¹ See Hayes, Carleton J. H., Nationalism, A Religion (New York, 1960)Google Scholar; Of the many studies on the subject of nationalism, I find especially provocative, Kedourie, Elie, Nationalism (New York, 1961)Google Scholar.

² ProfessorHarootunian, Harry has treated the subject of restorationism in great depth for the Bakumatsu period in his important study that has just appeared: Toward Restorationism (Berkeley, 1970)Google Scholar. I tend to feel that the main pieces of restorationism as critical historicism had come together somewhat earlier than the loyalist publications of the Mito School, which Harootunian emphasizes. A closer look at the nature of eighteenth century historical thought would seem, in this respect, very much in order.

³ The tide simply means “new thesis of Ryūshi,” Ryūshi referring to Ryūsō, which Daini used as one of his names. I have relied on die kambun version included in Nihon rinri then, 9 vols. Tetsujirō, Inoue ed., (Tokyo, 1902), Vol. 7, pp. 584–623Google Scholar. A good version is also in Nihon keizai taiten, Vol. 26, Seiichi, Takimoto ed., (Tokyo, 1968)Google Scholar. The version in Yamagata Daini ichō, Hirose

⁵ Inoue Tetsujirō, for example, includes Daini not have grammatical marks, which makes it difficult to use. It can also be found in a number of other places as well, although some are only exerpts presented in modern style and should be used with care.

⁴ Daini was known also as Akisada and Ryūsō. He is often discussed along with other colorful figures in the early phase of the loyalist tradition, such as, Takeuchi Shikibu (1712–1767), Gamō Kumpei (1768–1813), and Takayama Hikokurō (1747–1793). The salient aspects of Daini's life are treated in somewhat romantic fashion by Saburō, Ichii, Meiji Ishin no tetsugakji (Tokyo, 1967) pp. 34–53, 120–128Google Scholar; and also his “Ishin henkaku no shisō,” Meiji Ishin, kenkyūkai, Shisō no kagaku, ed., (Tokyo, 1967), pp. 97–150Google Scholar. Iichirō, Tokutomi (Sohō) put together most of the salient data on Daini in his Kinsei Nihon kokuminshi, Vol. 22 (Tokyo, 1926Google Scholar; republished 1964) pp. 334–394. See also Tetsurō, Watsuji, Nihon rinri shisōshi, 2 vols. (Tokyo, 1952), Vol. 2, pp. 581–588Google Scholar.

⁵ Inoue Tetsujirō, for example, includes Daini in the Shushigaku tradition in editing the Nihon rinri ihen. Iwahashi Junsei does likewise in one of his works, Dai Nihon rinri shisō hattatsu shi, 2 vols., (Tokyo, 1915) Vol. 1, pp. 482–485Google Scholar. But in another of his works, the outstanding, Soraikenkyū (Tokyo, 1934 and republished 1969, pp. 498–504), Iwahashi emphasizes Daini's place in the lineage of Ogyū Sorai. Masao, Maruyama also discusses him in this latter tradition in his famous Nihon seiji shisōshi kenkyū (Tokyo, 1952), pp. 276–285Google Scholar passim.

⁶ Iwahashi, Sorai kenkyū, pp. 498–504.

⁷ Dazai Shundai is an important figure in the development of late eighteenth century political thought and will be treated in a separate essay. A good example of Dazai's critical style (other than his famous Keizairoku) is his Seigaku mondō (included in Nihon rinri ihen, Vol. 6, pp. 233–300). A thoughtful analysis of Yamazaki Ansai is by Bitō Masahide in his excellent study on political thought in Tokugawa, , Nihon hōken shisōshi kenkyū, (Tokyo, 1961), pp. 40–100Google Scholar.

⁸ Ryūshi shinron, pp. 585–587.

⁹ Ibid., 587.

¹⁰ Ibid., 586, bun o motte tsune o mamoru; bu o motte hen o shosu. A similar set of expressions is also on p. 611.

¹¹ Ibid., 585.

¹² Daini's language: konkan no gotoki bun-bu no betsu nashi; sunawachi hen o shosuru o motte tsune o mamoru. … Ibid., 585.

¹³ Ibid., 596–598.

¹⁴ A readable version of Kaihō's principal work, Keikodan, is in Kindai shisō no hōga, Vol. 1 of Gendai Nihon shisōtaikei, Sannosuke, Matsumoto ed., (Tokyo, 1966), pp. 85–110Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Ryūshi, 599–600.

¹⁶ Ibid., 600–603.

¹⁷ Ibid., 601.

¹⁸ Ibid., 594. Daini expressed the need for political system with the terse phrase, tada hito sei nakubekarazu.

¹⁹ Daini's use of such terms as eiyūgōketsu (heroic genius), tsukuru (create), chihei no jutsu (technique of peaceful rule) are good indications of his indebtedness to the scholarship of Sorai. Comments defining the sage as one who creates political systems, (as in kore [system] o tsukuru mono kore set to iu) is almost certainly directly drawn from Sorai, Ibid., 589 and also 591, 593, 613 and passim.

²⁰ Kunshi ni nashi, kensei ichi ni kisu. Ibid., 588–589, 603.

²¹ Ibid., 590.

²² Daini used language such as the following to convey his feelings. Kunshi ya ni ari; shōjin kurai ari. Ibid., 610; Kare [the people] hin nishite ware [the samurai] fu. 613.

²³ Ibid., 611. Nagata Hiroshi notes that Daini's identification with the people is part of the development of the idea of a popular or “peasant” army (nōheiron), the notion, in short, challenging samurai monopoly over military power. (Nihon hōkensei ideorogii, 2 vols., Tokyo, 1968. Vol. 1, 266–268Google Scholar).

²⁴ Daini's language crackles with anger: Ware nanzo suwarite kpre o miru o shinobu ya [I] Mi o koroshite jin o nasu. Kunshi no jisezaru tokoro nari. Or: Aruiwa mi o koroshite jin o nashi, Aruiwa tami o hikiite gi o tonae, motte tenka o sendō su. Ryūshi, p. 594 and 613.

²⁵ This is indicated, for example, in passages such as the following: “After the political system shifted to Kantō. … Vassals came to monopolize power completely. It has since been over five hundred years. Men have come to know only how to glorify military authority. … The evil of glorifying military authority is the arbitrary use of punitive law. The people cannot withstand that oppression.” (Sei kore Kanto ni utsuru ya. … Baishin sono ken o moppara ni su. Jirai gohyaku yūyonen nari. Hito tada bu o tōtobu o shiru. … Bu o tōtobu no hai keibatsu o kokō su. Tami sono kakoku ni katazu.) Ibid., 594.

²⁶ Ibid., 619–622; also, Tokutomi, Kinsei Nihon, Vol. 22, 347–351.

²⁷ Matsumiya's phrase: waga kokufu no bi nari. Ryūshi, 622.

²⁸ Kangaku iufū no henken tatari o nasu nomi. See Tokutomi, 347 and Ryūshi, 619.

²⁹ Kyūsen ōzoku; fūzoku no hoi etc. Ryūshi, 620.

³⁰ gunkoku no sci, ibid., 619.

³¹ Shikaraba kore [history] o shosuru wa ken [power] o motte su. Yō-yō kore o hensu. Ibid., 619.

³² Ibid., 620.

³³ Ichii, “Ishin henkaku,” 104–105.

³⁴ Tokutomi, 352–366; Ichii, Ishin henkaku,” 97–150.

³⁵ Takeuchi Shikibu (1712–1767) is a loyalist usually coupled with Daini in general histories. He was born in present day Niigata into a house of physicians. At about age 17, he studied in Kyoto, and, like Daini, came under the influence of Kimon, the school of Yamazaki Ansai. Unlike Daini, however, he emphasized the Shinto aspect of Kimon. Daini, as we have seen, came around to the “nationalist” position as a result of a process of political reasoning and docs not use it as a premise. Takeuchi lectured privately among Court nobles on the legitimacy of restoring power to the emperor. He was expelled from Kyoto for this activity in what is known as the “Homacr;reki Incident” of 1759. His main ideas are documented in a work entitled Hōkō kokoroesho. See Toku-tomi, Nihon kinsei, pp. 89–125.

³⁶ Tokutomi, 362–393. Also, Ichii, “Ishin henkaku,” 102–107, passim, and Ichii, Meiji Ishin no tetsugaku, 35–53, passim. Gamō Kumpei, a loyalist one generation after Daini's time, concluded after studying the Daini incident that the Bakufu's verdict clearly indicated its fear of a direct connection between Daini and peasant disturbances in the area of Obata han. Tokutomi, writing in the 1910's from a conservative point of view, tended to side with the Bakufu in denying political connections between the various parties under investigation. Yet he too finds the language of the verdicts extremely ambiguous and even contradictory. See the above citations.

³⁷ The following curious language was used denying significance in Yoshida's relations with Daini: Hoka ni wakeai mo korenashi sōrō aida kamai korenashi. Tokutomi, 369Google Scholar.

³⁸ Heiran o konomu no dōri. The death sentence itself was written in bald language: Katagata osore ōki fikei no itari futodoki shigoku ni tsuki shizai mōshitsukeru. Ibid., 377.

³⁹ Ibid., 379; Ichii, “Ishin henkaku,” p. 106. The entire poem reads:

Kumoru tomo/ nanika uramin/ tsuki koyoi Hare o matsubeki/ mi ni shi araneba.

⁴⁰ I have written on Ōshio's idealism in a short essay, “Ōshio Heihachirō (1793–1837),” in Personality in Japanese History, Craig, Albert M. and Shively, Donald H. eds. (Berkeley, 1970)Google Scholar.

⁴¹ I refer here to the proscription of unorthodox ideas, (Kansei igaku no kin) of 1787. It should be mentioned here that the characterization often made of Shushigaku as the “orthodoxy” of the Bakufu can be misleading. The Bakufu favored it, but not at the exclusion of other systems of thought. Otherwise, it would be difficult to explain the important advisory role played by Ogyū Sorai and Dazai Shundai (both of whom rejected Shushigaku). Moreover, Yamazaki's Kimon continued to exercise a strong influence in various quarters all through the Tokugawa Period. The Kimon school could be applied, as it often was, to buttress the Bakufu. It was especially useful for this in the sense that it argued the ultimate universality, in the Neo-Confucian sense, of particular structures and indigenous religion; it could be used, however, against the Bakufu as well as seen in Yamagata Daini and Takeuchi Shikibu. The declaration of Shushigaku as “orthodox” came late in the 18th century in the context of a strongly felt need within the Bakufu to clarify the ideological basis of the regime and to establish ethical consensus within it. That ideology, however, was not systematically imposed on the entire country as some accounts make it out to seem. Bitō Masahide's Nihon hōken shisōshi kinkyü is extremely helpful in explaining the relationship between Ogyū's Kogaku, Yamazaki's Kimon and Shushigaku. Interesting essays of more general nature in and around this same relationship are Yoshio, Abe, “Nihon jugaku no tokushitsu,” Tōyō shisō, 10 vols., Tōyō shisō no Nihonteki tenkai, Vol. 10, Seiichi, Uno et al. , (Tokyo, 1967) pp. 263–280Google Scholar; and Sagara Tōrn, “Edo jidai no jukyō,” ibid., 281–324.

⁴² Maruyama, Nihon seiji shisōshi, p. 285 and passim.

⁴³ Sec Ichii, “Ishin henkaku,” p. 136.