when Japan was defeated, they were not purged by the allied forces, and a considerable number decided to serve in the National

Self-Defense Forces (Jieitai). Many carried the prewar teachings of Hiraizumi into the postwar period. Others left Hiraizumi. For instance, Takeshita Masahiko who resolved to have Hiraizumi's ideas guide the Imperial Army in 1935 (see Chapter Five) no longer sought Hiraizumi's teaching after Japan's defeat. He became a chief of staff (Bakuryocho) of the ground forces of the National Self-Defense Forces (Rikujo jieitai).

Those who were sympathetic to Hiraizumi and who assumed positions of leadership invited him to the institutions of which they were in charge. For example, he went to Hoantai, the forerunner of the National Self-Defense Force (Jieitai) in Kanazawa and Takada on December 5, 1952.16 Both the Maritime and Ground Forces of the National

Self-Defense Forces (Kaijo and Rikujo Jieitai) began to invite Hiraizumi to their educational institutions after 1955.17 In fact, he seemed to take more frequent lecture trips in the postwar period than before the war, perhaps because he had more time - he no longer taught at Tokyo Imperial University.

Matsudaira Nagayoshi, the hereditary lord of the Fukui-Echizen domain and a son of Matsudaira Yoshitami, was closely associated with Hiraizumi before and during the war.

He stayed at Hiraizumi's private residence in Tokyo in 1934, and Hiraizumi helped him prepare for the entrance exam of the Mechanical School of the Navy (Kaigun kikan gakko).

16 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p.73. 17 Tanaka Takashi, Hiraizumi shigaku to kokoku shikan (Ise: Seisei kikaku, 2000). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 263

As will be discussed later in the chapter, the mentor-student relationship between

Hiraizumi and Nagayoshi had a vital impact on the course of the nation through the issue of Yasukuni Shrine.

Hirata Toshiharu, who was a student of Hiraizumi and played a leading role in the

Division of the Nation's History and Shigakukai at Tokyo Imperial University in

1934-1935, was appointed Professor of the Nation's History at the Great University of

Defense (Boei daigakko). In this way, a historian, who fully understood Hiraizumi's view of history, was in charge of history education at the institution where the future leaders of the national defense of Japan were being educated.

Hiraizumi was associated with the Teikoku zaigo gunjinkai during the war. This was abolished during the American occupation of Japan, but was later restored and renamed Gdyukai. Hiraizumi was invited to the Lecture Meeting for the 100-Year

Anniversary of the Meiji Restoration (Meiji ishin hyakunen kinen koen) organized by

Gdyukai, where he spoke about "The Rise of Great Meiji" (Idai naru Meiji no koryu) at

Kyoto International Hall on October 13, 1968. A branch of Gdyukai also invited Hiraizumi to deliver lectures; Gdyukai of Fukui prefecture held Fukui-ken seishonen kenkyukai at

Heisenji August 12-14,1962.19

Hiraizumi and the Amendment of the 1947 Japanese Constitution

Although Hiraizumi was critical of party politics and restored the ancient imperial system during the 1930s and 1940s, he became involved with the Liberal Democratic Party in the postwar period. For example, he was invited to the Research Group on the Constitution, set

18 Hiraizumi Kiysohi "Idai naru Meiji no koryu," Goyu (November 1968). 19 Kobayashi Kenjuro, "Heisenji no natsu," in Kobayashi Kenjuro, Fushoki (Fukui: Fushoki kankokai, 1970), p. 97. Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 264 up by the Liberal Democratic Party, and delivered a lecture on June 30, 1954. Hiraizumi had known Kishi Nobusuke since his undergraduate years at Tokyo Imperial University.

Both were members of Kokoku Doshikai, a patriotic student organization, founded by

90

Professor Uesugi Shinkichi (see Chapter Three). Hiraizumi and Kishi had a shared view of what the constitution of Japan ought to be, probably following Professor Uesugi: both wished to renounce the postwar Japanese constitution.

Hiraizumi called for constitutional amendment throughout the postwar period. He insisted that Japan abolish the postwar constitution, reinstate the Meiji Constitution, and amend it. Hiraizumi had two main criticisms of the 1947 constitution. First, the Emperor was no longer considered a living god and sovereign residing with the Japanese people.

Instead, he became a symbol of the unity of the Japanese people. Hiraizumi thought this contravened the National Polity of Japan, and he spoke out against it: on June 39, 1954, at the residence of the Prime Minister, he spoke on "The Status of the Emperor in the Context of Japan's History."21 He also delivered a lecture on "Matsushitasonjukuki kogi" to his disciples, during the annual summer youth camp at Sondokan in Osaka prefecture in

I960.22 Finally, he spoke on "The Lifeline of the State" at the Imperial Hotel in Tokyo on

October 28, 1970, at the request of Research Committee on Internal and External Affairs

(Naigai josei kenkyukai).

A noted scholar of the Japanese constitution in the Faculty of Law at Tokyo Imperial University, Professor Uesugi had a series of heated debates on the constitutional status of the Emperor with Professor Minobe Tatsukichi of Tokyo Imperial University. Based on Uesugi's theory, Kikuchi Takeo of Teikoku Zaigo gunjinkai, attacked Professor Minobe in the Japanese Parliament in 1935. Hiraizumi became an advisor for Teikoku zaigo gunjinkai in 1937 (see Chapters Two and Four). Reportedly, Uesugi wanted to pass on his professorship to Kishi upon retirement. 21 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Ninon rekishi no ue yori mita tenno no chii," in Tenno ni kansuru mondai (Tokubetsu shiryo 9; Tokyo: Jiminto kenpo chosakai, 1954). 22 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Matsushitasonjukuki kogi," in his Sentetsu wo aogu (Tokyo: Kinseisha, 1998). 23 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kokka no meimyaku (Tokyo: Gaiko fukyu chishiki fukyukai, 1971). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 265

Another bone of contention for Hiraizumi was that Article Nine of the postwar constitution stipulated that Japan be allowed to use its armed forces only for self-defense.

It prohibited Japan's use of armed force outside the territories of Japan. Moreover, Japan was no longer allowed to possess a military, but must make do with National Self-Defense

Forces (Jieitai). Hiraizumi could not accept a constitution that denied the fundamental core of the National Polity (Kokutai), along with the means and ethical character to defend it.

He argued that each sovereign nation has a right to possess a military force.

Hirzaizumi and the Ministry of Education

Hiraizumi began to associate with the Ministry of Education in his undergraduate years and served the Ministry through the delivery of spiritual lectures as part of its nationwide

System of Special Lectures (Tokubetsu kogi seido) before 1945. However, the relations between Hiraizumi and the Ministry of Education after the war are unclear. On the surface, he certainly did not act with the Ministry in the postwar period as actively as he did after his return from the West in 1931. However, his students, Murao Jiro and Torisu Michiaki, kept their prewar ties with the Ministry, and through them, Hiraizumi continued to exert an influence.

Like Hiraizumi, Murao Jiro and Torisu Michiaki were associated with the Ministry during the Great East Asian War. Murao, Assistant in the Division of History at Tokyo

Imperial University, and Torisu, Professor of the Nation's History at the preparatory school in the Cadet Academy of the Imperial Army, were members of the Committee to Promote

Various Studies on Japan (Ninon shogaku shinko iinkai), a sub-organization of the Ministry, closely linked with the Department of Indoctrination (Kyogaku kyoku) of the Ministry. In

June 1942, the Committee to Promote Various Studies on Japan organized its third

Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 266 symposium on the study of history, a half-year after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. During this event, Murao Jiro delivered the lecture "Own kensetsu to kudara hyakuo" and Torisu spoke on "Bakumatsu shishi's position to propose for the view of expelling barbarians:

Hirano Kuniyuki as a case study." That year, Hiraizumi was made a temporary member of the Committee's Department of History.24

Hence, Hiraizumi's prewar views were reflected in the policies of the Ministry of

Education, certainly during the war, and also after it had ended, when the wartime students to whom he had lectured became more influential, and as people like Murao Jiro and

Torisu Michiaki continued their contact with the Ministry. Especially noteworthy in this context is the fact that the student-mentor relations of the Hiraizumi School were modeled after those of the Kimon School by Yamazaki Ansai and the Matsushitasonjuku by

Yoshida Shin, in which students were expected to inherit their mentor's teachings without changing them. By extension, then, these students had been taught the notion that they ought to safeguard Hiraizumi's teachings.

Some of Hiraizumi's students from the prewar period began to criticize postwar changes in history education. For instance, Kobayashi Kenzo and Nishiuchi Tadashi co-authored The Seishin of the History of Japan: Criticism of History as Social Studies in

1965. In this book, they criticized the inclusion of history as part of social studies

(Shakaika rekishi) and emphasized the significance of history education as Hiraizumi

Kiyoshi had taught them before 1945, referring to the Late-Mito school of history.25

Kobayashi Kenzo was Professor of Shinto at 4th High School in Kanazawa Ishikawa

24 Monbusho kyogaku kyoku, ed., Nihon shogaku kenkyu hokoku: Dai junana hen: Rekishigaku (Monbusho kyogaku kyoku, November 1942). 25 Kobayashi Kenzo and Nishiuchi Tadashi, Nihon rekishi no seishin: Shakaika reksihi hihan (Tokyo: Risosha, 1967). Their views remind the author of "The Marrow Bone of the Study of the Nation's History." Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 267 prefecture and founded Dogijuku (Academy for the Way of Gi) by following Shukokai, a patriotic student organization, of which Hiraizumi was president, at Tokyo Imperial

University during the first half of the 1930s. When a course for the Study of Shinto

(Shintogaku koza) was installed at Tokyo Imperial University in 1938, Kobayashi was appointed Associate Professor (Professor Miyachi Naoichi was in charge of the program).

Nishiuchi Tadashi was a member of Seiseijuku, Professor of Math at the Cadets Academy of the Imperial Army, a member of the Research Center for Total War during the Great

East Asian War, and one of four young Army officers who took part in the Kyujo Incident on August 15, 1945.26 After the war, Nishiuchi did not communicate with Hiraizumi as often as he did before 1945. He returned home to Tosa and occasionally visited Tokyo to deliver lectures.

The Ienaga History School Textbook Trial, 1965-1984

In a notable postwar incident, Ienaga Saburo sued the Ministry of Education, alleging its unconstitutional interference in the content of a school textbook he wrote. Ienaga had been a student in the Division of the Nation's History at Tokyo Imperial University during the first half of the 1930s, where he studied under Hiraizumi. He was a member of the prestigious Shigakukai (Club for the Study of History) and became involved in the editing of Shigaku zasshi, the club's official journal. Several of Hiraizumi's students - Murao Jiro,

Torisu Michiaki, Yamaguchi Yasubei, Tokinoya Shigeru, and Tokoro Isao — were on the

They remonstrated with Emperor Hirohito for making an official announcement of the surrender of Japan by radio. See Nishiuchi Tadashi and Ihata Masataka, Otakebi: Dai toa senso no seishin to kyujo jiken (Tokyo: Nihon kogyo shinbunsha, 1982). 27 Torisu Michiaki, "Kyokasho ronso no seikaku," Tori 6.1 (1956). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 268

Censorship Committee from the time of its founding in the postwar period. Hiraizumi's students, therefore, were involved in the court case - on both sides. 28

Murao Jiro, a student of Hiraizumi, was a member of the Committee before the

Ienaga trial.29 Murao first heard Hiraizumi speak when Hiraizumi delivered "The Way of the Japanese" (Nihon jin no michi) at Shizuoka High School in Shizuoka City, Shizuoka prefecture in 1933. When Murao enrolled at Tokyo Imperial University, he chose to study the Nation's History under Hiraizumi. He joined Seiseijuku; he also joined Kenmu gikai

(founded in 1936), just a month after the February 26 Incident of 1936. After the Great

East Asian War began in December 1941, Murao went with Hiraizumi to the Kasumigaura

Air Naval Base of the Imperial Navy in Ibaraki prefecture. Here, young volunteer pilots were trained to be suicidal pilots (Kamikaze) and departed for missions from which they would never return. Murao was assigned to deliver lectures to these men throughout the rest of the war. He was also associated with the Ministry of Education during the same period. Near the end of the war, Murao probably accompanied Hiraizumi to visit the

Hiraizumi family while they were residing in Tama, outside Tokyo, because of the intensifying air raids on Tokyo.30 After Japan was defeated, Murao tried to reach his mentor in Hakusan in Fukui prefecture, but it was almost impossible for a person of the defeated nation to secure a train ticket. He asked a friend, who was originally from Taiwan, to buy a ticket for him. He stood on the train from Tokyo to Fukui for the entire trip and

28 For instance, Hirata Toshiharu, a student of Hirazumi, a member of Seiseijuku and Kenmu gikai during the war, and Professor of the University of Defense in the postwar period, was in charge of the student committee and placed Ienaga in this position. During the trial, however, Hirata stood in court for the Ministry of Education, while Ienaga took the opposing side. 29 Murao Jiro wrote a book on his experiences as a member of the Censorship Committee. See Murao Jiro, Kyokasho chosakan no hatsugen (Tokyo: Hara Shobo, 1969). 30 Hiraizumi Wataru, "Chichi, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi no tsukue ni okareta shashin," Bungei shunju 83.12 (September 2005): 211. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 269 finally reached Hakusan Shrine. During his study in Hakusan, Murao received warm hospitality from Hiraizumi and his wife, and he regained strength in the midst of the chaos caused by the defeat of the nation.31 According to the journalist Chamoto Shigemasa, it was Koyama Iwao, a member of the prewar Kyoto school, who recruited Murao to the

Censorship Committee. It is noteworthy that those two schools did not work together before Japan's defeat in 1945.

Tokinoya Shigeru, who enrolled in the Division of the Nation's History at Tokyo

Imperial University on October 1, 1944, joined Shukokai when the Great East Asian War was ending. He took part in the Study Group of History of Shukokai and studied the relationship between Nihon shoki and Jinno shotoki. Tokinoya sincerely respected his mentor Hiraizumi and visited Hakusan Shrine in deep snow to attend one of his lectures for a small group of his disciples as early as 1947. He became a member of the Censorship

Committee on history school textbooks in 1973 and remained in this position until 1985.

Murao Jiro recruited Tokinoya right before his retirement from the position.33 Tokinoya was involved in the revision of the section on the Nanking Incident in the textbook; after

Murao Jiro, "Fukuin chokugo no Heisenji koki," in Kobayashi Kenjuro, ed., Bodairin wo aogite: Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei tsuito roku (Fukui: Kobayashi Kenjuro, 1985). 32 Chamoto Shigemasa, "Shukokai no fukei: kyiku no meija wo toru," (Kuro no choryu: kaiken ni ugomeku mono, dai nikai) (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1982.) This story raises another issue; that is, the unification of prewar nationalistic schools such as the Kodogaku-ha (the Imperial Way faction, a spiritualist faction influential in the Imperial Army, of which Hiraizumi was quite critical), the Hiraizumigaku-ha, the Nihon Roman-ha (founded in 1933 by Yasuda Yojuro in the field of literature), and the prewar Kyoto School (four students of Nishida Kitaro in the field of philosophy at Kyoto Imperial University who collaborated with the mainstream Imperial Navy during the 1940s). The issue is significant for understanding the "revival" of the prewar nationalistic schools in postwar Japan because during the war they were not necessarily friendly to each other. In fact, some were openly antagonistic. An exception was the prewar Kyoto School and the Nihon Roman-ha which organized two significant conferences in 1943. This issue developed into a source of diplomatic dispute between Japan and its neighbors during the early 1980s and among Hiraizumi's students. 33 Tokinoya Shigeru kanreki kinen ronshu kankokai, ed., Seidoshi ronshu: Tokinoya Shigeru kanreki kinen (Tokyo: Tokinoya Shigeru kanreki kinen ronshu kankokai, 1986), p.343. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 270 the trial he wrote a book and a short publication on the subject: The Ienaga School

Textbook Trial and the Nanking Incident and With regards to the recent problems on school textbook: School textbook thirty years war and the judgment of the Highest Court in

1998.35 In the latter, Tokinoya noted that he "likes to keep taking the position to deny

revolution and to defend tradition."36

Thus, Hiraizumi maintained his influence through his students. Many from

Seiseijuku, Shukokai, and Tokyo Imperial University were well-placed in teaching

positions in institutions of higher learning after the war. Tanaka Takashi of Kogakukan

University, provided his students with the same kind of education which Hiraizumi had

given him. And as has been shown, some members of the censorship committee continued

to hold the view of history that Hiraizumi taught them during and after the war. In fact,

although he resigned his Professorship in Medieval Japanese History in anticipation of a

purge by the US occupation authorities, Hiraizumi kept in close contact with the field of

higher education. To cite one example, he may have been involved in founding Kogakukan

University in Ise, Mie prefecture. The university was an offspring of the prewar Jingu

Kogakukan University, whose primary objective was to educate Shinto priests and scholars.

In the 1950s, Prime Minister Yoshida Shigeru took the initiative in reviving the university

that had been closed by order of the American occupation force. Later, former Prime

Minister Kishi Nobusuke became the university's President.37 Moreover, it was reported

34 Tokinoya Shigeru, Ienaga kyokasho saiban to Nankin jiken: Monbusho tantokan ha shogen suru. (Tokyo: NihonKyobundo, 1989). 35 Tokinoya Shigeru, Saikin no kyokasho mondai ni tsuite: Kyokasho sanjunen saiban to saikosai hanketsu. (Kokumin kaikan sosho 22; Osaka: Kokumin kaikan, 1998). 36 Tokinoya Shigeru, Ienaga kyokasho saiban to Nankin jiken: Monbusho tantokan ha shogen suru. (Tokyo: Nihon Kyobundo, 1989). P.75. 37 Hashikawa Bunzo, "Kogakukan daigaku: kami nagara no sandaime." Hashikawa visited Kogakukan university after its founding and described his impression on its professors, students, and school color. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 271 that some individuals of Kogakukan University were closely involved in the founding of

Kyoto Industrial University, and members of the Hiraizumi family became professors at

Kanazawa Industrial University.

Hiraizumi became the education advisor of Kogakukan University and its

companion high school. He was invited to deliver lectures to their students during the

1960s and gave them ethical and moral lessons similar to the ones he provided to students

before 1945. Hiraizumi was invited to Kogakukan High School, where he discussed "A

Secret of Learning" on June 10, 1963,38 and "Risshi" on November 22, 1966.39 On June

7, 1968, he was invited to Kogakukan University and delivered the lecture "The

Continuity of History" to the students.40 On May 21, 1970, he was again invited to

Kogakukan University for an event commemorating Nihon Shoki and spoke on "Keikoku

no taigyd."4^ The liberal historian Hashikawa Bunzo visited Kogakukan in the postwar

period. He wrote that this university shared its fate with the state more than any other

university in the nation and expressed his concern that its re-establishment was evidence

of the possible revival of prewar conservatism. At the same time, he had a very positive

opinion of the polite manners of the faculty and students he met.42

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Benkyo no hiden (Kogakukan koto gakko koen sosho dai nana go: Kaiko junen kinen tokubetsugo) (Ise: Kogakukan koto gakko koenkai, 1972). 39 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Risshi. (Kogakukan koto gakko koen sosho daigogo) (Ise: Kogakukan koto gakko koenkai, September 1971). 40 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Rekishi no zokusho (Kogakukan daigaku koen sosho) (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, September 1968). 41 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Keikoku no taigyo (Kogakukan daigaku koen sosho dai junana go) (Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, July 1970). 42 Hashikawa Bunzo, "Kogakukan daigaku: kami nagara no sandaime." Hashikawa visited Kogakukan university after its founding and described his impression on its professors, students, and school color.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 272

The Fukui-Echizen Connection in the Yasukuni Controversy

It is essential to understand the role Hiraizumi and Matsudaira Nagayoshi played in history-related issues in postwar Japan. The relationship between Hiraizumi and the

Matsudaira family represented the interests of the imperial loyalism of the Fukui-Echizen domain, the Kantai faction of the Imperial Navy, and the Meiji state Shinto, significant components of postwar Japanese conservatism. Just as their ancestors had played major roles in the Meiji Restoration of the 19th century, members of both the main and the second branch of the Matsudaira family of the Fukui-Echizen domain played crucial roles in the state affairs of Showa Japan in the 20 century - both before and after the war. For instance, Matsudaira Yoshitami was the last Minister of the Ministry of the Imperial

Household at the end of the war. When the Communists organized a May-day celebration in front of the Imperial Palace, and participants cried "Show us the kitchen of the

Emperor," Yoshitami made sure the palace gates were locked.

Hiraizumi had been closely associated with Matsudaira Nagayoshi, a son of

Matsudaira Yoshitami since the war period. As noted earlier, when Nagayoshi was preparing for the entrance exam of the Mechanical School of the Imperial Navy in 1934, he stayed at Hiraizumi's residence in Tokyo under his mentorship. Nagayoshi was stationed as a naval officer in French Indochina when Japan was defeated. He personally suffered after Japan's defeat: his father (Yoshitami) and mother died; Rear-Admiral Godai, his uncle, was executed as a war criminal; he had to manage the disbursement of the family inheritance, and was forced to move as a result of property taxes after the war. Nagayoshi never took transportation from the train station in Katsuyama when he visited Hakusan

Shrine; he always walked, and this journey took him nearly three hours. Nagayoshi kept this habit throughout the postwar period. In the fall of 1950, Nagayoshi visited Hakusan

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 273

Shrine for the first time since the war. On this occasion, he stayed with Hiraizumi in the precinct of the shrine for four nights and five days. He spent the mornings reading and spent the afternoons with Hiraizumi and his wife Hayako, learning about the history of

Hakusan Shrine. He had time to reflect as well, and his memoirs note: "On October 7,

1950, I went to bed at 10:30 p.m. but could not sleep, thinking about the future of our nation."43

The people of the Fukui-Echizen domain and the Matsudaira family were particularly proud of Matsudaira Shungaku, the father of Yoshitami and the grandfather of

Nagayoshi. Like his father, Nagayoshi played a role in state affairs, inheriting the Seishin of Yoshitami as well as the Seishin of Shungaku. Nagayoshi joined the Ground Forces of the Self-Defense Forces (Rikujo Jieitai) so that he could defend the imperial house if something happened.

The people of the domain were also proud of Hashimoto Sanai, a Shishi of the

Bakumatsu period and were determined to manifest his Seishin in Showa Japan. Hiraizumi had restored Keigakukai, the provincial organization for manifestation of the Seishin of

Hashimoto in the prefecture and nationwide, and he had disseminated the Seishin of

Hashimoto as a guiding thought of the Imperial Nation since 1931. After some period of termination after the war, Keigakukai was once again restored in Fukui prefecture in the early months of 1958. Matsudaira Nagayoshi was in charge of restoring the organization in

Fukui City, assuming its presidency as the "hereditary lord" (Hanshu: Head of the

Domain) of Fukui-Echizen domain after the death of his father, Matsudaira Yoshitami, the last Minister of the Imperial Household (Kunaisho), on July 18, 1948.44

43 Matsudaira Nagayoshi, "Hakusansha sanpai no ki," in Kobayashi Kenjuro, ed., Shojinzaka wo noborite (Fukui: Shojinzaka wo noborite kanko kai, 1971), pp.42-43. 44 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu. (Tokyo: Jikaseiban, 1964), p.63. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 274

Keigakukai organized a festival for the 100th anniversary of the death of Keigaku sensei (Keigaku sensei jusetsu hyakunen on saiten) at Kaikoin on September 28, 1958.

There was a lecture after a religious ceremony honouring Hashimoto Sanai. Ichimura

Shin'ichi, member of Nihongaku kyokai, Ph.D. from MIT, and Associate Professor of

Economics at Kyoto University, first gave a lecture on "Japan and the West." Then

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi delivered the lecture "The Truth of the Mass Execution of the Ansei

Era," in which he said that it is crucial to inherit Seishin of Keigaku (Hashimoto) sensei today because the current national crisis was as serious as the national crisis of 100 years ago before Sanai fell as a martyr. 5 As this comment makes clear, Hiraizumi was once again determined to rescue the nation by the spread of Seishin of Hashimoto Sanai as a guiding thought of the nation, this time for national reconstruction (Kokka no fukko).

Keigakukai also organized an event for the 70 anniversary of the death of

Matsudaira Shungaku at Women's Hall in Yotsuya, Tokyo, on October 8, 1960.

Hashimoto Nagamasa, a descendant of Hashimoto Sanai, and Kubota Osamu, and a student of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, delivered lectures that day. Matsudaira Nagayoshi, a representative of the Echizen Matsudaira family and President of Keigakukai, gave the opening statement, because Tokugawa Yorichika, a member of the Tokugawa family who governed Japan for more than 300 years before the Meiji Restoration, a son of Shungaku, and Nagayoshi's uncle, could not make it from Nagoya Aichi prefecture.46 The title of his address was "Discuss My Grandfather, Matsudaira Shungaku."47

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Ansei no taigoku no shinsd (Tokyo: Keigakukai, April 1958), p. 15. 46 Echizen Matsudaira ke and Keigakukai, ed., Shungakukd yokei (Tokyo: Echizen Matsudaira ke and Keigakukai, May 1960). In the author's opinion, Tokugawa Yorichika distanced himself from the "spiritual" activities which Nagayoshi conducted in the postwar period. 47 Matsudaira Nagayoshi, "Sofu Matsudaira Shungaku wo kataru," Hanashi 204 (January 1974). Kiyoshi Veda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 275

Matsudaira Nagayoshi continued his contacts with both the house of Prince

Chichibu and the house of Prince Takamatsu throughout postwar period. Hiraizumi had delivered lectures on the Nation's History to both princes before 1945. Although he did not have frequent contact with them after the war, it is said that they always asked Nagayoshi about him.48 Nagayoshi visited Fukui from November 9-14, 1957. During this trip, he escorted Prince Takamatsu, who visited Fukui prefecture and the Hakusan Shrine.

Nagayoshi was moved by seeing the villagers of Heisenji standing along the street, waving

Hinomaru, the national flag: he saw a true image of Japan, which he had not seen for a long time. Once at the Hakusan Shrine, Hiraizumi became their escort.49 The Princess of the House of Chichibu also visited Hakusan Shrine in 1973; Hiraizumi had delivered 72 lectures on the Political History of Japan to Princess Chichibu from 1932 to 1934. Hence, the House of Chichibu and the House of Takamatsu, the two brothers of Emperor Hirohito, had enormous sympathy with and respect for Hiraizumi throughout the postwar period.

As imperial loyalists of the Fukui-Echizen domain, Hiraizumi and Matsudaira

Nagayoshi acted according to the concept of Chokkan50 in subsequent years, as for example, their role in the Yasukuni controversy of 1978. At issue was the controversial enshrining of Japanese war dead at Yasukuni Shrine, controversial because these particular men had been declared "class-A criminals" by the War Crimes Trial. However, the

Matsudaira Nagayoshi, "Sengo no on chokumiya sama to Hakusansha," in Kobayashi Kenjuro, ed., Bodairin wo aogite:Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei tsuitoroku (Fukui: 1986), p,8. 49 Matsudaira Nagayoshi, "Hakusansha sanpai no ki," in Kobayashi Kenjuro,ed., Shojinzaka wo noborite (Fukui: Shojinzaka wo noborite kankokai, 1971), pp. 42-43. Prince Takamatsu visited Fukui three times after the war. Prince Takamatsu and Nagayoshi both served in the Imperial Navy during the war. For more about the Prince's visit to Fukui and Hakusan Shrine, see Matsudaira Nagayoshi, "Sengo no on chokumiya gata to Hakusan sha," in Kobayashi Kenjuro, ed., Bodairin wo aogite: Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei tsuito roku (Fukui: Kobayashi Kenjuro, 1985). 50 Chokkan is a concept that if the master were doing something wrong from a "moral" point of view so as to harm the National Polity, it was the duty of true imperial loyalists to remonstrate their master even at the cost of their lives. But this is not a revolutionary act, which is different from Chokkan in intention.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 276

"spiritual" history disseminated by Hiraizumi after his return from the West and which he strove to restore after the war, constitutes the intellectual, historical, and religious foundation of the way in which contemporary Japanese practice and defend the reverence of the Seishin of the war dead at Yasukuni and other Shinto Shrines. In terms of its religious component, it is based upon the southern court view of history and the view of history of Bakumatsu. In this sense, Yasukuni Shrine is a shrine for all those who practiced

"the Way of the Subjects" (Shindo) and died in battle.

Hiraizumi visited Yasukuni Shrine on March 18, 1954, for the first time since the war. On March 10, 1959, he was invited to deliver the lecture "To Revere the Divine

Virtue of Yasukuni" at the 90th anniversary of the founding of the shrine.51 On June 4,

1978, Murakami Osamu, a former Minister of Construction and President of the

Association of the Bereaved Families of Japan (Ninon izoku kai), visited Hakusan Shrine, seeking Hiraizumi's advice on the nomination of Matsudaira Nagayoshi to Chief Priest of

Yasukuni Shrine.52 As a result of this consultation, Matsudaira Nagayoshi became Chief

Priest on June 24. Thus, Nagayoshi, a life-long student of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, the hereditary lord of Fukui-Echizen domain, and a committed proponent of "spiritual" history

(including the southern court view of history and the Bakumatsu view of history), was

Chief Priest of a shrine dedicated solely to the souls of the war dead.

Matsudaira Nagayoshi, like his mentor Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, believed that Japan could not accomplish the "spiritual" restoration of Japan (Nihon no Seishin fukkS) unless the Japanese absolutely denied the Tokyo War Crimes Trial's view of history (Tokyo

51 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, "Yasukuni no goshintoku wo aoide," in Yasukuni (Tokyo: Yasukuni jinja, November 1959-March 1960); rpt. in Yasukuni jinja: Soritsu hyakunijunen kinen tokushu (Bessatsu Rekishi kenkyu}m)& shirlzu) (Tokyo: Shin jinbutsu orai sha, 1989). 52 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, Kanrin nenpu: Zokuroku (Tokyo: Kajima shuppansha, 1987), p.52. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 277

Saiban Shinkan).53 Having this in mind, in 1978, he decided to enshrine the souls of 14 men who had been declared "class-A war criminals" at the War Crimes Trial. It was said to be his personal decision. At the same time, as mentioned, it was not only Nagayoshi who was behind the decision.54 In any event, the public did not find out about the enshrinement of these class-A war criminals until April 9, 1979. Nagayoshi had not consulted the government about his decision because he maintained that the Shrine should not be associated with state authorities (Kenryoku), including the Agency of Shinto Shrines

(Jinjacho). Rather, it must be independent. This position is reflective of Hiraizumi's view that Shinto should not be protected by the state; rather, the Shinto's purpose is to pray for the peace of the state.

Nagayoshi's views caused a serious conflict with Prime Minister Nakasone

Yasuhiro (1918-), who reportedly said, "Mr. Matsudaira, the chief priest of Yasukuni, is such a stubborn man. He is a grandson of Matsudaira Shungaku of the Bakumatsu period."

This also caused international outrage, particularly from China and the two Koreas, who had suffered from Japan's expansion during a series of "incidents" and the Great East

Asian War. From this point on, Yasukuni Shrine became a point of contention both at home and abroad, and the issue became increasingly politicized. But for Nagayoshi, the

National Polity (Kokutai) and "the Way of Subjects" (Shindo) as a means by which to defend the National Polity were more fundamentally important than the government and its decisions.

The recent release of new personal materials of the court servant Tomita demonstrates that Emperor Hirohito disliked the developments at Yasukuni Shrine. A

53 Matsudaira Nagayoshi, "Yasukuni hoshi juyonen no munen," Shokun (Tokyo: Bungei shunju sha, December 1992). 54 Mainichi shinbun Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 278 source revealed that the Emperor said to him, "Children sometimes fail to understand the true intention of their parents." The Emperor made this comment in the context of

Nagayoshi's decision to enshrine the souls of the war criminals at Yasukuni; he is saying that Nagayoshi failed to understand the will of his father, Matsudaira Yoshitami, the first

Minister of the Agency of Imperial Household (Kunaifu chokan), upon whom Emperor

Hirohito had bestowed his trust. However, for Nagayoshi, it was his duty as a true imperial loyalist to remonstrate his master (Kun wo isameru) on the issue of how he ought to view the cause of the Great East Asian War and how the roles of those "class-A war criminals" should be interpreted.

Nor was this enshrinement of war criminals all he did. Nagayoshi re-opened

Yushukan, the war memorial museum within the precinct of Yasukuni Shrine in 1986. The museum was renovated and re-opened in 2002 when Nanbu Toshiaki (1935-) was the

Chief Priest of Yasukuni Shrine.55 Nagae Taro, a member of the board of directors of the

Association of the Study of Japan (Nihon gaku kyokai) and a student of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, was asked to write a modern history for the museum.56 As a young man, Nagae often carried letters and documents to Hiraizumi in Ginza. Hiraizumi always gave 500 yen to

Nagae and told him to have a good meal on his way home.57 Within three months, Nagae and ten members of the Group of the Study of Military History (Gunji shigaku kai) had written the early modern and modern history of Japan and Asia, noting the tides of

55 Toshiaki is the 45th head (Toshu) of the Nanbu family. The family governed the region for more than 700 years after the northern and southern courts period of the 14th century and before Meiji started in the 19th century. As Tozama Daimyo, the Nanbu family governed Mori oka domain (currently the northern part of Iwate prefecture) in Tohoku region, while the Tokugawa family ruled the country for 300 years. General Tojo Hideki of the Imperial Army was from this area. 56 "Yasukuni: Sengo kara dokoe/12 tome A kyu senpan gohi no genryu: Ima ni myakuutsu senzen shikan," Mainichi shinbun, 19 August, 2006. 57 The author heard about this when he interviewed Nagae Taro at the headquarters of the Association of the Learning of Japan (Nihon gaku kyokai) in Nakano, Tokyo, August 2005. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 279

"Western aggression" into Asia. The view of history presented at the museum is reflective of Matsudaira Nagayoshi's decision to deny the Tokyo War Crimes Trial. It is also reflective of the view of the Great East Asian War, which Hiraizumi held before, during, and after the war, and of Great Asianism, which Hiraizumi had supported since the early

1930s (see Chapter Six).

Furthermore, the museum contains a number of pictures of soldiers who loyally died in battle. Interestingly, among those pictures are drawings of the imperial loyalists of the southern court of the 14th century and the men who awakened the will (shishi) of the

18th and 19th century before the great accomplishment of the Meiji Restoration. What does this tell us? We see that soldiers who die loyally and bravely in battle, regardless of the situation, are regarded as imperial loyalists. In other words, the war dead of the Great East

Asian War are now thought to be living eternally inside "history," in the same way as the imperial loyalists of the southern court and the Bakumatsu shishi have been living inside

"history" eternally. Among the pictures of the war dead, there is a picture of Kuroki

Hiroshi, the young officer of the Imperial Navy at the Mechanical School of the Imperial

Navy at Tsurumaki and a loyal student of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. Kuroki invented the suicidal submarine Tenkai at the end of Great East Asian War. A body from Tenkai is exhibited in the museum as well.

In essence, then, the museum contains many memories of Hiraizumi's view of

"history." Those who created the memorial seem to wish that the next generation will visit and learn to carry on the Seishin of the soldiers who fought and died in the battlefield according the ethical principle of Gi and the moral principle of CM. As if to underline this point, poems written by the imperial loyalists and the princes of the southern court, including Prince Nagayoshi, are displayed on the museum's walls. Not surprisingly, the

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 280

US government has expressed concern with the historical point of view employed here.58

On June 12, 2006, the American ambassador to Japan said in an interview on Japanese television that he was not convinced by what he saw.59 As this example makes clear, a piece of prewar values is preserved in the Shinto shrine, and its companion war museum is likely to maintain and display these values well into the future.

Hiraizumi and his students did not change their prewar views of history and nation at all in the postwar period. Their religious faith and their understanding of the national history remained absolutely inseparable. They subjectified history through their faith and lived inside the Nation's History in order to defend the "Imperial nation." As before, they strove to revive the Seishin of the imperial loyalists and the Bakumatsu shishi, who had sacrificed their lives for the defence of the imperial nation at the critical junctures of the

Nation's History. In this way, they themselves became one with the images of the imperial loyalists of the 14th century and Bakumatsu shishi of the 19th century, as they resolved to defend the Imperial nation from those who tried to undermine the Nation's History

(Kokushi), thereby destroying the National Polity (Kokutai) in the postwar period. When they revived Seishin and became one with their predecessors, they possessed the absolute ethical and moral correctness and legitimacy of the imperial loyalists of previous centuries.

Their conviction on this point may make them appear self-righteous to others, but they were sure of themselves and their view of history. Above all, they knew that their faith

(Shin) kept "history" alive eternally. For them, "history" was not solely academic but a matter of religious faith. In this way, ethics and morality, Shinto religion, and history are joined together as one. The spiritual historian Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, without assuming an

58 Matsudaira Nagayoshi was in charge of the project while he was Chief Priest. 59 "Yasukuni: Sengo kara dokoe/5 Yushukan baburu Shusho sanpai to kyomei," Mainichi shinbun, 10 August, 2006. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 281 official position, continued to play a role in the promotion of such a view of history throughout the postwar period; some conservative segments of the Japanese society sought his cooperation just as they did before the war.

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 282

CHAPTER TEN

"Spiritual" History as a Source of the Logic behind the Illogicality of Japan's

"Un-repentance" to the Present

This chapter shows that the southern court view of history served as a source of the logic behind the apparent illogicality of Japan's "un-repentance" throughout the postwar period.

To this end, the chapter follows Hiraizumi's involvement in key domestic issues (Naisei mondai): National Polity (Kokutai) and the amendment of the 1947 Japanese constitution

(Kaiken mondai); Japan as the nation of the way of Gi; the war dead as imperial loyalists of the 20th century; the spirit of the Great East Asian War; and the defense of "history."

Although these issues have been dealt with in preceding chapters, it is important to take a last look at them, as they have continued significance today, more than 20 years after

Hiraizumi's death.

The Amendment of the 1947 Constitution For the Defense of the National Polity (Kokutai) Did the defeat of the Imperial Nation mean the discontinuity of the Nation's History of

Japan? Did it mean the death of the National Polity of Japan that had never been

interrupted throughout the course of the Nation's History - more than 2,600 years?

Hiraizumi was concerned with these questions throughout the postwar period. "History" was fundamentally challenged in his eyes after Japan's defeat. Nevertheless, he was

determined to ensure the continuation of "history" because "Japanese morality" (Nihon no

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 283 dotoku) and the "Japanese spirit" (Nihon seishin) were preserved and embodied in it. In this context, he resolved to restore Gi, the core ethical principle of his prewar definition of

"Japanese Spirit" (see Chapters Eight and Nine). The ethical principle of Gi was essential for imperial loyalists to act according to the absolute moral principle of Chu. In other words, imperial loyalists serve the emperor according to the absolute moral principle of

CM with the assistance of the ethical principle of Gi. The possession of this set of ethical and moral principles is essential if one wishes to defend the National Polity of Japan.

Hiraizumi had taught this view in a series of "spiritual" lectures delivered throughout the

1930s and 1940s, up to 1945. He believed that as long as each imperial subject acted according to this set of principles, the true form of National Polity would remain. He continued to maintain this stance in the postwar period.

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi believed that the 1947 Japanese constitution did not accord with the National Polity of Japan and was involved in the movement for the amendment of the

constitution as early as 1954. This is one of a few issues with which Hiraizumi was

involved (albeit behind the scenes), because in his view, it was directly linked with whether

or not Japan could preserve the prewar definition of its National Polity. Hiraizumi

considered that the National Polity of Japan was barely preserved (in name but not in

substance) as a result of the American decision to keep the Japanese imperial system.1 One problem with the 1947 constitutional arrangement was that the Imperial House had

compromised on the issue of the constitutional status of the Emperor. The Emperor was no

longer divine, no longer a living god (Arahito garni); he became the symbol of the unity of

the Japanese people, not the sovereign of the nation as the Meiji Constitution stipulated.

1 Partly for this reason, Emperor Hirohito was never indicted at the Tokyo War Crimes Trial (1946-1948). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 284

Moreover, the sovereign now resided with the Japanese people. Such a relationship was unthinkable to Hiraizumi and those who still held the view of "history" and the definition of the relationship between individuals and the state according to the Way of the Subjects

(Shindo),2 even though this new constitutional arrangement strengthened the prewar imperial system in a rapidly changing world. As a Shinto essentialist, Hiraizumi could not accept this from the "historical" point of view. For Hiraizumi and his students, "history" began with the story of Opening the Nation (Chokoku), the starting point of Japanese mythology. And as essentialists, they considered (and still consider) the Emperor to be a living god (Arahito garni).

Furthermore, in this view of "history," each nation has a life. When "revolution" takes place, the life of the nation dies. After Japan's defeat in the Great East Asian War,

Hiraizumi believed, Japan was injected with unfamiliar blood when the 1947 Japanese constitution was implemented by foreigners ("the American occupiers"). If the Japanese did nothing about it, Japan would die. For Hiraizumi, the ancient imperial system was the only form of the National Polity of Japan. From this point of view, therefore, Hiraizumi absolutely rejected democracy and liberalism. More importantly, he resolved to discard the

1947 Japanese constitution. He even asserted that constitutional amendment did not mean the amendment of the 1947 constitution. Rather, it meant the nullification of the 1947 constitution, the reinstatement of the Meiji Constitution, and finally, the amendment of the

Meiji constitution.

This new arrangement might be better than what the Japanese communist party would offer: the abolition of the imperial system, Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 285

3 Japan as the Nation of the Way of Gi (the Just): (Dogi no kuni to shite no Nihon)

As noted, Hiraizumi taught the significance of the ethical principle of Gi to act according to the moral principle of Chu throughout the 1930s and 1940s, up to 1945. Those two principles represented Japanese Spirit (Nihon seishin), together with "the disposition to respect the martial arts" (Shobu no kisho). What most represents the Way of Gi is the Way of Bus hi (Bushido). Throughout the 1930s, Hiraizumi repeatedly claimed this was "the

Way of the Japanese" (Nihonjin no michi) which he believed the Japanese must follow instead of "the Way of the British" or "the Way of the Jews" (a term that also includes

Marxism). Hiraizumi promoted Bushido for the first time in September 1933 and called for its revival (Bushido no fukkatsu) in subsequent years (see Chapter Four). He defined the

Imperial Nation of Japan as "the nation of the Way of Gi" especially after the

Sino-Japanese Incident began in 1937 (see Chapter Six). Furthermore, he praised the character of Gi of Emperor Gotoba (1180-1239), Emperor Juntoku (1197-1242), and

Emperor Godaigo (1288-1339), who fought against a warrior regime to restore the ancient imperial system.4 Citing Emperor Gotoba's poems, Hiraizumi called Japan "the nation where the Way stands" (Michi no tatsuru kuni). The Way, in this context, means the Way of

Gi. - in effect, Hiraizumi saw Japan as a nation with a character of not being afraid to take up arms to fight for the restoration of the ancient imperial system.

In this historical context, the postwar period was a time when the form of the nation

3 The Way of Gi (Dogi) is different from the Way of Virtue (Dotoku). However, both terms are translated simply as morality (Dotoku) in the majority of Japanese-English and English-Japanese dictionaries. This causes a significant misunderstanding between Japanese and English speakers. 4 Gotoba failed and was sent to the remote island of Oki. This was known as the Jokyu War (Jokyu no Kikaku or Ran depending upon the interpretation). Emperor Godaigo succeeded in restoring the ancient imperial system, although it lasted only for a short period. This success was known as the Kenmu Restoration (Kenmu no chuko), the core of the southern court view of history (Nancho seito ron). Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 286 was not clearly defined. Moreover, with the 1947 Japanese constitution, the Imperial

Nation could not remain as "the nation of the Way of Gi" "the nation where the Way stands," and "the nation of the Way of Bushi." Although Japan had Self-Defense Forces, the Emperor was no longer the supreme commander of the Imperial Army and the Imperial

Navy. He could no longer take up arms to defend "the Way" and "the Way of Gi" as

Emperor Gotoba and Emperor Godaigo had done during the 12th and 14th centuries respectively. Nor could the soldiers of Japan's Self-Defense Forces act as the soldiers of the Way of Bushi, something which is directly linked to the imperial loyalists of the southern court. These "historical" ties were no longer valid. For one thing, the Tokyo War

Crimes Trial severely punished the Imperial Army. For another, the soldiers of the

Self-Defense Forces, who sheltered under "the American umbrella," were often the target of criticism from liberals and the left-wing because they were constitutionally prohibited from being sent outside Japanese soil under Article Nine of the 1947 constitution. One graduate of the University of Defense (Boei daigakko) told the author that some people called him a "tax robber" in the 1950s. While he was deeply hurt by this, not all Japanese were unkind: some farmers kindly asked him to sit and sip green tea when he visited the countryside for training.

Some leaders of the Self-Defense Forces were Hiraizumi's students; others had attended his special lectures at one of the educational institutions of the Imperial Army and the Imperial Navy before 1945. Throughout the postwar period, Hiraizumi made an effort to restore the self-confidence of the soldiers of the Self-Defense Forces through lectures and journal articles. The content remained the same as his prewar lectures and articles. In fact, there were no signs of discontinuity in Hiraizumi's relations with the soldiers of the

Imperial nation before 1945 and the "self-defense" soldiers of democratic Japan in the Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 287 postwar period.5 More importantly, he strove for the continuity of the "historical" ties between the imperial loyalists of the southern court and the soldiers of the Self-Defense

Forces in postwar Japan - even though the rest of the nation remained oblivious to this.

With Hiraizumi's assistance, a piece of prewar Japan was preserved in the Self-Defense

Forces of democratic Japan.

The War Dead as the Imperial Loyalists (Chushin) of the Twentieth Century

In the opinion of proponents of the southern court view of history, if the Japanese considered the deaths of the soldiers of the Imperial Army and the Imperial Navy during the Great East Asian War as meaningless (Inu Jini),6 by extension, this meant the deaths of the imperial loyalists of the southern court were meaningless (and vice versa). This would deny the historical basis of the Great Ideal of the imperial military operations of Japan.

More properly, the soldiers of the imperial military and the imperial loyalists of the southern court were "spiritually" one and the same. In other words, the soldiers of the imperial military were the imperial loyalists of the southern court in Showa period. Such an understanding gave historical and moral legitimacy to the military objectives of the imperial armed forces and the behavior of imperial soldiers who strove to accomplish this

"ideal" during the Great East Asian holy war (Seisen).

The soldiers understood that even if they lost their lives physically, life would never cease "spiritually." They would live on inside "history" eternally. Thus, they understood the "historical" significance of death within the framework of the southern court view of

5 On one occasion, the head of the Ground-Forces and head of the Maritime Forces visited Hakusan Shrine to give Hiraizumi Kiyoshi a letter of appreciation for his continuing services to "the Imperial Army" and "the Imperial Navy" in "democratic" Japan. 6 The Japanese expression Inu Jini literally means a death of a dog. This means a wasted death. The author cannot explain why a death of a dog means a wasted death. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 288 history.7 Admittedly, this smacks of false comfort. But for those young people who faced death for the realization of the Great Just (Taigi) of the Great East Asian War, it was a precious thought: they would continue to live inside the southern court view of history.

This theory has remained inviolable for more than 60 years. Although many do not necessarily agree intellectually with this logic, some still share the sentiment (Shinjo).

Many Japanese do not know it, but they share a "national" sentiment systematically constructed from this set of principles. Although the Americans banned this type of education for self-cultivation (Shushin), the national education on ethics and morality before 1945, some persistently preserved it during the American occupation and promoted it throughout the postwar period. Here, Hiraizumi and his students played a leading role.

This could be a source, if not the only one, of the Yasukuni problem. This is a point on which a considerable number of Japanese, especially those who had lost loved ones in the war, could never compromise.

The Spirit of the Great East Asian War: The Actions of Soldiers of the Imperial Army and "History" Arguably, illuminating the lack of ethics and the immorality of the soldiers of the imperial armed forces of Japan means to deny the character of Taigi Meibun and "historical" validity and legitimacy of the imperial loyalists of the southern court. Furthermore, it

denies the ethics and morality required to maintain the National Polity of Japan, thereby

destroying the Nation's History (Kokushi). Therefore, Hiraizumi held that people should

not conduct micro-history research, including the case of the Korean comfort women or

7 Emperor Hirohito did not support this view of history. He was the descendant of the northern court and a supporter of the northern court. Hence, they died for the Emperor within a view of history which the Emperor himself did not support. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 289 gas experimentation; instead, he stuck to "subjectivity," and the point of view of "one's own nation."

But there is a logical basis for this position which denies the historical descriptions of the aggression of the imperial armed forces and disregards the barbarity of the soldiers of the imperial military (Kogun) at the Nanking Incident during the Tokyo War Crimes

Trial. More specifically, these positions and opinions are understandable from the point of view of the ethical and moral interpretation of history (such as the southern court view of history and according to the theory of Taigi Meibun). While the peoples of neighbouring nations and the Japanese of the postwar-generation, who obviously lack the knowledge of this "historicaP'-intellectual source, remain puzzled by the righteousness of un-repentant

"right-wing" Japanese, the "un-repentant Japanese" retain the ethical and moral principles on which the southern court view of history was based. This is the source of the "logic" behind the illogicality of their ongoing affirmation of the legitimacy of the Great East

Asian war and the acts of the soldiers striving to accomplish the great ideal of the war. In their view, the soldiers acted with and for the ethical and moral principles of CM and Gi, thereby defending the Seishin of history (Rekishi no seishin). It would go against "history" to describe their acts as unethical and immoral, even though that might occasionally be the case. There was (and is) no room for such descriptions in the Nation's History of Japan in the eyes of Hiraizumi, his students, and others who shared (and share) these views.8

Hiraizumi repeatedly said people must learn from the Seishin of "history," not going against it, and certainly not adopting the Seishin of "revolution." Tokinoya Shigeru, a member of the Censorship Committee for history textbooks in the Ministry of Education, wrote that he was determined to carry on with this view throughout his life. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 290

A "Tragic History" of the Southern Court and A "Tragic History" of Japan in the Great East Asian War9 Why are some Japanese able to remain "un-repentant" about Japan's military actions in

Asia? A considerable number of people are puzzled by this question. As noted, one of the

"historical" sources of their un-repentance is the notion of the "tragic history" (Hishi) of the southern court view of history.10 Emperor Godaigo and his imperial loyalists strove to restore the ancient imperial system and did so, but for only a short period, and the northern court became a legitimate line of the imperial reign. Proponents argue, however, that while the southern court was defeated, its Seishin lives on. The Seishin of its imperial loyalists inspired the shishi, who sacrificed themselves to restore the ancient imperial system in the

19th century.

Adherents to the southern court view of history apply the same logic to the defeat of Japan in the Great East Asian War. Although Japan was defeated and many lives were lost, the great ideal of the Great East Asian War, for which Japan fought, and the Seishin of those soldiers who acted to realize this ideal in the image of the imperial loyalists of the

9 This comparison was made as recently as 2004 when Kenmu no Chuko was republished. Kubota Osamu, Hiraizumi's student, wrote the book, which was originally published in 1965. In this new version, Hiraizumi Hakafusa, a grandson of Hiraizumi Kiyoshi, wrote the preface. He was a student of Kubota at Kogakukan university and took a course on Kenmu restoration from Kubota. In the words of recommendation, Kobori Kei'ichiro made this comparison between the tragic history of the southern court and that of Japan in Great East Asian War. See, Kobori Kei'ichiro, "Susumeru kotoba," in Kubota Osamu, Kenmu no chuko: Godaigo tenno no riso to chiishin tachi no katsuyaku. (Tokyo: Meiseisha, 2004), p.2-5. 10 The southern court view of history was a product of applying the ethical and moral principles, which were developed in the Study of Song (Sogaku), to the interpretation of the Nation's History of Japan. The Song dynasty was defeated by non-Han people. Therefore, the Song people developed their scholarship praising unsubdued principles such as CM and Gi of the subjects towards their master. In the 20th century, this tradition of tragic history was reinforced by the German example. Prussia was defeated by France, and Berlin was under the control of France, when Fichte addressed a series of lectures to his fellow countrymen, calling for the restoration of the nation. Hiraizumi seemed to place himself in the image of Fichte, first when he was disseminating Seishin after his return from the West, and again when he was trying to restore the Way of Gi after Japan's defeat in 1945 (see Chapters Three and Eight).

Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 291 southern court will live on inside history. In fact, the defeat of Japan was a perfect scenario: the Great East Asian War could be incorporated into the chain of logic that included the historical notions of Chukd and Ishin, for which countless imperial loyalists sacrificed themselves to defend "history." Such a moral triumph, despite, or perhaps because of, the defeat, allowed the proponents of the southern court view of history to retain their faith in the moral basis for their actions in the war. Thus, they did not (and do not) see any reason to repent the actions of the soldiers who revived the Seishin of imperial loyalists of the southern court, became one with the Seishin of the medieval imperial loyalist, and died as imperial loyalists of the 20th century. Indeed, the pictures of the imperial loyalists of the southern court are placed among the pictures of the more recent war-dead. They meet and become one in the timeless world of spirit and still defend the peace of the nation at the Shrine of pacifying the nation (Yasukuni) today.

Teaching "History" Today

Hiraizumi taught the Study of the Nation's History (Kokushi gaku) to his students at Tokyo

Imperial University. For him, the purpose of studying history was to clarify the Seishin

(Geist) that runs throughout the course of history. He encouraged his students to be

subjective and to go inside "history" instead of observing it from the outside. The Japanese

could learn from the histories of foreign nations, he said, but they could realize "history" only through the history of Japan. Hiraizumi's students carried on the tradition of the

ethical and moral interpretation of the southern court period. Under him, they were trained to interpret history according to ethical and moral points of view. They were and are rigid

on this point. Like Tokinoya Shigeru, they distinguished the Seishin of "tradition" and

"history" from the Seishin of "revolution," thereby defending the National Polity (Kokutai), Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 292 but never harming it.

Persisting Presence

In 2008, Emperor Akihito still resided at Edo castle, a former residence of the Shogun, a member of the Tokugawa family who governed the nation from 1600 until "the ancient imperial system" was restored in the 19th century. The Emperor's residence here symbolizes the origins of modern Japan. In its return to the ancient, Japan became a modern state, and it remains thus today. The five-kilometer circumference of Edo castle is a popular place for joggers: we see both Japanese and Westerners running around the residence of the Emperor of Japan. Inside the castle, the customs of the ancient imperial system and the ideas of constitutional monarchy harmoniously co-exist to preserve, strengthen, and continue the "tradition of Japan" and the National Polity of Japan.

In the Palace Square (Kyujo/Kokyo hiroba), not far away from the famous Nijo

Bridge, there is a bronze statue of Kusunoki Masashige, the imperial loyalist of the southern court, whose ethical and moral principles were promoted by Hiraizumi. The statue was made during the Meiji period. The face of Kusunoki is hidden in the shadow of

Kabuto (a helmet of samurai) and is not clearly carved. In this way, the historical notion of being an imperial loyalist, which Kusunoki embodies and represents in the southern court view of history, seems to remain more significant than Kusunoki himself as a concrete historical example. He is seen riding a horse and holding a sword in his hand, but he does not look towards the Imperial Palace. Instead, he looks far away in the opposite direction.

He seems to be defending the ancient imperial system from "the rebel" ("Gaykuzoku")

Ashikaga Takauji (1305-58) and the next physical and ideological challenges to the

National Polity. This statue may represent the Way of the Subjects, but it does not represent Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 293 the National Polity itself. If each Japanese follows the Way of the Subjects, the National

Polity will become clear, as Hiraizumi repeatedly reminded his students. It is impossible to imagine the founding and defense of the modern Shinto state without the support of the national moral and religious education based upon the southern court view of history.

However, this view of history does not deal with the governing philosophy of the imperial nation within a constitutional arrangement.

Although the imperial nation has always needed the southern court view of history, the current sovereign has kept some distance from its proponents, such as Hiraizumi

Kiyoshi. (The Emperor's two brothers, Prince Chichibu and Prince Takamatsu maintained amicable relations with Hiraizumi Kiyoshi throughout their lives, and Princess Chichibu,

Princess and Princess Takamatsu visited Hakusan Shrine.) That is probably wise, for the purpose of retaining the National polity under the Meiji constitution and the 1947 constitution. The distance between the Nijo Bridge, an entrance to the Palace, and the statue of Kusunoki Masashige epitomizes the role that the proponents of the southern court view of history have played and continue to play in Showa era. While they are kept at arm's length from the sovereign, ultimately, they defend the abstract concept of the

National Polity, thereby keeping the "life of the nation" alive at present and in the future.

Could the southern court view of history become instrumental in Japan in the future? Although the study of history to strengthen the validity of the southern court view of history might not take place for quite some time in mainstream Japanese academia, such a view is retained in the study of the history of Shinto and the study of Shinto in such places as Kogakukan University near the Ise Grand Shrine in Mie prefecture, Kyoto

Industrial University, and Kanazawa Industrial University. Those who share this view are scattered across the nation. Some are members of Nihongaku kyokai, the postwar offspring Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 294 of Seiseijuku, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's private academy in the prewar period (see Chapters

Five and Eight). They periodically hold meetings and seminars, and they sponsor a summer youth camp in Mt. Chihaya, in Osaka prefecture, where Kusunoki Masashige fought for Emperor Godaigo in the defense of the southern court. Hiraizumi's prewar students still deliver lectures at the organization's events in Tokyo and at its branches in places such as Osaka, Kyoto, and Mito. In this fashion, Hiraizumi's view of history is passed on to the next generation.

Among those who attend these events are officers of the Japanese Self-Defense

Forces and the Police. As for the Self-Defense Forces, Japan's role in the United Nations'

Peace-Keeping Missions is rapidly increasing, and the role of the Self-Defense Forces will become even more significant internationally after the amendment of the Japanese constitution. In the circumstances, there is a reasonable possibility that the southern court view of history will be reinvigorated as the source of spiritual education of officers and soldiers of "Japan's military." Even under the current pacifist constitution, they are trained to kill enemy soldiers and to prepare for potential death in the tour of duty. Furthermore, as soldiers, each must demonstrate his allegiance to his nation.11

Moreover, Bushido, which Hiraizumi actively promoted throughout the war period, has evidently inspired some officers of the Self-Defense Forces who are sent overseas as peace-keepers. A Japanese newspaper reported that one officer who was sent to Iraq cultivates himself by reading Japanese classics. Another officer said that he was proud to be a soldier from the nation of the Way of the Warrior (Bushido). Keep in mind that

11 In the case of Japan, it is not clear whether soldiers are loyally committed to the nation of Japan, the civil government of Japan, or the Emperor of Japan (as in the prewar period) on moral and sentimental levels. In other countries, allegiance is clear; in Britain, for example, soldiers show allegiance to the Queen. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 295

Bushido and the southern court view of history are inseparable. As has been shown,

Hiraizumi delivered spiritual lectures and promoted the "Japanese Spirit" (Nihon Seishin) from the late 1920s; Seishin included the Seishin of Chu and Gi (Chugi no seishin) and the

Disposition for Respecting the Martial Arts (Shobu no kisho). The soldiers of Japan's

Self-Defense Forces retain this Seishin as part of "the tradition of Japan" (Nihon no dento).

How do we approach the persisting influences of the southern court view of history

(and spiritual history in general) today, if they do exist? One approach to this question is to

clarify the point that to criticize the southern court view of history would not mean to

destroy (or undermine) the National Polity (Kokutai). One cause of the history-related

national debates and other issues on which the Japanese acted "un-repentantly" was that the proponents of the southern court view of history and the practitioners of the ethical and

moral principles of the southern court are absolutely loyal to the abstract concept of the

National Polity. They are also committed to the notion of the Emperor as a living god (or

divine emperor) and the national sovereign of Gi (the just), who represents the concepts,

which historically unify the nation - which the Japanese call the nation of harmony (Wa no

kuni) and Nihon (the land where the sun begins).

Is it possible for imperial loyalists to correct the wrong-doings of the living god

who represents the National Polity? Imperial loyalists have an instrument called Chokkan,

which refers to the direct remonstration of the master by his loyal subjects. Hiraizumi and

his students are among those who have exercised this instrument in the Showa era. For

instance, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi delivered a lecture, "The Contributions which Kusunoki

Masashige Made," in the presence of the Emperor Hirohito in the academic quarter of the

Imperial Palace in Tokyo, in December 5 1932 (see Chapter Five). As noted, Kusunoki

represents the ethical and moral principles in the southern court view of history. However, Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 296 after the lecture, Emperor Hirohito asked Hiraizumi if there were any shortcomings in the governance of Emperor Godaigo.n He implicitly expressed his discontent with the southern court view of history, which was not always historically accurate in his eyes, even if it was ethically and morally correct in the eyes of its proponents.

As another example, when Japan was defeated on August 15, 1945, four officers of the Imperial Army, Hiraizumi's students, stormed into the Imperial Palace and tried to obtain the record of Emperor Hirohito's announcement for the surrender of Japan. They followed the teaching of their mentor Hiraizumi Kiyoshi (albeit without his permission), acting to correct the actions of their Emperor. When they failed, two immediately committed suicide. The Great East Asian War ended at this point in both history and

"history." The Japanese "subjects" heard the voice of "the living god," the first such occasion in the entire course of the Nation's History of Japan (see Chapter Seven.)

Finally, during the postwar period, Matsudaira Nagayoshi, Hiraizumi's life-long student from "Fukui-Echizen Domain" reportedly offered his opinions to Emperor Akihito on several issues. One of the most significant concerned Yasukuni Shrine (see Chapter

Nine). Nagayoshi proceeded to enshrine "class-A war criminals" at Yasukuni. Emperor

Hirohito expressed his disapproval of this development at Yasukuni through his court servants on numerous occasions. But when Nagaysohi, "the imperial loyalist," saw

Emperor Hirohito and Emperor Akihito, he probably saw them from the standpoint of the

Way of Gi (the Just), which Emperor Gotoba and Emperor Godaigo represented through their action for the restoration of the ancient imperial system during the medieval period within the framework of "spiritual" history.

12 He asked a similar question of Professor Nakamura Koya of Tokyo Imperial University when he delivered a lecture on the Nation's History from the standpoint of the southern court view of history during the firsthal f of the 1930s. Kiyoshi Ueda Part Four: Continuity and Persistence 297

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi passed away at Hakusan Shrine at the age of 89, on February 18,

1984. More than 1,000 people attended his funeral on February 20, 1984. Princess

Chichibu, Prince and Princess Takamatsu, Prime Minister Nakasone Yasuhiro, Former

Prime Minister Kishi Nobusuke, the Governor of Fukui, and the Governor of Osaka sent letters of condolence. As these examples show, many people appreciated Hiraizumi's service to "the Imperial Nation" before, during, and after the war.

Hiraizumi is gone, but his students are determined to carry on with their mentor's

Seishin, acting strictly according to the ethical and moral principles upon which the southern court view of history was based. They educate the next generation on the principles and the view of history they learned from Hiraizumi Kiyoshi. Japanese Shinto essentialists continue to practice "spiritual" history by sincerely hoping for the restoration of the ancient imperial system. This objective "historically" defines their agenda on current issues. We should not underestimate the resilience and the influence of Japanese Shinto essentialism on the behavior of some Japanese in state affairs at present or in the future. It is crucial to acknowledge it and to find ways to cope with its ongoing influence.

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 298

Bibliography Primary Sources

Un-published Materials (Tokutomi Soho Memorial Museum) Hiraizumi Kiyoshi's letters to Tokutomi Soho ¥-&MfrbWmM^^

(Central Library at Kanazawa University) Jishuryo NfH:S? Ryomu nisshi ^f£ P life Ji Taisho ni nen kugatsu tei do san nen hachigatsu g TCJEH^^ ^.Wi^^-AM .

(Division for Primary Sources on Early Modern and Modern History, Faculty of Law at University of Tokyo) Takeshita Masahiko tlTlE/l?. Takeshita Masahiko Nikki f5"TlE/S? P IB.

(National Archives of Japan) "Tokyo teikoku daigaku kyoju Hiraizumi Kiyoshi Manshukoku seifu no shokutaku ni oshi narabi ryohi wo ukuruno ken March 1 1940" MM^Wi^^^U¥^MWMM^ClBO 1f£MU5fc&fc*£g:< 5©fr 1940 ¥ 3 J3 1 P.

Published Materials

Lectures by Hiraizumi Kiyoshi

Tokyo Imperial University Teidai purinto renmei ^i^.'f V y V |$M, ed. Teidai purinto renmei hen go kogi purinto Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei Nihon shisoshi (zen) i$f 7C7° D y b lii

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 299

The Ministry of Education

National level Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^-^M- "Kakumeiron" ¥^lm. In Shiso mondai shoshu dai roku shu SOTH/htlfg^li, ed. Monbusho Shiso kyoku XU^^MMi. Tokyo: Monbusho Shiso kyoku, 1934.

Provincial branches Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥• M. M . "Bushido Seishin no shinzui" ^ dr xl ft # CO M II. Kanagawa ken kyoiku jiho #3&JH JftifcWNf^ 32 - 36 (Feburary - April 1934). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^F^S. uChushi no gaku" /S^Etf)^. Fukui: Fukui ken cho kyogakuka nai Fukui kyoikukai.n.d.1943 Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^^^."Seigaku" lE^. In Fukuiken kokumin seishin bunka koshujo shosho san tg#Jf;|SK$i#;£lbitliB^/h$iH. Fukui: Fukuiken kokumin seishin bunka koshujo, 1939. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^HfiL Kigen nisenroppyakunen wo mukaete /fE7G—^/^W^^iSl X. X. Nagoya: Nagoya shi shaken' kybikuka %* ]£fII rfni^ifcWIS, June 20, 1941. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^flL "Kokumin teki jikaku" HK&tl S %. Inoue sensei kiju kinen ronbunshu #±L%%M^t^tm~XM (December 1931). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi splltl. "Kokushi gaisetsu" H^mift. In Kyoiku Rinri koza ffcWfm SiJfjUi, ed. Tamura Hajime. Tokyo: Nihon Gakujitsu shoin, 1927. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^-^.WL. "Nihon seishin ni tsuite" B^ffrW^lfcT. Akita kyoiku fA ffl^W(August 1933). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^MW. "Nihon seishin" B^ffrH3. Ehime kyoiku SIMifcW 555 (August 1933). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W-^kW.. "Nihon seishin" B^fiW. Sapporo: Hokkaido teikoku daigaku gakuseika ^t^jI^H^^^^ff, April 1934. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^HL "Nihon seishin ni tsuite" B^ftW^ltT. Ueda shi: Ueda shidankai _h ffl %&&, November 1933). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥MWi. "Obei wo megurite sokoku wo omou" ffi^&M "9 "ClESSr ffi&.Aichi kyoiku S^P^W 528 (November 1931). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥!l?l. "Yamazaki Ansai to Mitogaku" |illU£f Hg^^fe^iTKF^. lb or aki kyoiku $c^#fcW (August 1933). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^HHL "Nihon bunka shi gairon" B if-'XWL^.W^. Toyama kyoiku %\^WC^ (September 1929).

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^-%M.. "Kokutai shikan ni motozuku Nihon gaiko shi" HUL^H^ &~3< B^^^i. Gaimusho shuyo tanren shiryo $\-W-£W^^lWM:P( 1 (July 1939). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥-MWt. Kenmu no chuko ni tsuite jUS^^H^Ol^T. Tokyo: Gaimusho ^M\ June 1940.

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 300

The Ministry of Health Hiraizumi Kiyoshi *f£k¥$t. "Budo shinko no han'i, kihon oyobi mokuhyo ni tsuite" l^ijt MR^faHs &&ATfBMKWL^X.Buddlcdron &WAW& 3. 1 (February 1941).

The Ministry of Internal Affairs (Police and Thought Police) Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^M. "Dai Nihon shi" ^CP^^. In Keisatsu kanbu: Yokuonkan kowaroku #^#§P - BMUM^U, ed. Naimusho keiho kyoku ftW4Wi%%). Tokyo: Keisatsu kyokai, 1939. Hiriazumi Kiyoshi ^TJ^WL- Chu to Gi /Si SI. Kanazawa: Ishikawa ken keisatsubu, September 1934. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^fK. "Ikei sareru keikan" Sfft $ tl <5 f£ll\ Keisatsukan no tomo W^W^S: 115 (January 1971). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^fl. "Shinjitsu no rekishi" ^^Oli. Jikei IW 38. 8 (August 1956).

The Imperial Palace Police Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^^fl. "Yoshida Shoin sensei" p? Ht£PH5te4. (Kogu keisatsu kden sokkiroku S'S'W^^IS^^IBS) Gojo SJHj (Not for sell) 24. Tokyo: Kunaisho gojokai, 1934.

The Imperial Army Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W-^W- "Daitoa senso no seishin" ^ jit IS® #-(75 ft #. Rikugun shikan gakko kiji llkW-^iS^-^MM- 81 (January 1945). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥•&&. "Meiji ishin no konpon seishin" W<ff^t.S^ffrH3. In Nihon seishin koenshu dai ni shu 0 ^ff#I#?H^^—$f, ed. Rikugun shinkan gakko i^Si'B'^'R. Rikugun shikan gakko kotokan shukaijo, 1937. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^^{st. "Nihon Kokumin seishin" 0 2^111 Kffiffi3. In "Nihon seishin koenshu" B^WffiM'MM, ed. PliSilT^K. Zama: Rikugun shikan gakko koto shukaijo, 1934. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W-M-lSE. Hakko ichiu A$fe—^. Tokyo: Teikoku zaigo gunjinkai ^ m&MMA&U, March 1939. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi *¥M.W- Kokushi kowa Hif#f5. Tokyo: Rikugun daigakko P^JR^C ^&, June 1936. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^PJ^HL Kokushi no ganmoku Si©l @ .Tokyo: Teikoku zaigo gunjinkai, Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^PJ^tlL Sho taruno kokorogamae #fc <5 'frflt. Tokyo: Rikugun yoka shikan gakko WtW-^^'i:'^^^., November 1938. Hiraizumi Kiysohi ^PIU!. "Idai naru Meiji no koryu" &;*cfr5l^?fr£>j&H. Goyu % tC (November 1968).

(Textbooks) Honposhi #H$l. Tokyo: Rikugun yoka shikan gakko ^W-^^ii'^^Xs 1939.

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 301

The Imperial Navy Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^f^W. "Kokka goji no seishin" H slltf <£>!##. In Shiso kyoiku shiryo ®3§ffcWifef4 24, ed. Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku m^m^m. Tokyo: Kaigunsho kyoiku kyoku ^MW-^WC^M, 1929. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^ykW.. "Kokushigaku no gaiyo" [Hife^

In Association with the Study of Shinto (Shrines) Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W-M.W. "Daitoa senso to Jinno shotoki" ^:KM^#-i#SlEJKIE. In Jinno shotoki (3rd Edition) #SJE$5fE(0HJ£). 1945. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥-&Wt. "Heisenji ni tsuite" ^^#(CoV^T. Nihon 0 ^ 42 (February 1992). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^^H/'Jinja no za ni tsuite" #£kGDJlIJ£Ol^"t. Shintogaku zasshi Wai^ftitfc 2 (April 1927). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W- M. W.. "Kitabatake Akiie ko wo shinobu" (Kitabatake ko roppyakunen kinen shuppan) itMMW^^^i^^ (ItMMW-^^lS^wi^t^). In Osakafu shakai kyoiku sosho ^PJxW^li^iScWStil 8. Osaka: Osakafu shakai kyoikuka, 1938. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^PMfst. "Kitabatake Akiie Nitta Yoshisada ryoko wo shinobu" AtHs

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 302

W.W. • &mBMW£&$&&.Kenmu 2t^C 3.4 (July 1938). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥$kW- "Jinja wo chushin to sum jichi dantai no ketsugo to tosei" # ftZtp'b 11" 5 g femfc£MU 28. 2 (March 1929). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi *¥$:W:. "Ronsetsu: Gotoba tenno nanahyakunen Godaigo tenno roppyaku nen no onsai wo mukae tatematsurite" fratfe - fJL&^KJli-bW^ • HBI{$3 X^'g¥~(f $ <5. Kenmu H3£ (January 1939). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^HHL "Juntoku tenno nanahyaku nen sai haishiki narabini kinen koenkai"H1&^!:-bW¥^#^& ktffcfE&f&jft^. &«mw ^S; 7.6 (November 1942). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^M.¥st. "Kagiri naki koon wo aogitatematsuru" Pjt 9 & c? HiSSfW #*^<5. Kenmu Eg£ 7. 6 (November 1942). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^IISL "Yasukuni no goshintoku wo aoide" i^M^MffilM&i^^X. In Yasukuni jinja: Soritsu hyaku nijyu nen kinen tokushu (Bessatsu Rekishi kenkyii jinja Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 303 shimu) mmm± - m±L^r.-^mz&MM (mmm$.m^]m±^v-^). Tokyo: Shin jinbutsu orai sha, 1989.

Colonial/overseas Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^-^W. Nihon to shina oyobi seiyo shokoku tono kokutai oyobi dogi no konponteki sai ni kansuru kowa B^t ~%M[$S.l3^M S t (D\MW-Jk'Cf:$l-&k(D%B: ##J^E^(£Mi"3 MM. Shinkyo: Kantogun shireibu MUS^T^, May 1940. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥M.%$.. "Koa no gendoryoku" fHi<£>M!Sf);ft. Ronso daini shu frail fg—lt (March 1940). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W-%W- "Nihon seishin kowa " 0 ^ffifWflf IS. Bunkyo no Chosen 3C ^(DmU 122 (October 1935).

Liberal Democratic Party Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^-^M- "Nihon rekishi no ue yori mita tenno no chii" 0 ^Effi^-b frb%utc3zikP)MiiL. In Jiminto kenpo chosakai iR^^&ffS^, ed., Tenno ron ni kansuru mondai (Tokubetsu shiryo 9) ^cUfrafcM'fS fgjgf (OfcWMPr 9). Tokyo: Jiminto kenpo chosakai, 1954.

Kogakukan University and its companion High School Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^-^.W.- Benkyo no hiden (Kogakukan koto gakko koen sosho dai nana shu: Kaiko jQnen kinen tokubetsugo) f&%MDWtfc (l^tf r^ffSI|l*^-b|S - WK+¥IB^#S'J-^). Ise: Kogakukan koto gakko koenkai, 1972. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^-MW- "Keikoku no taigyo" HHO^H. Kogakukan daigaku koen sosho dai jiinana shu Jl^ff ^Jp^^itll Jj|-|—btl (July 1970). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^{-7kWt. "Rekishi no keisho" Slffe^lllTpC. Kogakukan koto gakko koen sosho dai nana shu ll^tf M&W'MMW %JL JC%% (September 1968). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^f-^M.. "Risshi" ±Lns-. Kogakukan koto gakko koen sosho daigo shu S^filMmnmBm M3M (September 1971).

Other places Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥•&&. "Chokoku no dairiso" f£W\

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 304

SttlSilSIM^c. Osakafu minami kawachi gun chihaya akasaka mura: Mura yakuba, 1976. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥-$kW- Nidai kisho: Shotoki to Kokuminshi ^A-8fH JE^QlEiH K5£l (Naigai josei chosa shirizu F^^'IW^DSftv^ ]J ""X 198). Tokyo: Naigai chosa kai, 1963. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W-^W- Rekishi no songen M$.(DWM (Koen shirizu 111 t!ir> U — X 204). Tokyo: Naigai chosa kai, 1963. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^HL Rekishi ha mageraretari ]Sifetttt&f hfrlfc K>. Kumamoto: 1956. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥-$kW.- Sakura sensei no seishin j^AJ^Tfe^^ffirW'. Osaka: 1936. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^PH?!:. "Seishin naki mono wa horobu" ff#& c^ t) <£>&$$ •£». Nihon 0^: 45.6(1931) Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ~¥-7kW- "Senko no shinkyo wo kaitaku su" ^^ b>M'%:T$'$i~$~. Tokyo: Kinsei nihon kokumin shi kanko kai. (October 1961). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^PI^tiL Kokka no meimyaku SH^CD^M. Tokyo: Gaiko fukyu chishiki fukyukai, 1971. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^HL "Onjin" MA. In Idai nam Fukui no sentetsu (Kaikan kinen koenkai kirokushi) &±t£Z>fe#

Books Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P j^til. Nihon reksihi monogatari (CM) {Nihon Jido bunko) 0 ^Sf 5^f§ C^) (0 #JES:£J£). Tokyo: Arusu, 1928. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^HH. "Haikyo" HH^sSt. In Banbutsu Ruten MWMM-, ed. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^HH. Tokyo: Shibundo, 1936. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^SiL Bushido nofukkatsu tE^drjjicDtiC?!!. Tokyo: Shibundo.1933. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^PIjIflL Chusei ni okeru seishin seikatsu cF,1fe^^1"'5ffi#:^?i§. Tokyo: Shibundo, 1926. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi *f-MWt. Chusei ni okeru shaji to shakai no kankei ^"tM^djo (} <5|±Tf kfc£(Dm&. Tokyo: Shibundo, 1925. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^HL Waga rekishikan ^fc^Mifeil. Tokyo: Shibundo, 1926. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^PIUI. Dento {nW,. Tokyo: Shibundo, 1940. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^f-ykW:. Diary (Not for sell). Katsuyma: Shikaseiban, 1991. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥-M.WL- Kikuchi kinno shi ^T?tiliK):Ejfe. Tokyo: Kikuchi shi kinn5 kensho kai, 1941. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^PHliL Hakusan seifu cho S illf#JHfe. (Private publication). 1984. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥-$kW.. Higeki Jyuso MMWt^E. Ise: Kogakukan daigaku shuppanbu, 1980. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥-M.$t. "Dokusho no gaku" Hreff 6Ds$J. In Hiraizumi Kiyoshi hakushi shironsho: Rekishikan wo shu to shite ^l^f^iifefira^ - Mifeltl^rEfei: LT - , ed. Tanaka Takashi ffl "£#. Ise: Seisei kikaku, 1998.

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 305

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥••&%£. "Rinka yuhei no ki" #TffiPfltf)fE. In Kanai no omoide M- \H IE ffc. In Meiji no koki W(o(D%W, ed. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥&W:. Tokyo: Nihongaku kyokai, 1980. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^^W. Nihon no higeki to riso 0 ^<£>^J=0J i Sfi. Tokyo: Hara Shobo, 1977. Hiraizumi Kiysohi ^P^SL Kanai no omoide l^l*l<£>S5tt}. (Not for sale). Tokyo: Kajima shuppan sha, 1983. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^HSI. Shukyo no hito: Dai Saigo H" ££:<£> A - JKWM- Tokyo: Hara shobo, 1986. Hirazumi Kiyoshi. ^F^HL Shonen Nihon shi 6^^ B 3f$l. Tokyo: Jiji tsushin sha, 1970. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^fMW:. Sentetsu wo aogu jfeHf^rifll C Tokyo: Kinseisha, 1998. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^-MlSt, ed. Taicho osho denki iS^fP^fEffi (a version of the Hakusan shrine). Onogun Heisenjison Heisenji: Hakusan jinja, November 1953. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^IK. "Kokushi no ganmoku" SH ill CD @il @ . In Tenpei ni teki nashi Ji&KW£ t, ed. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥&W.. Tokyo: Shibundo, 1943. Hiraizumi Kiyoshi *¥-M.W:. Konomichi wo yuku: Kanrinshi kankoroku vZOiS^rff

Academic Journal articles Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^f&W. "Ayamararetaru Nikkobyo" M b frlfc %> B %M. Shigaku zasshi i#£tf& 32. 2 (Feburary 1921). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^HtlL "Bunka jinrui gaku wo yomu" XWLKW^-^CWXS . Shigaku zasshi S&^lfffe 36. 1 (February 1924).

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 306

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi *fM.W:. "Croce Rekishi jujitsu no ronri oyobi rekishi hoyaku wo ete" ^n^f-;* M£.%l7&

(December 1917). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥-&W:"Ko Tanaka hakushi ikd no shuppan" $Cffi ^WiiSH^ttJ JR. Shigaku zasshi 5£^3ttfe 33. 12 (December 1922). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^P^ tit "Rekishi no kaiko to kakushin no chikara" M$.(D\BlMt^- §T

Journal/magazine articles Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^-%W- "Bakugyaku Uchiyama ani wo omou" MMP^lhRj^i^.^. Ono chugakko koyushi JK%f ^^K'K^ffe 32 (December 1937). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥-&W. "Dokuritsu no kisho" Z&'iiKDiaM. Tori $fc^ 2. 6 (June 1952). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W-^kW- "Fukutsu no tamashii" ^JSCDlfe. Tori $fc^ 4. 1 (January 1954). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥•&&. "Kimigayo" M& ft. Tori $W 5. 1 (January 1955). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ¥1^1 "Tenka no godaiji" 3zT|U ii. Shukan Asahi M^M 0 (December 5, 1943). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi *f M. W:. "Kokushi wo tsuranuku mono" H 3fe £: o b fcfo < h

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 308

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^PHH. "Tenpei ni tekinashi" 3z.£kK$fcfj: L. Shukan Asahi MflJ^fj 0 (January 17, 1942). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W-^W:. "Yukyu nisen roppyaku nen" f&^H^p/N W^-. Shukan Asahi ilflJiH 0 (February 15, 1942). Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ^^^."Bushido no fukkatsu" ^dr^OD^fg' Dai Ajia shugi ~^MM M^B; 5 (September 1933).

Newspaper articles Hiraizumi Kiyoshi W-MW:- "Arata naru rekishi e: retsuretsu taru senkaku no iyoku wo kaiko" §ftcf£^>M$.^ - ffl*1tZ>9G%

(Ministries of the government of Japan)

The Ministry of Education Monbusho, ZfcgR^T ed. Kokutai no hongi gift CO^M. Tokyo: Monbusho, 1937. Monbusho kyoigaku kyoku X^^Wi^M Kyogaku kyoku yoko iSt^iPuHljL Tokyo: Monbusho kyogaku kyoku Xffitgt&^M, 1941.

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 309

Monbusho kyogaku kyoku ^C^^Wc^-M ed., Nihon shogaku kenkyu hokoku: Dai jyiinana hen: Rekishigaku B^lt^W^f^'n' - H + 'tM. Monbusho kyogaku kyoku JM%&&M, 1942. Monbusho shakai kyoikubu zaidan hojin shakai kyoiku kai ^fP^lt^i^W^ltffl&A li^tfcW^, ed. Jinno shotoki {Nihon Shisd sosho 10) ttjUE^fE (P ^l-SHIf 10). Tokyo: Dai Nihon kydka tosho kabushiki gaisha, 1934. Monbusho shisokyoku ~XW^f£MM. Shiso kyoku yoko SSJSIPS. Tokyo: Monbusho shiso kyoku £M\SlUi, 1934. Monbusho shis5kyoku 'X^'^^fM-^}. "Nihon seishin ron no chosd" 0 ^fB#fra^ff 2=E. Tokyo: Monbusho shiso kyoku JCffig&Mffi, 1935. Naikaku.NaimushS.Monbusho rtKl • \Hf^^ ' 3CM^ .ed., Nihon seishin no hatsuyo: Hakko ichiu no seishin (Kokuminseishin sodoin shiryo 4). 0 ^ft#£)^§:lli - Afflu— ^COffiW (HISff#^lt)MSf4 4). Tokyo: Kokuminseishin sodoin chuo renmei. (December 1937). Nihon bunka kyokai 0 ^-JCifcWi^, ed. Kyogaku sasshin hyogikai toshin oyobi kengi %. ^MWgt-W&^ftMW* (Not for sell). Tokyo: Nihon bunka kyokai 0 ttM£, 1937.

Kempei shireibu M^^l^v^- "Shuppanbutsu wo tsuujite mitaru waga kuni shakai undo no fashoka ni tsuite" ffiȣil LTtl/c S^Hft^jgilKZ)? 7 *SB IkCo^ T (Shiso iho SS*# 27). Tokyo: Kenpei shireibu, 1932. In Yoshida Yutaka ^ffl ^, ed. Jugonen senso gokuhi shiryoshu 14: Shiso iho (ge) ~\~'S^-Wi^rWMi^^c'M, 14 -SS*$&(T) .Tokyo: Fuji shuppan, 1990.7-1997.4.

Shihosho keijibu shisobu WJ&^ffJ^PiPSSpflJ. "Kokka shugi oyobi kokka shakai shugi dantai goran (Zotei kaiban) (Showa jyiiichinen jyunigatsu shirabe)" S^i^S.H^|i ^±^fflf*$SK (*tfT3feJK) (Bg|P+¥+-^ M). In shakaimondai shiryo sosho dai ichi sho dai sanjuni haihon tt^BliSilf^lilt W> 1 %% W> 32 UlIB^. Shakai mondai shiryo kenkyilkai. Kyoto: Toyo bunkasha, 1974.

Uyoku kankei jinmeiroku ^HH^A^H (Absolutely confidential®^), November 1935.

Others on (and about) Hiraizumi Kiyoshi "Hiraizumi bungaku hakushi no shosoku" ¥-$.JC^W-^<£>ffiM- in Fukui hyoron tg# f¥ffra 7. 3 (March 1931). "Meiji kenpo kara shin kenpo e: Taidan Miyazawa Toshiyoshi.Kobayashi Naoki" WfeM $5/^ bffMi^ - ft1fc'g$l$t$& • /J^E^t. In Showa shisoshi e no shogen: kaitei shinban Bg f P Jg ?Jl ^ ^ £> flE If, ed. Mainichi shinbunsha fe 0 $f K! 1±. Tokyo: Mainichi shinbun % 0 ffIB, 1972. Hani Goro $H—3L£|S. Rekishigaku hihan josetsu Sife^ftfc¥ljfff&. Tokyo: Sento shoin, 1932.

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 310

Harada Kumao W-. ffl M^B. Saionjiko to seikyoku dairokkan ji showa juninen rokugatsu tei showa jusan nen rokugatsu H|I|#^ t J$tMH/N# S Bgfp-f-Z1^7\^l IgBg^P+H ^•r\M . Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1967. Hayashi Kentaro #M^C^|5. Utsuriyuku monono kage: ichi interi no ayumi H ty ^ < h (D(DB - —4 yf y (D^ty. Tokyo: Bungei shunju shinsha, 1960. Hiraizumi Akira ^-^.\jt. "Chichi Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ni tsuite" ^^^iBCOl^T. Shintoshi kenkyu W-B-^M^t 33. 1 (January 1986). Hiraizumi Wataru ^^ffl. "Chichi.Hiraizumi Kiyoshi no tsukue ni okareta shashin" 5i ¥&Wi<0%lfcMfrtlfe^M. Bungei shunju £§#$( 83. 12 (September 2005). Horige Ichimaro M^ih~"JS. "Rikudai ni miru doran no rikugun" $g.J^\Z-Wl%>W}:&L(Of& W-. In Showa rikugun shi B-p^PPzltSife, ed. Nakamura Kikuo ^ttl^^. Tokyo: Bancho shobo, 1968. Ienaga Saburo M-TKZL$$. Gekido nanajunen no rekishi wo ikite ^ft(0"b+^$r^£# "C. Tokyo: Shinchi shobo, 1988. Ienaga Saburo W~M^L$$- IchiRekishigakusha no ayumi- Kyokasho saiban ni itarumade -i$ff©^^- t^Sl|IJl:I5tt. Tokyo: Sanseido, 1967. Ienaga Saburo W-7^^rM>. Japan's Past, Japan's Future: One Historian's Odyssey, trans., by Richard H. Minear (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC., 2001) Irokawa Daikichi "feJI|;*Cl=f. "Ienaga Saiban no Kuromakutachi" ^^c^^JCOHSTc*?. In Meiji no seishin S^lfo 0!ff #. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobo, 1965. Ishida Yoshiro 5H^:6|3. "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei wo shinonde" ^P^M^fe^SriSA/ X.Kaiko fgtf 402.(1984). Iwata Masataka ^HIE# . "Misui ni owatta kirikomi keikaku" 3zMfc%&fc>otc$i 9 JA ^ff®. ChuoKoron 107. 3 (March 1992). Kato Haruhiro ^PHH^ca. Gunshuku kaigi to kokumin no kakugo MW^zWi, t BRCO^ 'IH. Tokyo: Nihon seishin kyokai, 1935. Kido Koichi T^p^—. "Gotoba tenno nanahyakunen sai ni atarite" m^^H-frS"^ gkK^V) X.Kenmu Mfk 4. 3 (May 1939). Kido nikki kenkyukai TfcF' 0 ffilff^^, ed, Kido Koichi Nikki (jo) T^F #— 0 IS (_h). Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku shuppan kai, 1966. Kishi Nobusuke ^fif;fr. Kaisoroku: Waga seishun HO®IS - ^fc^W^. Tokyo: Kosaido, 1983. Kishima Masaaki T^J^IE^. "Anama kara Nagataki e" "X^frbW-tm^. In Shojinzaka wo noborite ItiiSSrS V X, ed. Kobayashi Kenjuro /hWiS^f£|$. Fukui: Shojinzaka wo noborite kanko kai, 1971. Kisoshinshusoshikoku seinen gakudokai S^'L^tlW^W^^]!^, ed. Yasui Eiji sensei danwa: Ichi gakuto to shite no gyosei seijika no keiken T&T^^—^te^iffciS - —¥$E.b \^X

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 311

Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei tsuito roku #$l#3Hfp c?T - ^P^^^fe^feiif-^ii, ed. Kobayashi Kenjuro /J^#M#^P. Fukui: Kobayashi Kenjuro, 1985. Kobayashi Yuichi A'SWK~'• "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei no goshosoku: daitoa senso no shin'i kyumei wo yosei no shimei to shite goshojin" W-^W^u^.^OM^M- - J^MM 'm^(DMffi%g$Z%&£.(Dm^ t LX ^WM. Kaiko mi- (August 1974). Matsudaira Nagayoshi |£ ^P TK 5~r . "Hakusansha sanpai no ki" S lh # W (O IE . In Shojinzaka wo noborite fifi§iS£f §: *9 X, ed. Kobayashi Kenjuro A^Wi0$$. Fukui: Shojinzaka wo noborite kanko kai, 1971. Matsudaira Nagayoshi tk^P^k??. "Sengo no on chokumiya gata to Hakusan sha" WM.&) $?jlL IT ^ t 6 U-ili. In Bodairin wo aogite: Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei tsuitoroku ^FSl Pf&W€X - ^PHtl^n^itt^ii, ed. Kobayashi Kenjuro /h#$t#gR. Fukui: Kobayashi Kenjuro, 1985. Mazaki Jinzaburo M l^ S H IR . Mazaki Jinzaburo nikki: Showa juichinen nanagaku-Showa jiisan nen junigatsu JIlU^^HlP 0 ffi - HgfPH ^-~\zR - B§?P -hH¥ + —^. (Kindai Nihon shiryo sensho j£f^0^^f4jl# 1-3). Tokyo: Yamakawa shuppan, 1981. Mori Katsunori "Rokujunen no omoide". In Shigaku ronshu taigai kaikei to seiji bunka (vol. 3), ed. Mori Katsunori hakushi koki kinen kai. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobunkan, 1974:617. Murao Jiro frJl&gp. "Fukuin chokugo no Hensenji k5ki" tSMit#^¥^^#fS. In Bodairin wo aogite: Hiraizumi Kiyoshi sensei tsuito roku ^^fkWJtWH'X - ^PI^M Tfe^iJlt-^ii, ed. Kobayashi Kenjuro. Fukui: Kobayashi Kenjuro, 1985. Nakano Shigeharu ^IfJT/'p. "Akutagawa shi no koto nado" and "Rekishi" In Geijutsu ni kansuru hashirigaki teki oboe gaki iS?WlZ.M~$~•£> &. *9 W^ W^X-l?, ed. Nakano Shigeharu ITJi?fif'p. Tokyo: Kaizosha, 1929. (originally published in Bungei koron X&&$m, January 1928). Nakano Shigeharu ^If JSfp. "Muragimo" tf £> eft). Tokyo: Chuo koron sha, 1954. Nishiuchi Tadashi Hff^ft and Ihata Masataka SfflIE#. Otakebi: Daitoa senso no seishin to kyujo jiken HIS - 'X'MMM^^W^ t ^ffif-W -. Tokyo: Nihon kogyo shinbunsha, 1982. Nishiyama Toku HiP-lfS. "Hiraizumi.Nakamura ryo hakushi no taishoku" ^yk • ^ttPf W±(Dm$," Shigaku zashi 5£^t!£ 56. 6 (June 1945). Okawa Shumei kankei monjo kanko kai ^CJI|Jo)^M'f^^#flJfT^, ed. Okawa Shumei kankei monjo JK)WJ^VMMi%JCW. Tokyo: Fuyo shobo shuppan sha. 1998. Okawa Shumei Kenshokai AJI| ffl 9!SI^^, ed. Okawa Shumei Nikki: Meiji36nen ~Showa24nen ;fcjl| JSK B IB - Wf& 36 ^ ~ BgfP 24 ^. Tokyo: Iwasaki Gakujutsu shuppan sha, 1986. Okubo Toshiaki ifc^M^IJft. "Kindaishi kotohajime: ichi rekishika no kaiso" 0 ^ifift &^*#&- —flf 5&^0>H1®. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1996. Osaka Furitsu Toshokan ^RW^ III lift. Kinno shishi Sakura Azumao iboku bunken tenrankai mokuroku §frl|j£±'f£^i^]SHA3l£itfclili!#. Nara: Osaka furitsu toshokan, November 1935.

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 312

Sato Shin'ichi feUii—. Nanbokucho no ddran j^fc^fjOfiJlSL (Nihon no rekishi 9) Tokyo: Chuo koronsha, 1965. Shimomura Sadamu Ttt^. "Hiraizumi sensei no shuro: Tokyo ni kenkyujo kaisetsu saru" ¥-&%±(DltiA - MM\Z.mfiffiM&&Z.Kaikdffift 3 (March 15 1954) Tokinoya Shigeru kanreki kinen ronshu kankokai ^W&MMMui&fmM^ttl?*, ed. Seidoshi ronshu: Tokinoya Shigeru kanreki kinen ffflJSifefrail - ^WQWMMf&&- Tokyo: Tokinoya Shigeru kanreki kinen ronshu kankokai ^W^-WMMt&l^tmMf^ ft£, 1986. Tokinoya Shigeru H# if ^ W& • Ienaga kyokasho saiban to Nankin jiken: Monbusho tantokan ha shbgen suru. W-foWiPt^WtM t FffjK*^ - XU^U^^tUW^5. Tokyo: Nihon Kyobund5, 1989. Tomita Kenji llffllllfq. Haisen Nihon no uchigawa: Konoe ko no omoide !&^c 0 if(D M% - jfi#T^OStB. Tokyo: Kokin shoin, 1962.

Other primary sources y<^:T h 9 n^-^rc. Rekishi jojitsu no ronri oyobi rekishi M^§Xi&(DtmMJkM.$l, translated by Hani Gor5 ^H—3£$[$. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1926. General Headquarters of Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers. "List of Authors Purged.as of August 1948." In Removal and Exclusion of Undesirable Personal from Public Office (E.O. 12065 3-402/NNDG NO.775020). Willian Elliot Griffis. The Mikado's Empire: Book: History of Japan, from 660 B.C. to 1872 A.D..Book 2.Personal Experiences. Observations.and Studies in Japan. 1870-1874; with supplementary chapters; Japan in 1883 and Japan in 1886. New York: Harper. 1883. Heisenji joto koto shogakkd ^^^^^rSj^r'h^K, ed. Heisenjison kyodo dokuhon ^P ^Tftt$?:hfm^ (Not for sale). Katsuyama-cho: Takaki insatsujo, May 1935. Hirata Toshiharu ^Ffflf^^. Nihon no kenkoku to nigatsu juichi nichi. 0 7^(7)^[5 t. — M H—" 0 . Tokyo: Koyo shobo, 1967. Ishiwara Kitao ^W^t^z, ed. Hashimoto Sanai sensei seitan hyakunen kinen kiyd W&'&'tE ft^^W^ffi^JSfl^fES. Tokyo: Keigakukai, 1939. it m^; Jp!:. "Shokuin" fUJt. In Kenkoku daigaku yoran jil H ^ Ipt H H (Shinkyo: Yasutoku hachi nen §fM. - !Kf;§A^-). Keigakukai ItrS^lil., ed. Hashimoto Sanai zenshu ^^f&fy^.M- Tokyo: Keigakukai, 1908. Kobayashi Kenzo /h#fl!H and Nishiuchi Tadashi Mf^lJi. Nihon rekishi no seishin: Shakaika reksihi hihan 0*M^^ffiW - %t^f4M5&WJ-. Tokyo: Risosha, 1967. Kuroita Hakushi kinenkai ^ISI^drfS^^, ed. Kobunka no hozon to kenkyu l^JCik(D {*# t W9t. Tokyo: Kuroita hakushi kinen kai, 1953. Kuroita Katsumi #M&i#|i. "Kenmu no chuko no seishin" ItiE^flCDffif'N3. In Kenmu ItS; 1.3 (March 1936). Kuroita Katsumi Sffi^H. "Nanbokuryocho no yurai to sono seijun wo ronzu" J^Mbl$ <£>&5fE t ^ (D^Em&tm'f • In Seijun dan'an: Kokutai no engo lEmWrM- BIfi£JS

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 313

M, ed. Yuseikai ~i£W%- Tokyo: Tokyodo, 1911. Kuroita Katsumi HSJUii. "Rekishijo no kenchi yori waga kokutai kannen (ge)" Sifei: (DMuMX ^^HHIS^. In Waga Kokutai kannen ffcUHKH^ (Rikugun shikan gakko seito kagai koenshu dai kyu sho) (BM±t^^±^^fUMW^MMM^), eds. Inoue Tetsujiro ^Jb^^cSP and Kuroita Katsumi M%Rf§=k. Tokyo: Rikugun shikan gakko shoko shukaijo, 1925. Kurotia Katsumi ^JxlHitt. Kokutai Shinron Hff§ffm. Tokyo: Hakubundo, 1925. Matsudaira Nagayoshi fe¥*^ . "Showa 34 nen do saibun" VBfQ^.-[-m*E&t£X. In Sanai sensei keigyo roku 1iEfa9zQLJk{W$&, ed. Keigakukai. Tokyo: Keigakukai, June 1958. Matsudaira Nagayoshi l&^P^iJjf . "Yasukuni hoshijuyonenno munen" Tifgj ^f±+ E3¥^M^. Shokun §|g 12. (December 1992). Matsudaira Nagayoshi th^-iK^. "Atogaki" h t &c5. In Ah ah Kuroki shosa l)§P^ H *'>{£, ed. Kaigun kikan gakko dosokai %%WLW£Wftl&&. (1955). Matsudaira Nagayoshi tfjX^-J^:. "Sofu Matsudaira Shungaku wo kataru" II^Ii^^fiR %:WiZ>. Hanashi fg 204 (January 1974). Murao Jiro ttH^SP. Kyokasho chosakan no hatsugen ^f4^fJSS'g'(^>l§'B'- Tokyo: Hara shobo, 1969. Murata Masashi tt ffl 1EM. Nanbokuchoron: Shijitsu to shiso (Nihon rekishi shinsho) W imtm: &Mki&M (0*Siff»). Tokyo: Shibundo, 1959. Nagoe Tokimasa %MWiE. Kyodoshi teiyo H|$±jfe$§l|. Mito: Ibaraki ken keisatsu gakko koyukai, 1954. Nagoe Tokimasa £ IS H# IE. Mito no Nihongaku 7j< ~P

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 314

fljff #. Tokyo: Sogo tosho, November 1978. Suganuma Teifu ^WffiMM*. Dai Nihon shogyo shi ;fc 0 2fcj?!!iife. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1940. Suganuma Teifu If $3 JlJM. Shin Nihon zunan no yume 0f 0 ^f-WM^W-. (Iwanami bunko Ig&XM 3082). Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1942. Takagi Sokichi. rU/f^ef. Jiden teki Nippon kaigun shimatsuki § {;Kfr\J 0 ^^S^PT^IS. Tokyo: Kojinsha, 1971. Takagi Sokichi. rfijTfcl^la'. Shikan Taiheiyo senso fk^X^W^^- Takamatsu no miya jf!il&lT. Takamatsu no miya nikki rHj^lTPfE 2. Tokyo: Chuo koron sha. Takeuchi Akihiro flft^^n. Tokko keisatsu to Nihon shugi undo no gaisetsu ^rtilflS t R^^MWWl^W.M- Hyogo ken shirozaki gun tomiokacho: Hyogoken Tomioka keisatsucho tokko shitsu, 1936. Tanaka Yoshinari H^il^t Nanbokucho jidaishi MAYM^W^.- Tokyo: Meiji Shoin, 1922. Tokinoya Shigeru HvfSF^ItL Saikin no kyokasho mondai ni tsuite: Kyokasho sanjunen saiban to saikosai hanketsu S3ir^tfcf4#FtfllI^Ol^T- Ifcf^lrH+^fs^J t H BJife^J^: (Kokumin kaikan sosho 111 5^ if Stir 22). Osaka: Kokumin kaikan, 1998. Tokyo daigaku hyakunen hensan iinkai j#LJR;fc^W^-$fill3?Ji.35c, ed. Tokyo daigaku hyakunen shi kyokubu shi ichi "Bungakubu" H^^^WWi^-$.^!^$.— 0C¥-nf>). Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku shuppankai, 1986. Tokyo daigaku hyakunenshi hensan iinkai $M^f I^ifefjllli?Jt^?, ed. Tokyo daigaku hyakunenshi: Tsushi 2 J&MJK^lSjpl^ife - ilife 2. Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku shuppankai, 1985. Torisu Michiaki MMtM^. "Kyokasho ronso no seikaku" Wt^Wtm^

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 315

%%%>-$&&£ &&tfc - ^IIi^HiS + ¥M. (Furusato Yasukuni ^»5 £ kii&Wi 4). Tokyo: Tentensha, 1995. Yasukuni jinja jfSttli, ed. hasaraba wareha mikuni no yamazakura: Gakuto shutsujin gojushunen tokubetsuten no kiroku V^£'£ btf$Z\ify< lZ.(D[h^ -^^UiWS.+ m^-^^mm^^. Furusato Yasukuni ^&£i£f H no. 3; Tokyo: Tentensha, 1994. Ueyama Shunpei Ailh^^f-. Daitda senso no igi j^MM^k^OMM. Tokyo: Chuo koron sha, 1964. Varley, H. Paul trans., A Chronicle of Gods and Sovereigns: Jinno shotoki of Kitabatake Chikafusa (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980). Secondary Source (On Hiraizumi Kiyoshi) Arakawa Hisao JJLJII AiPJ?. "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi Hakushi no shigaku no shoki keisei" ^P %.W.W±V>$l^V>®W&J$. .Geirin^Jfa 35. 4 (December 1986). Brownlee, John S. Japanese Historians and the National Myths. 1600-1945: The Age of the Gods and Emperor Jinmu. Vancouver: UBC Press, 1997. Hata Ikuhiko ^tP0. "Anami Korechika" H^fiill. Showashi no gunjin tachi W>fU$. CDMAfch. Tokyo: Bungeishunju XS^K, 1982. Imatani Akira "4*^?^. "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi no hensetsu ni tsuite: Showa shigakushi no ichi danmen" 5F^:^Cr)^lftl^.oV''T. Yokohama shiritsu daigaku ronsan ^^TfTiC A^t&H 40. 1 (March 1989). Imatani Akira 4~^^j. "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi to Kenmon taisei ron" ^fH^I t $k?^i$MHm. In Chusei no shaji to shinko ^W^'t^fb^W, ed. Ueyokote Masataka _h$t^?t ?£. Tokyo: Yoshikanwa kobunkan, 2001. Imatani Akira -^^M. "Shinpojiumu: Nihon rekishigaku no hansei" i/ytfi?ty J* - 0 &M£.¥-ffi:# 95. Tokyo, 1995. Miyazawa Eriko HHtflMM-F. "Nihonjin Kenkoku daigaku kyushokuin ichiran" 0 ^A - SHHA^iSclfeJI '%. In Kenkoku daigaku to minzoku kyowa IS UK A ^ t &MWJ%U. Tokyo: Kazama shobo, 1997. Nakano Yoshiyuki. ^W0^-- Ba-ku no shiso to gendai Nihonjin no rekishikan: hoshu kaikaku no seiji tetsugaku to koto keisho no rinen ^— 9 ©Sffli IS ft 0 ^ A 09 ill %M - W^^&

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 316

ed. Saito Takashi ^||#. Tokyo: Shogakukan, 1984: 87-110. Sakamoto Taro K^^C^P. The Six National Histories of Japan (translated by Brownlee, John S). Vancouver: UBC Press.1991. Shuzo Uyenaka. "The Textbook Controversy of 1911: National Truth," In History in the Service of the Japanese Nation, ed. John S. Brownlee. Volume 2; Toronto: University of Toronto-York University Joint Centre on Modern East Asia, 1983. Ben-Ami Shillony Revolt in Japan: The Young Officers and the February 26 1936 Incident. (Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1973). Tada Shinbei. "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi hakushi no rekishikan to seiyo shiso: Kokokushikan e no ichi shikaku" W-MWW±(DM^W,t 0#ML Yokohama shodai ronshu W& \%±tmM 30. 2 (December 1996). Tanaka Takashi H ^^-. Hiraizumi shigaku to kokoku shikan (Tanaka Takashi hyoronshu 2) spjf^gg t I-Bl^H (ffl dp^MW&M 2). Ise: Seisei kikaku, 2000. Tatamiya Eitaro ffl *? IET^^I^. Kami no kuni to cho rekishika: Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Tojo Konoe wo tedama ni totta otoko #(7)|I| bMM^.'W- ' ¥-$kW: - M§z ' jfi#I^#S t^o tz.%. Tokyo: Ozankaku shuppan, 2000. Varley, H. Paul, Imperial Restoration in Medieval Japan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971). Uemura Kazuhide ffitt^P^. "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi to Furi-dorihi Mainetsuke (1)" ¥-MW t y !i — K !J V t • -?<< ^ v >r (l). Sandai hogaku MJtfe^ 33. 3/4 (March/April 2000). Uemura Kazuhide ffittfP^. Maruyama Masao to Hiraizumi Kiyoshi: Showaki Nihon no seiji shugi %lUm%b¥-^m. - Bgfil3BB;fc<£>gtf&±gL Tokyo: Kawashi shobo, 2004. Wakai Toshiaki ^^Wt^M. "Hiraizumi Kiyoshi ni okeru ningen keisei" W-^fcWtlZ-iol'i<5 \W&$L. Seiji keizai shigaku 3&#J$Si&&^.397 . Machida: Nihon Seiji keizai shigaku kenkyujO.September 1999. Yamane Yukio li-ltH^s^:. Kenkoku daigaku no kenkyu: Nihon teikoku shugi no ichi danmen (Kyuko sosho 49). IB^f©I% - B^%TM^.M

(Others) Agawa Hiroyuki M)\\%£-. Takamatsu no miya to kaigun M&ti tMW-. Tokyo: Chuo koron sha, 1996. Aketa Takumi. Keisatsu seishin no shin kenkyu: Kanshido no saikento fff^fifW^DilT'fiff 2£ -. Tokyo: Shokado shoten, 1934. Arai, ed. Nihon bunka dantai nenkan Showa juhachi nen ban B ^•^CihMW'^-^.^n^U-j- A^-JtS Tokyo: Zaidan hojin Nihon bunka Chuo renmei, 1943. Beard Charles A. President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War 1941: A Study in Appearances and Realities. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948. Bix, Herbert P. Emperor Hirohito and Making of Modern Japan. New York: Harper Collins Publisher, 2000. Breisach E. Historiography: Ancient, Medieval, & Modern. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1994.

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 317

Chamoto Shigemasa ^^HJE. "Shukokai no keifu: kyoiku no meija wo torn" (Kuro no choryu: kaiken ni ugomeku mono.dai nikai) &3fe#E>^Bf - l&MWfcfe'fo:& - (M< h&>. if—HI). Sekai ift^ Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1982. Chichibunomiya ke ^5C^%, Yusuhito shinno jikki Mi~M~3LM!&. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobunkan, 1972. Daiyon Koto gakko jishuryo ryoshi hensan iin kai ilHS^^^NFl^ifillilJt^, ed. Daiyon koto gakko jishuryo shi J^Hfi^^KB^ii^ffe. Kanazawa: Daiyon koto gakko jishuryo, 1948. Echizen Matsudaira ke Mffl;f&5P^ and Keigakukai tS^, eds. Shungakuko yokei # tt£<£f£i!J. Tokyo: Echizen Matsudaira ke and Keigakukai, 1960. Fichte jutsu. ~7 4 tT^. "Doitsu kokumin ni tsugu" ^^HKJ^izr C. In Jikyoku ni kansuru kyoiku shiryo tokubetsugo dai san B#/lH^lfIi~<5 t^WSIf^^tfS'J^f IIH. Tokyo: Monbusho 3tM\ 1917. Fihite. 7-f tr. Doitsu kokumin ni tsuguMMMB:\C^- C (translated by Otsu Yasuo JK $rM). (Iwanami bunko 265-267). Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1928. Goble, Andrew Edmund. Kenmu: Go-Daigo 's Revolution (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996). Hakusan jinja shi hensan iinkai 6 |il#|±5felill#M^, ed. Hakusanjinja shi 0 PUW^i ffe(Not for sell). Katsuyama: Hakusanjinja, 1992. Hayashi Fusao PfMM- Dai toa senso kotei ron A'MMM.^^m'^.im. Tokyo: Bancho shobo, 1964. Hiraizumi Takafusa ^P^PlM. "Kamakurajidai no Hakusanjinja" §t;i~Bf ft(D 6 lll#lt. In Hakusan jinja shi 6 lllWliffe, ed. Hakusan Jinjashi hensan iinkai. (Not for sell). Katsuyama: Hakusanjinja shi hensan iinkai. 1992. Howes, John. Japan's Modern Prophet: Uchimura Kanzo 1861-1930 (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2005). Kobori Kei'ichiro /hSiS-'IR. "Susumeru kotoba" H#)<5M. In Kenmu no chuko: Godaigo tenno no riso to chushin tachi no katsuyaku HS^^H - ^SfSW^M^S^S t !&g.tz.h(D%i;M, ed. Kubota Osamu &&ffll(X. Tokyo: Meiseisha.2004. Inoue Shigeyoshi denki kanko kai # Jn^^SfflfOfr^, ed. Inoue Shigeyoshi #Jh/5<;=i§. Tokyo: Inoue Shigeyoshi denki kanko kai, 1982. Koschmann, J.Victor. The Mito Ideology: Discourse, Reform, and Insurrection in Late Tokugawa Japan, 1790-1864 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987). Nosco, Peter. Remembering Paradise: Nativism and Nostalgia in Eighteenth-Century Japan. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1990. Roberts, Luke S. Mercantilism in a Japanese domain: The merchant origins of economic nationalism in 18* -century Tosa (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). Sato Kazuhiko j^0^Pi^. Taiheiki wo yomu: Doran no jidai to hitobito yfc^fESrfjEt? - Wi^KD^iXh A*-. Tokyo: Gakuseisha, 1991. Sato Eisuke iilM^ktfc, ed. Arima Ryokitsu den ^M£kfflsfc. Tokyo: Arima Ryokitsu denki hensan kai, 1974. Wakabayashi, Bob Tadashi. Anti-Foreignism and Western Learning in Early-Modern

Kiyoshi Ueda Bibliography 318

Japan: The New Theses of 1825. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1986. Wakabayashi, Bob Tadashi. Japanese Loyalism Reconstrued: Yamagata Daini's Ryushi Shinron of 1759 (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1995). Yoshioka Isao pffSSIfk. Kuroki Hiroshi W*~fcW-. Gifu: Kyoiku shuppan bunka kyokai, 1979.

Newspapers "Yasukuni: Sengo kara dokoe/12 tome A kyu senpan gohi no genryu: Ima ni myakuutsu senzen shikan" j#H - fM»bfa#W 12 ± A»3E^iEcDiCr;ft - M^-Btt olefin. Mainichi shinbun % 0 $f M! (August 19, 2006). "Yasukuni: Sengo kara dokoe/5 Yushukan baburu Shusho sanpai to kyomei" £fll : !"*$« %.\ ^bi:^W5 jggfcif^/V mmWt r*q|j .Mainichi shinbun &B#fffl (August 1,2006).

Kiyoshi Ueda