Talk:Meiji Restoration

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Npsteinh, Maltompk, Rjhuber, Historyfan2013, Velewilm (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Kservice78.

The END of the Meiji Restoration ?

Dear Editors, This article leaves it unclear as to why the MR ended in 1912. --Smilo Don (talk) 23:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Controversy in semantics

Moved to talk

{{Multiple issues|section=y|refimprove=August 2007|cleanup=November 2007}}

Ongoing debate continues between historians as to the historical legitimacy of the name "restoration", as opposed to a "coup" or "revolution". There are reasons to call it all three. (see --> De Bary, William Theodore; Donald Keene; George Tanabe; Paul Varley (2001). Sources of Japanese Tradition. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 0-231-12984-X )

Advocates of the term "coup" would point out the fact that there was a change in only the regime, with the fighting confined to the elite, which managed to avoid being spread to the rest of society and that there was a shared sense of national mission and class values. However, this term only refers to the political leaders—not commoners. More importantly, it also does not represent the wider historical context of the period, and the various ideological struggles of the time in addition to the subsequent radical changes of society.

The direct challenge to the legitimacy of the Tokugawa Regime in 1868 identifies this event as a revolution. This term also implies an anticipation of subsequent radical changes and indicates that the regime was toppled through the combination of concerns and actions of different groups. This term is problematic because it gives the false impression that rebels had unified or coherent plans for the future and it does not account for the relatively peaceful transition or how much actually stayed the same within the country.

The events of 1868 can be viewed in terms of a restoration because the opposition made claims that the Tokugawa Shogunate had usurped the power to govern from the Emperor. This claim as well as the strictly isolationist sentiments of the times is an accurate representation of the event, in some ways. The word restoration implies a focus on the elite ideological debates but does not address the regional and religious tensions of the period. It also undervalues the strategic nature of restorationist claims and gives a false impression of unity among the rebelling houses. The most detrimental implication of this term is that it offers no concrete explanation of how ordinary people came to accept the legitimacy of direct imperial rule.

when was this moved from the article to the TP? who moved it? would have been nice to have some sort of 'history' for this move ... 50.111.11.25 (talk) 08:47, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Bibliography for Edits

This will be list of citations for sources the G369 Modern Japan course students will be using to edit this page: (Npsteinh (talk) 01:25, 12 February 2018 (UTC))

1952-, Gordon, Andrew, (2003). A modern history of Japan : from Tokugawa times to the present. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780198027089. OCLC 57124980.

Dower, John W. "Black Ships & Samurai." 2010. MIT.edu. 2017. <https://ocw.mit.edu/ans7870/21f/21f.027/black_ships_and_samurai/bss_essay01.html>.

"Perry's Gunboat Diplomacy." Visualizing Japan. MIT, 21 August 2014. Online Video. 2018. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mLy0nnYnig&feature=youtu.be>.

Hopper, H. M. (2005). Fukuzawa Yukichi: from samurai to capitalist. New York: Pearson/Longman.

Townsend, Dr Susan. “History - World Wars: Japan's Quest for Empire.” BBC, BBC, 30 Mar. 2011, www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/japan_quest_empire_01.shtml.

Vandalism

Due to many of the most recent edits being vandalism, I would like to suggest either Pending Changes protection or Semi-Protection.

Nemoanon (talk) 04:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

End of the shogunate, wrong proclamation (王政復古の大号令)

The English translation of Meiji Tennō's proclamation from January 3, 1868 is wrong. It refers to Satow (A Diplomat In Japan, p. 353), but Satow gives another date, Feb. 3, 1868. Satow's text is clearly a diplomatic note to foreign embassies, while the proclamation of Jan. 3 [Keiō 3/12/9] is directed to the Japanese people. It is also much more detailed and can be found here: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%8E%8B%E6%94%BF%E5%BE%A9%E5%8F%A4_(%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC)#%E7%8E%8B%E6%94%BF%E5%BE%A9%E5%8F%A4%E3%81%AE%E5%A4%A7%E5%8F%B7%E4%BB%A4 --Bescheid (talk) 09:06, 18 September 2018 (UTC)