Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 591
Thanks:
0
Also remember I am not saying that the Japanese at the time considered China to be superior to Japan but simply superior to the UK, which was universally considered to be barbarian.
And stop ignoring the fact that the Japanese did not consider the UK and the western countries worthy of other titles other than "barbarian" and "red heads" until after the Meiji restoration.
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 477
Thanks:
0
Some random historical tidbits that might help you to see the broader picture.
徳川家康 who was the founding father of Tokugawa Bakufu gave an English captain who were stranded in Japan the title of 旗本 (lord) and a fief to be an adviser of foreign affairs. His name was William Adams 三浦按針. Ieyasu entreated William to stay in Japan because he recognized the importance of the West. There is a city called 八重洲 in Tokyo. It was named after the estate of a Dutch called Jan Joosten van Loodensteijn, who was stranded with Williams and got a similar treatment but died early. This was back in the 17th century.
A German medical book on human anatomy called "Anatomische Tabellen" was translated by 杉田玄白 in 1774. Newton's physics theory in 1802 by 志筑 忠雄.
Edited: 2010-10-08, 10:42 pm
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,582
Thanks:
0
According to that article and others', Japan was already aware, for centuries, of British and other non-Asian countries' prowess and knowledge and did not think of China as 'Great' or the UK as incapable of defeating China. They even considered elements of China and other Asian countries as barbarian. Their concerns were practical and based in a sense of superiority, not anxiety and insecurity.
In fact, Japan seems like they would've bet on Britain and were disappointed China didn't treat them with enough respect.
Edited: 2010-10-08, 11:20 pm
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 591
Thanks:
0
Yes after Europeans arrived in Japan the word became more common in Japanese than in Chinese because terms like "white ghosts" became more common. In fact in the 1500s a lot of Chinese mistook the Portuguese for Arabians.
Edited: 2010-10-09, 1:12 am
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,582
Thanks:
0
I'm sure the complexly ambiguous use of the terms the Japanese used to refer to various European countries organically changed over time due to many factors, not some sudden widespread unidirectional change that reflected a shocking shift in perception.
That article points to a preference from certain Confucian-educated thinkers for a strong China to maintain a specific kind of power dynamic in the region, not a belief that Britain was inferior and couldn't possibly have defeated China. It seems as much practical as aesthetic, but not related to a faltering national pride in relation to Europeans or a belief that Europeans were less advanced.
Japan recognized European advances centuries before China lost to the British. They knew especially about their military prowess. It was a gradual development in relations and importation of practical knowledge from China and the West while Japan's national identity and esteem solidified; the radical, widespread projects that came later were not jarring in the sense that Japan thought Britain was Inferior and China Great.
Wow, when you just toss out simplistic, authoritative statements, it really is easy to narrate history.
Edited: 2010-10-09, 1:16 am
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 591
Thanks:
0
The very use of the kanji 蛮 is mockery in Chinese and Japanese thought at the time.
In 16th century Canton I would be called any number of names. Loufan, guiro, nanman, Arabian, etc.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,582
Thanks:
0
Masaman's usage of 'importing culture' seemed obviously to me to refer to the same premise this section from a previously linked article says.
"Chinese culture had nurtured Japan, enabling her to reduce the
time necessary to move from a primitive to a civilized society, as
well as to accelerate her speed of development in such areas as pro-
duction and the like. Over a long, long period, Japan was deeply
influenced by Chinese customs, institutions, ceremonial garb, and in
many other areas. The entire upper stratum of the ruling elite in
the Nara period imitated China--the more like Tang China, the better.
In this there was no particularly great difference with other
countries along China's borders.
However, Japan was ultimately dif-
ferent from these other countries in that it never shed or abandoned
its own native culture; although it absorbed China's advanced civili-
zation, it only used the [new-found] strength to speed its own
development and progress. In a specific era and under specific con-
ditions, the Japanese also made use of Chinese reign titles and
adopted the Chinese calendar, but Japan did have its own reign
titles, domestically employed and always its own. Thus, the Chinese
reign titles used under certain circumstances caused debates and
confusion among Japan's ruling elite, and the latter by no means
unanimously supported adopting China's reign titles unconditionally.
Furthermore, long nourished by China's more advanced civiliza-
tion, Japan, although similar to China in production and cUlture,
certainly could not wait for the reemergence of conditions precisely
like those of China. Here, too, Japan differed from other countries
on China's periphery, relying from first to last on its own cultural
foundations and absorbing, adopting the foreign-derived civilization;
and having assimilated the latter, formed its own entity."
That article's time periods stop much earlier than the other articles (plus Morris Low and Angela Schottelmayer) on Japan's relations with China and Europe in the 16c onward, so it's a nice place to start if we're loading up on caches of chinajapan.org. ^_^
I recommend any lurkers that might have passed up those Page 5 links to read those articles, books, and materials like them (i.e. any serious scholarship of Japan) if interested. Real historical literature is so much more interesting. ;p
Edited: 2010-10-09, 2:08 am
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 591
Thanks:
0
Anyone want to bring this back to cultural cringe in Japan?
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,582
Thanks:
0
By the way, if one wishes to attempt to form a new school of history, maybe a socio/psycholinguistic analysis about kanji usage to preface statements about cultural trends that fly in the face of events/evidence, and then using that as a premise for a contemporary psychoanalysis of a personified country's 'mind' based on a vague year old web survey isn't the best paradigm.
Edited: 2010-10-09, 2:22 am
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 589
Thanks:
0
The whole idea of Americans and British and other English speakers who are learning the Japanese language discussing the deep and contrived history of Japan and the philosophy of Japanese people worries me on a level that you guys will never understand.
It kind of makes me think of Japanese forming a circle and trying to discuss why Americans value freedom and democracy yet slavery existed, something that American scholars on the subject discuss to this very day...
) Please stop ignoring my actual fact that is backed by the dictionary.
