Pages |
Not only was history central to the political ideology of the Meiji state, many prominent historians were actually employed by the government. The Meiji government had in 1869 appointed official historians to write a comprehensive Japanese history, and in 1888, historians on the Bureau of Historiography (Shūshikan) were appointed as professors at Tokyo Imperial University. Since the university was a state institution, its faculty were (and still are) civil servants, under public scrutiny and subject to discipline from government officials and politicians.
Kume Kunitake was a respected specialist in ancient history who served on the Bureau of Historiography. When he published an article in 1891 stating that Shinto was by Western standards little more than a primitive religion, several hundred articles in newspapers and journals attacked Kume for religious blasphemy and pressed for his removal from the faculty at Tokyo Imperial University. Kume was forced to publish a retraction of his opinions and ordered to resign his university post. Kume's downfall illustrated the personal consequences of airing contentious views.
The Kume case was followed by another that pressured historians to put official policy above their own research and scholarship. In 1911, a second public furor erupted when the history section of the elementary school textbook was found to contradict the government's official policy concerning the legitimate line of imperial succession. Historians were accustomed to calling the fourteenth century period of divided imperial courts the "Northern and Southern Courts" (Nanboku chō) era, but the Meiji Restoration modeled itself on the southern court and had enshrined its loyal officials. The textbook deviated from the government's policy by treating both courts equally. The discussion in the media led to questions in the Diet and almost toppled the cabinet, which insisted that the textbooks be revised in accordance with government policy. During the debates, critics attacked professional historians for not understanding the tremendous damage they inflicted on young minds by not adhering firmly to the official policy. Scholarship which contradicted the tenets of the emperor ideology could not occupy public space. Thereafter, leading historians tended to remain silent if they disagreed with official orthodoxy. From 1931, offensive statements were removed from books and censorship increased.
Postwar National and Cultural Identity
Japan's defeat in World War II stunned many Japanese. The American Occupation (1945-1952) removed all references to the pre-war ideology from Japanese textbooks and forced the emperor to publicly renounce claims to divinity. A new constitution was adopted which vested sovereignty in the people and declared that the emperor was a "symbol of the state." Despite numerous attempts by conservative politicians to revise this clause after the signing of the Peace Treaty in 1951, it remains the constitutional definition of the emperor's role in Japan.
During the Occupation period, the prewar emperor-centered ideology was discredited and disappeared from view. With it went many of the national symbols that had been invented during the Meiji period such as the flag and national anthem. With the active participation of the staff of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers (SCAP), the image of the Shōwa emperor, Hirohito, was democratized. Both the Imperial Household Agency and SCAP shielded the emperor from accusations of war guilt and portrayed him as someone who had been powerless to stop the militarists.
Pages |