Emperor Hirohito and Showa Japan

A Political Biography

Stephen Large

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• eBook ISBN: 9781134968763
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Emperor Hirohito reigned for more than sixty years, yet we know little about him or the part he really played in the turbulent history of Showa Japan.Stephen Large draws on a wide range of Japanese and Western sources in his study of Emperor Hirohito's political role in Showa Japan (1926-89). This analysis focuses on key events in his career such as the extent to which he bore responsibility for Japanese aggression in the Pacific in 1941, and explains why Hirohito remains such a contested symbol in Japanese post war politics.

1 The making of the Shōwa Emperor

EARLY EDUCATION

Named Michi-no-miya Hirohito after his birth on 29 April 1901, Hirohito was soon separated from his parents, Crown Prince Yoshihito, the future Taishō Emperor, and Sadako, his consort, as was customary at court. They entrusted him to the care of a respected ex-naval officer, Kawamura Sumiyoshi, and his wife (Kawahara 1990:14). Chichibu-no-miya Yasuhito Shinno, Hirohito's first brother, born in 1902, likewise was sent to live with the Kawamura family, not far from the imperial palace. After Kawamura died in 1904, however, the young princes rejoined their parents at the Tōgū-gosho, the Crown Prince's palace in Akasaka. In 1905 Hirohito's second brother, Takamatsu-no-miya Nobuhito, was born. A third brother, Mikasa-no-miya Takahito, was born ten years later.

Hirohito and Chichibu attended a special kindergarten in the precincts of the Akasaka detached palace and of the two, Chichibu was the more exuberant child.¹ Hirohito's quieter temperament was apparent in his features: dark in complexion, he ‘had a wide, intelligent forehead and limpid, tranquil eyes set below thick eyebrows’ (Kanroji 1975:13). He was a distinctly cautious child. When the boys played tag with other children from aristocratic families who had been chosen to accompany them, ‘Prince Hirohito always played strictly according to the rules, never employing any of the little tricks that were possible in this game’ (Kanroji 1975:16). As an adult, he would display the same circumspection in sticking to the ‘rules’ of political life as he interpreted them.

Under the care of his tutors, Hirohito seldom saw his parents. Nor did he see much of his grandfather, Emperor Meiji, who ‘showed his affection only by smiling at the little Prince’ on the few occasions when they were together (Kanroji 1975:23). Meiji later became an important political model for Hirohito but it cannot be said that they were close in a personal sense.

A more immediate model was General Nogi Maresuke, principal of the Peers’ School (Gakushu-in), where Hirohito began his formal studies in 1908. A national hero of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905, Nogi personified to Hirohito the virtues of patriotism and the samurai ethic of personal austerity and devotion to duty which constituted part of the legacy of Tokugawa to Meiji Japan. His guidelines for educating Hirohito emphasized physical fitness, ‘the habit of diligence’, punishment for misbehavior, no leniency in grading, plain living, and military training (Ōtake 1986:237). Many years later, in 1975, the Shōwa Emperor told an American reporter, concerning Nogi's influence,

I particularly recall this episode when I was a small boy: I met him at a certain place and he asked me, ‘How do you come to school when it rains?’ And I was just a small boy, so I answered off hand, ‘I come by horse-drawn carriage’. And Nogi said, ‘When it rains you must come here on foot wearing an overcoat’. So he was advocating a very frugal, strenuous, self-disciplined life. That made a profound impression on me.

(‘Hirohito: “A Happy Experience”’ 1975:42)

Under the routine established by Nogi, Hirohito was awakened early in the morning for prayers, to honor the Sun Goddess and Emperor Meiji. Then he and his classmates attended lessons, many of which stressed the imperative of stoicism in the performance of duty and skills in the martial arts (Kojima I 1981:33–42). Not all the aristocratic students who studied with Hirohito at the Peers’ School took Nogi's traditional values very seriously, viewing them as anachronistic in a changing society. This was the impression Nogi made on some Japanese when, after Meiji died in 1912, Nogi and his wife committed ritual suicide, emulating the former samurai practice of loyally following one's lord in death. Others of his countrymen were profoundly moved by Nogi's gesture (Gluck 1985:221).

For his part, Hirohito took Nogi's spartan samurai example to heart. In later years he abstained from alcohol and tobacco and cultivated physical strength through swimming and other sports, as if to steel himself for performing the manifold duties of his office. Once, in 1928, when reviewing a parade of students in the rain, the Shōwa Emperor was urged by his attendants to take shelter in a tent erected for the occasion. ‘His Majesty replied that so long as tens of thousands of students would be standing in the rain, he too would stand in the rain’. When his attendants then gave him a cloak, he ‘suddenly flung the cloak down’ and stood ‘in the pouring rain for over one hour’ as the students filed past (Honjō 1975:248). This austere sense of duty was typical of the Emperor and reflects Nogi's impact on his character.

After he left the Peers’ School in 1914 Hirohito entered a special institute established specifically for his further training, the Tōgū-gogakumonsho, which was supervised by another hero of the Russo-Japanese War, Admiral Tōgō Heihachirō. By then, Hirohito held appointments as an officer in the army and navy, and military training was increasingly emphasized in his studies. For example, in 1916, he was entrusted to Prince Fushimi Hiroyasu, a squadron commander in the imperial fleet, for a six-day tour aboard a battleship (Nomura 1988:55).² His formal naval training was similar to, if less extensive than, that received earlier by King George V of Britain when he was a young man (Nicolson 1952:37–79).

Among his tutors at the Tōgū-gogakumonsho were Sugiura Shigetake (Jūgō) and Shiratori Kurakichi. In a program he characterized as teiōgaku, or learning for the emperor’, Sugiura taught Confucian ethics and such virtues as courage, wisdom, and benevolence, symbolized by the imperial regalia (Yamamoto 1989:206). He also lectured on Shintō mythology and the history of the Japanese imperial house, underscoring the moral purity of the ‘imperial way’. This theme likewise typified Shiratori's lessons in Japanese and Asian history. Both men were ardent loyalists and nationalists who nurtured in Hirohito a deep pride in the imperial institution and Japan's recent rise as a power in Asia. His strong sense of nationalism owed much to their influence and that of Nogi and Tōgō.

For this reason, Sugiura and Shiratori have been roundly criticized as chauvinists. Bergamini calls Sugiura a ‘professional jingoist’ who was opposed to Western cultural influences (Bergamini 1971:297). Behr writes dismissively that ‘Sugiura's lectures were a hotch-potch of Shintōist superstitions and clichés about Japanese national virtues’ (Behr 1989:38). And Leonard Mosley portrays him as a ‘fundamentalist’ who ‘believed in the Sun Goddess Amaterasu just as fervently as a Plymouth Brethren believes in Adam and Eve …’ (Mosley 1966:32).

These assessments are misleading. To be sure, Sugiura and Hirohito's other teachers were influenced by Herbert Spencer's social Darwinism, much in vogue in Meiji Japan, to believe that only the most powerful countries could withstand the intense political, economic, and military competition which prevailed in international relations at the time. For them, Spencer's ideas, which drew parallels between the struggle to survive in nature and the struggle to survive among nations, were authoritative. However, in Sugiura's view, the national power needed for survival was not primarily military or economic power but rather spiritual or moral power. In Japan's case it depended in the first instance on the ‘benevolence’ of the emperor, the attainment of which, Sugiura thought, required not just ethical training but knowledge in the broadest possible sense (Yamamoto 1989:49–50).

Accordingly, Sugiura, who had studied agricultural science at Owens College (later, the University of Manchester), and chemistry at London University, helped devise a broad curriculum for teiōgaku which exposed Hirohito to a comprehensive range of subjects including mathematics, physics, chemistry, natural history, law, economics, geography, military strategy and tactics, the French language, and world history, as well as Confucian ethics, Japanese history, and the Japanese language (Yamamoto 1989:52). In addition, he learned about great men in history whose lives illustrated the power of knowledge in one way or another: Rousseau, for his philosophy of education and independence of thought; George Washington, for his sense of justice and fair play; Malthus, for his ideas on demographic and economic change; and so forth (Ōtake 1986:206–17). The importance of general knowledge prompted Sugiura repeatedly to draw Hirohito's attention to Emperor Meiji's Charter Oath of 1868 which included the statement, ‘Knowledge shall be sought throughout the world so as to strengthen the foundation of Imperial rule’ (Tsunoda R et al. 1960:644).

Sugiura regarded the Charter Oath as an important document for political reasons, too. He attached special significance to its anticipation that deliberative assemblies shall be widely established and all matters decided by public discussion’ and that ‘All classes, high and low, shall unite in vigorously carrying out the administration of affairs of state’ (Tsunoda R., et al. 1960:644). Interpreting these objectives to mean that imperial rule in modern Japan would be assisted by a measure of popular participation in government, Sugiura stressed that the Meiji constitution had endorsed this vision by providing for an elected lower house of representatives as well as an appointed upper house of peers. Together, the Charter Oath and the constitution signified to him that the Japanese monarchy had reached a new stage in its historical evolution, that of constitutional monarchy (Yamamoto 1989:251–2). Above all, he wanted Hirohito to respect the principles of constitutional monarchy in emulation of Meiji, whom Sugiura praised as a ‘modern’ monarch.

Thus, ethically conservative and politically nationalistic he may have been, but Sugiura Shigetake was also a man of Meiji, very open to what the world could offer both to a future monarch and to Japan's continuing national quest for wealth and power generally, as it had unfolded since the Meiji Restoration.

Shiratori had a similarly catholic outlook. A professor of history at Tokyo Imperial University and also responsible for supervising the teaching of history at the Peers’ School, Shiratori, like Sugiura, was politically conservative. But he, too, was no obscurantist. Having studied history in the United States and in Germany, where he identified with Leopold von Ranke's school of research, Shiratori introduced Hirohito not only to Western as well as Japanese and Asian history but also to the importance of basing one's interpretations of history on firm evidence.

In particular, he communicated to Hirohito his own scholarly skepticism concerning the validity of myth, which he rigorously distinguished from history. ‘Myth is myth and not history’, he often insisted (Ōtake 1986:263). Shiratori's lessons referred to the Sun Goddess and other deities, as was customary in all Japanese history courses at the time and indeed through the Pacific War. But he was always careful to note the difference between what myths said about the Sun Goddess and what a historian might say about her, asserting that although myths were valuable parts of a country's cultural heritage, they did not constitute verifiable evidence for events that happened in the past.

From Shiratori, Hirohito learned to enjoy the study of history with an eye for evidence in reaching his own conclusions about it. That as an adult he would personally reject the myth of his ancestral divinity was due in no small measure to Shiratori's earlier influence, which the authorities of the Tōgū-gogakumonsho debated somewhat uneasily. But they tolerated his ideas as long as he taught Hirohito the content of the myths which were so essential to the tradition of the imperial house (Ōtake 1986:265). Even so, Hirohito was discouraged from making the study of history his principal interest because the subject was thought to be too controversial.

As it turned out, biological research became Hirohito's greatest lifelong intellectual passion, dating from his studies at the Tōgū-gogakumonsho under the scientist, Dr Hattori Hirotarō, who was seconded from the Peers’ School. In 1919 Hirohito made his first scientific discovery, of a new species of prawn (Kanroji 1975:60). He made a great many other discoveries over the years and wrote many scientific articles and books, mostly on marine life and in particular on hydrozoa, which resulted in an international reputation as a distinguished marine biologist. He carried out his research in a special laboratory, established in the grounds of the imperial palace in 1925 with the assistance of Dr Hattori, who often accompanied him on expeditions to collect marine specimens in Sagami Bay, Tokyo Bay, and elsewhere (Corner 1990). As one account states, he was happiest ‘when working with a microscope, absorbed in a factual world quite different from that normally inhabited by a Crown Prince or Emperor’ (Kanroji 1975:58).

Besides encouraging Hirohito's interest in science, Hattori taught him about Darwin's theory of evolution which Hattori had recently encountered in the publications of the zoologist, Oka Asajirō (Saeki 1989:491). It was natural, therefore, that a bust of Charles Darwin would be found in the library of the Shōwa Emperor, together with busts of Lincoln and Napoleon which reflected Hirohito's interest in history.³

Through Hattori, Hirohito shared the widespread belief that nature was governed by the laws of evolution which Darwin had described and which were accessible to human understanding through empirical study of the natural world. Hirohito and his teacher also shared the general assumption that the concept of evolution, and its core notion of progressive development through the adaptive process of natural selection, could be applied to the values and institutions of contemporary society. They accordingly regarded it as given that linked by a common emphasis on empirical evidence to penetrate the ‘truths’ of the natural world and of human society, the disciplines of biology and history were complementary means of discerning the universal dynamics of rational, evolutionary progress (Saeki 1989:492). Among thinkers everywhere who were influenced by Darwin, such ideas were commonplace at the time.

In retrospect, this confidence in the efficacy of knowledge, applied to all fields of human endeavor, including politics and government, was the most important legacy of Hirohito's education at the Tōgū-gogakumonsho. For, it was during this phase of his education that he acquired, along with the spirit of nationalism which typified the Meiji leadership, a ‘scientific rational spirit’ of inquiry, whether from Sugiura's intellectual eclecticism, Shiratori's historical skepticism, or Hattori's lessons on Darwin and scientific methodology (Ōtake 1986:275). How this legacy influenced his later political career will be considered in the chapters that follow.

A WIDER WORLD

By the time Hirohito concluded his studies at the Tōgū-gogakumonsho in February 1921 he had undergone his investiture as Crown Prince (K)taishi) on 2 November 1916 and had become engaged to Princess Nagako, the daughter of Prince Kuni-no-miya Kunihiko, in January 1919.

Also by 1921, Japan had emerged as a great power in the new League of Nations, having fought alongside the Western democracies in World War I, and the Japanese empire seemed strong and secure. It now included Taiwan, as a result of victory in the Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895; Southern Sakhalin island and a sphere of influence in South Manchuria following victory in the 1904–1905 Russo-Japanese War; Korea, after its annexation in 1910; and a number of Pacific islands, wrested from Germany in World War I, which Japan held as mandates under the League. It was in this general context that Hirohito's education, taken in the broadest sense of the term, continued with a long overseas tour to Britain, France, Belgium, Holland, and Italy in 1921. Since the British phase of his journey was the most important in his political development, it is emphasized here.

There were two motives for this tour. First, because the Anglo-Japanese Alliance dating from 1902 had been the cornerstone of Japanese foreign policy, the government of Prime Minister Hara Kei (Takashi) hoped that the tour would contribute to a political atmosphere conducive to the renewal of the Alliance which was due for review at the forthcoming Washington Conference. In this respect, the tour proved inconsequential, for the Alliance was allowed to lapse following the conclusion of the Four-Power Pact involving Britain, Japan, the United States, and France at the Washington Conference in December 1921.

Second, however, Hara and the elder stateman, Prince Saionji Kinmochi, whose advice on court affairs was decisive, had become gravely concerned over Taishō’s mental and physical deterioration. They anticipated that a Western tour would enhance the Crown Prince's preparation for the office of Regent, or Sesshō, if, as now seemed likely, Taishō could no longer perform his responsibilities at court (Connors 1987:86).

Notwithstanding opposition to the proposed tour, chiefly on the grounds that it was unprecedented for a member of the Japanese imperial family to go abroad, on 8 February 1921 the government announced the decision to send the Crown Prince overseas (Kojima I 1981:126). On 3 March, he set sail from Yokohama on board the cruiser Katori, which was escorted by the cruiser Kajima. He was accompanied by a large entourage which included his cousin, Prince Kan'in Kotohito, his political adviser, Chinda Sutemi, and his aide-de-camp, Nara Takeji, who would later serve in the imperial palace as chief aide-de-camp, from 1922 to 1932.

After a voyage which included stops at the British colonies of Hong Kong, Singapore, Ceylon, Malta, and Gibraltar, on 9 May the two ships reached Portsmouth where the Crown Prince was officially greeted by Edward, Prince of Wales. They then proceeded to Victoria Station in London where the Crown Prince was warmly welcomed by King George V, who conveyed him to Buckingham Palace in an ornate horse-drawn carriage. The next day a formal banquet was held in his honor at the palace, his residence for three nights during the official part of his tour.

The full details of the Crown Prince's three-week stay in Britain need not be repeated since they have been discussed at length elsewhere (Kojima I 1981:142–207, Mosley 1966:52–64).⁴ In brief, his varied schedule included a visit to the House of Commons; numerous receptions and dinners; visits to banks, schools, and universities, including Cambridge and Edinburgh, where he received honorary degrees, and Oxford; visits to Manchester and Glasgow; a memorable party at Blair Atholl castle in Scotland where ‘Kimi ga yo’ was played, rather incongruously, by a bagpipe band in an informal atmosphere which impressed the Japanese because local villagers were allowed to mingle casually with aristocracy during the festivities; and a sitting for a portrait by the painter, Augustus John. The Crown Prince was also made an honorary field marshal in the British army and a Knight of the Garter. These honors were later withdrawn when Britain and Japan went to war in 1941.

Of central concern here, however, is the political impact on the Crown Prince of his visit to Britain. In later years, he often recalled how impressed he had been by the King. In 1971, during his second visit to England, he stated at a reception staged in his honor by Queen Elizabeth, that in 1921, ‘I was deeply pleased at the time because King George spoke to me as if I were his son’ (Yuri and Higashi 1974:438). Similarly, in 1961, he told reporters that in 1921, ‘I had friendly conversations with King George V during my stay of three nights at Buckingham Palace and was able to gain a first-hand knowledge of English politics’ (Date 1975:9).

While it is not known precisely what the King said to him about English political affairs, it is reasonable to assume that the Crown Prince learned a good deal from the King about how constitutional monarchy functioned in Britain. He doubtless learned about it when he attended a lecture at Cambridge by Professor R.J.Tanner, a well-known specialist on constitutional law (Nish 1988:22). As one account puts it, he ‘saw at first hand the operations of constitutional monarchy and learned of its practical routine.… This experience left a very strong impression on him’ (Shimomura 19...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Series editor's preface
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1 The making of the Shōwa Emperor
• 2 Japanese aggression and the limits of imperial influence, 1926–1933
• 3 The challenge of Shōwa Restoration radicalism, 1931–1937
• 4 The Emperor and war, 1937–1940
• 5 World war and the imperial will, 1941–1945
• 6 The Emperor and the Occupation, 1945–1952
• 7 The politics of imperial symbolism, 1952–1970
• 8 The Emperor and the imperial institution in late Shōwa Japan, 1970–1989
• Conclusion
• Notes
• Bibliography
• Index