名古屋工業大学学術機関リポジトリ Nagoya Institute of Tchnology Repository
Edo-Period Precedents to Modern Japanese
Colloquial Writing and Proposed Reforms of
Meiji Enlightenment Thinkers
著者（英）
journal or
publication title
volume
page range
year
URL
Joseph Essertier
New Directions
31
11-29
2013-03-31
http://id.nii.ac.jp/1476/00001567/
Edo・Period Precedent8 to Modern Japane8e
Colloquial W亘tj血g and Propo8ed Refbrm80f
Me亘i EnHghten皿ent Thhiker8
Joseph Esser目er
！Phe increasing use of the vemacular in writing and e鑑）rts to
limi七reliance on Chinese characters between the late eighteenth
centuW and the late nineteenth century irl Japan have been brie且y
mentioned in English・1anguage publications by a number of
scholars， buもnowhere can be fbund a broad overview of the
i批ellectual trends towards refbrm of writing underway in the Edo
Period and how theyτelate to the major refbrms of the Me均i Period
（1868・1912）． This pape℃ represents a τough outline of
language−modernizing e銀）rts in the Edo Period（1603−1868）and an
exploration of how those e￡R）rts may have influenced
Enlightenment（ム加∂inteUectuals who proposed radical reもrms
such as Fukuzawa YUkichi（1835・1901） and Nishi Amane
（1829・1897）．
1．Language Re致）㎜Prece《ien七80f the Edo Pe】riod
Wlas there any di8cussion aboutτe＆）rm of writ垣g among intellectuals，
writers， and others in the Edo Period and if so， how were writing Practices
changing in the Edo Period？ If there was such a discussion and such
changes were， in f巨ct， underway already in the Edo Period， then what was
being discussed， what changes were taking place， and how were these
changes occu㎡ng？ I explore questions such as this in ordeで七〇 丘nd
precursors to the early Me垣debate and to provide some sense of the nature
of the deba七e over co且oquialization of writing in Japan， be｛bre the
一11一
nation・state was estabhshed．
A℃ai Hakuseki（1657・1725）was one of七he丘rst prominent intellectuals
in the Edo Pe亘od to consider the bene丘ts of a ph皿etic writing system such
as the Ronlan alphabet． Hakuseki was a scholar of Chinese Leaming
（ム刀田鋤and a pohtician。 In an unpublished and quite secret accou祇
written in 1715 entitled”Records of What I Heard about the West”（5已函
毎加刀，publi曲e（11882）he tells about an飽counter he had in Nagasaki with
an Italian Jesuit priest named Giovanni 8attista Sido枕i（1668・1715）．
Hakuseki asked Sido七ti ques七ions about 1浪in the West through a Dutch
interprete払 In this record of what he leamed丘om Sidot七i Hakuseki
Pτaises Westem language writing systems丑）r thehごsimplici培in particular
丑）rhoW in his view， that simplicity fUrthered science and enableむelativeb
罪apid acquisition of the sk斑s of readmg and writing in Wes七em countries・
He lam斑ts the trem識dous amount of energy that goes into leammg
Chinese characteτs in Japan compared to the energy that Westerners spend
on leaming the Roman alphabe七． With mwh experience m research on
languages and liniζuis七ics， Hakuseki mu8t have been f5scin抽ed l）y what he
heard丘om this priest． This account probably did not in日uence subsequent
thought in the Edo Pe姓od on language since it was not published unti1七he
15th yeaτof七he Me薄i Pe亘od（1882）， but heピe is the pe∫spective of a
Japanese person who was we11・infbrmed about七he languages of Japan and
China， who knew much about the nature・f language in genera1， and who
was also a pioneer of research on ancient Japan．
According七〇Kot6嘗bmoko， Hakuseki produced a sign遁cant quantity
of research on language， including a history of七he Japanese and Chinese
scripts entitled“A Comprehensive Examination of the Same Script”（刀δ加刀
缶泣δ），probabb writt頭between 1711 and 1715 and published in 1760．
This Ibur−volulne work explains the origin80f the sc℃ipts of Japan and
China and thei∫historical changes， and ixlcludes an etymological dic七i◎naW
of nouns from ancient Japanese and Chinese， and a manual on how to
represent允reign w・rds in Japanese． In these w・rks and・thers he
demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of七he nature of language in
一12一
general as we且as of Japanese and Chinese in particula且 For example， he
is aware of the diversi七y of languages in China and Japan；he explains that
etymological research on Japanese words mus七be done based on七he
pronunciation of Japanese words rather than on Chinese characters；he is
aware that phonological research is advanced in the West；aRd although he
writes in depth about七he diversity of languages， he rejects the idea that
SOme langUageS are COrreCt and OtherS are inCOrreCt． It iS Signi丘Can七もha七
Hakuseki， a pionee宝in histo亘cal hnguistics and one of the most advanced
language researchers in七he early 18th cen七ury in Japan， would praise
phonetic writmg systems and lament the d迎cult writing sys七ems of Japan
and China．
Criticism of the writing system was fUrthered in the late 18th centu］ワ
wi七h the w℃itings of Morishima Ch｛1ryδ〈1756・1810）and Honda Tbshia］ki
（1743・1820）．Mori8hima was the垣erary successor of Hiraga G頭nai
（1728−1780），the盤皿ous pharmacologist and卵8θ加（“play血1”or“｛をivolous，’
丘ction）writ肛 Like Hiraga belbre him， Morishima both wrote gθs磁μand
also con七亘buted to the丘eld of Dutch S七udies（」㍗a刀8没丘日〉． He discusses the
亘diculmg of the cumbersome system of Ch血ese characters m Japan by a
man from the Netherlands in侮δ頒∼短α微（Conversations with a
Dutchlnan，1787）． Honda l口）shiaki goes even further with his＆砿ゴ
1ηoηρg没］ぬゴ（Tales of the West，1798）， in which he recommends that
Japanese people use Romanized Japanese because it is easier to learn and
read than Chinese characters．
Ano七heτbook by a man from the Netherlands， J． E van Overmeer
Fi8scheちwas published in Amsterdam and translated i就o Japanese under
the七itle凪∼o刀搬zo盃1∼ゐ疏δ（Obse1門7atio】ぴs on the Manners and Customs of
Japan，1833）． Oveτmeer Fisscher lived in Japan＆om 1820 to 1829． h
that book he pur］por七s that Japanese peoPle have an ex七reme and
impractical love of Ch血ese characters．∧励o刀」位zo加力」必δwas apParently
widely read by scholars of 1）utch Studies， so must have had a major
influellce．
When Japanese Du七ch S七udies scholars translated in七〇Japanese￡eom
一13一
Du七ch or other languages they introduced many innovations to the written
language． They o銑en used spoken Japanese in w℃iting and adopted
certain conventions that originated＆om Dutch・to−Japanese translations．
One such scholar」Oba Sessai（1805聯1873）， translated 拓1左●r2V没εααヱ必α刀ゐ
（1831），abook cove亘ng various五elds in the natural sciences， be七we頭1862
and 1865 in a style heavi▲y dependent on c◎110quial vocabulary with the
intenti◎n of dissemina七ing ceτtain scient迅c knowledge gained＆om Dutch
Studies to a large audience． Fukuzawa「YUkichi， one◎f the primaオy
advoca七es of plain speech and writing in Me薄i， an adv◎ca七e of orato取and
one whose w亘tmg style in仇加加oη刀oθα8ロmθ（The Advancement of
Leaming，1872−76）was used as a Inode1｛br govemment textbooks with the
adoption◎f the co且oquial gロ刀ゐ㎜旋垣style by the Ministry of Educa七ion， is
said to have modeled his style on Oba Ses8ai’s style， like other Dutch
Studies and Westem Studies scholars．1 （（拓囎ゐロ刀立φ∫was the coHoquial
writing style based on the middle−class dialect of 7bkyo． It became the
standard w亘tten language fbr Japan in the Me亘i Pe亘od． θθ四加刀ゴ励τ
may be五te・ally t頗slated as the“u㎡cati・n・f speech and岨tinピ’）．
刀eaヱ・μ（“is”）， a c◎pula in the Japanese language todaあwas originaUy
characte亘stic of w垣tings by scholars of Dutch S加dies and， at one time， its
use may have be頭h避・ited to the辻丘eld， Such stylistic innovations in
Dutch Studies and the u8e of colloquial Japane8e m writing by scholars
such as this in the Edo Period， although probab】y not considered
respectable wri七iag at the time， must have pτepared Japanese
psychologica11ヱi抽ellectua11鵠and in other ways｛br the major changes in
writmg that◎ccu鵬d in Me巧i． The writing of Dutch Studies scholars was
colored by the language of Nagasaki and was ve】ごy d遜eren七from the 8θη力㎜
∫励τstyle of the Me巧i Period七hat eventually became standard， but in the
latter Me絨i Period the Dutch S七udies scholars had the℃eputatiOn of having
been fbrward・thinking lbr theむtime， and the language七hat they wrote may
have ahleady been associated with Westem scienti丘c and technological
sophistication in the mind80f ma可 Furthermore， Dutch Studies was
considered“dangerous though七”by power・holders in the Edo Period par七ly
一14一
because it was thought to be contamina七ed not only by Ch姓stianity bu七also
by aspirations toward denlocracy so colloquial writing m general may have
been associated wit｝1 democ薫acy in the minds of many people by early MeUi．
If this were t斑e it w斑1d help explain七he popularity of colloquial writing in
early Me亘i．
Moving to anothe主early Ibrce lending cre（五bility to 8θη加刀ゴ励ゴbut
more on the aesthetic plane， Naoki Sakai has discussed the emphasis on the
voice in National Studies（＆o＆卿加）and the way it was placed in
opposition to Chinese and Chi肥8e characters by Motoori Norinaga
（1730・1801）and others．2 National Studies 8cholars emphasized the
丑）reignness of Chinese and the nativeness of Japanese， and七hereby set the
stage lbr the later conception。f modem Japanese as a language with
borders， both temporal and spatial bo℃ders． Due to the eme誕gence of
National Studies and the Mito Schoo1（1刀鋤躍鋤， the Japanese language
began to mark a certain political body in the E（lo Period （eventuaUy
expressed as the“National Polity”oτ＆o左ロ垣D with a unique sp垣t re免rred
to as the“spirit of the language”』’oぬm∂that七ranscended time and
extended back to antiquity丘om the pτesent．3 Somewhat similaτto
Ger皿an Romanticist philology Norinaga’s language studies relied heavily
on phonetics and phonology the sounds of words， and p亘v量eged poetry as a
medium Ibr uniting People across distant spaces and times． It might be
said that Nati頭al Studie8 reified classical Japanese， but in fact， by
translating between spoken Japanese and classical Japanese by means of a
gra皿mar and dictionaries， it created a temporal boundaW fb℃ 8poken
Japanese， and by opposing Chinese to Japanese， it created a spatial
boundary fbr the Japanese of the present since vernacula℃Chinese was al80
being read㎞Japan in Me巧i． It could be argued that National Studies，
reinte巧preted and adapted to the needs of the state垣Meiji， helped to lend
legitimacy七〇g閉加刀τ励Z That is to sa況Edo・Period National Studies
scholars such as Noオinaga compared the characteristics of classical
Japanese to that of classical Chhlese and established in the minds of many
the impo式ance of the Japanese language． Masao Maruyama，s 5加㎡θθ垣
一15一
功θ」碗巳碓o加21疏3Zα夕of7汲㎎ヨ願占P8刀demonstrates the importance of
the Ianguage of Japan fbr the moτe chauvinistic Natiollal Studies scholars・4
1七must be remembe℃ed that while this‘‘image”of classical Japanese
was taking shape， the situati・n was veW雌lerent品r七he sp・ken Japanese
language．（This is七he situati・n that且n四ists re免r t・as“dig1・ssia”一孤e
language fbr writing and another＆）r speaking． In the Edo Pe亘od， clas8ical
Japanese had relatively universally recognized standards， but the spoken
dialects dif苦ered食om region to region）． There was trem頭dous lmguistic
diversity in the various dialects spoken throughout the ar￠hipelago・ る｝ven
while it was possible to t℃anscribe the spoken language and it was
the・retically p・ssible七・“W七e as・ne Speaks，”there was n・estabUshed
colloquial writing style． Transcriptions of utterances￡rom various dialects
蛎ヱ℃apPearing in print though． For example， one historical hnguist長）und
eleven difらrent instances of the quest輌on，‘‘V防en did you come to 8do？”in
transc］互ptions of spoken Japanese．5 「They di￡飴red according to the
pers・n’s class， gendeちand re鎮on・
An◎七her m・de℃nizing in且uence may have beenもhe…罪owth of the
Inarket負）r popular fiction． Robert Leutner views the mcreasing use◎f the
vernacular in popular fiction a」畿er app℃oximately 1790 as caused la宝gely by
the rise of the merchant cla8s垣terms of economic and cultural p◎we蔦6
Like Kem’s study of the popular五ction writer Santo Xy6den（1761・1816），
1￡ut荘er draws a hne between the earlier夢θβθ＆αwriters who wrote長）r a
sma111iteraτy Cote亘e and later 8冶8頭αwriters who wrote長）r money a丘er
approximately 1790．7 Whereas the earlier w亘ter8 tended to be samu宇ai，
the latte℃tellded to be from the merchant class． V碗th the pro￡itテseeking
uτge to壬each the large8t possible audience and larges七possible market，
writers五ke Kyδden from the merchant class simp1迫ed and collo騨ia五zed
grammar and v・cabula理Ky6den，㈱・f th・8e who did this， was 8・
successful that he became one of the飯st writers able to make a五ving as a
w亘ter of丘ction． Whie write主s continued the traditiのof keeping the loRy
and authoritative tone of pseudo“cla8sical Japane8e 丑）r the narrative
portions in which they spoke to the reade葛they expanded dialogue and
一16一
used realistic speech fbr a wide range of speakers varyirlg by class， sex， and
geographical origin．（Even in七he early Me垣Period， narrative passages of
popular丘ction continued to be writt飽in“pseudo”or‘‘f奴t”classical
Japanese， a style with easy classical grammar and a mix of classical and
spoken vocabulary）． The popular f玉c七ion write主Sh止コtei Sanba（1776・1822）
is remembered允r his o亘ginal and血ithfuhepresentations of a great
variety of characters， and his writings also evidence七he diversity of the
spoken language． Kyokutei I3akin（1767・1848）， the great芦8雄ロwrite葛
said that good￡iction is 70 percent‘‘vulga〆’and 30 pe鷲cent‘‘elegant，，， and
re食∋rred to himself as a ゐη互力万（五terati）but to Saxlba as a 8θθθ2ξロ5力θ
（pejorative then長）r a popular w碧iter）． He免1t that Sa曲a went too蝕r in
his p囎sui七〇f money and fame． Spoken language in writing was categorized
as“vulgar”（z砿∋and classica1・r pseud・−classical as“elegant”（m」ヅ没ゐ晦）．
Popular 五ction 毛hroughout the nineteenth centuW helped （丑sseminate
wide］y a view of certam kinds of speech as respectable and laid the
丘）undations fbr a speech“communit況”in the 8ense of what Benedict
Anderson七erms a nationa1 ilnagined community”8
These three molnents in late Edo discourse−Dutch Studies， National
S七udies， and the popular fiction re免汀ed to as gθsz∼丘ぽorrespond to three
aspects of historical changes in communication during the Edo Period that
probably paved the way＆）r the unif至cation of speech and w亘ting m
Me巧←the scienti｛玉c／七echnologica1， the aesthetic， and the socioeconomic
respectively
2．Language Refb㎝8 P㌘opo8ed by E五随ghte㎜ent lnteUectual8
＆om Edo・Period Dutch Studies
Many people stil have七he idea that since Japan was a“closed country”
（3a左磁のin the Edo Period， Japanese intellectuals knew little of science or
“rationahsm．” Howeve葛rationalism and even science were part of both
the Co㎡ucian tradition of scholarship−borrowed from China and fu☆her
elaborated in Japan−and of Japanese na七ivist movements that were bom
in the Edo Period． Some casual observers of Japan tend七〇assume tha七
一17一
science was a Westem tradition new to Japan in七he Me巧i Period， but one
can 丘nd many examples of scient近c research and ra七ionahsm i灘 the
ConfUcianist writings that Nishi Amane and Fukuzawa Yぱichi studied，
and also many sim丑arities between the Westem ideas that they adopted
and the ideas with which they must have akeady been血皿量ia鷲 Although
Fukuzawa and Nishi studied m depth Westem liberaI thought and
eamestly tried to promote it， surely one of their ove主all aim8 was to protect
Japan from 貴）reign aggression． Let us consider here the Edo・Period
intellectual milieu that they were a pa仕of and how it may have prepared
them fbr the language refbrms七hat they would advocate during七he Me亘i
Period．
Fh二st， 1et us collsider Corlfucianist rationalis文n， an impor七ε1nt
component of Fukuzawa and Nishi’s early education and intellec七ual
training in the Ed・Peri・d． Havens n・tes tha七whereas Chinese
Confucianism had empha8ized 1◎yalty t◎the血mU況Edo・Period Zhu Xi
Confucia】Usm emphasized loyalty to one’s免udal lord．9 According to the
耶kugawa・rth・d・xy“9・姓n g・」6，”samu・ai were expected t・emb・dy the
vi式ues・f“1・yaltヱ｛狙ali七X d晦8e・vice七・・ne’s master（雄∂， and keeping
to ◎ne，s 8tation （βz瑠θ口）．” By promoting such e七hical standards the
Tbkugawa rulers maintained七he status quo political order an（1 discouraged
a枕acks on its au七horityl The］邑ghe℃in the hierarchy a person was， the
more v丘tuous they were presumed t◎be．
Maruyama Masao pointed out that Neo・Confucianis七s in Japan
believed that criticizing theβ凌左α」后was“not so王nuch as a rebelhon against
thehi authority as a system leading dh！ectly to the co且apse of morality and
sanctities．”10 Thus Japanese Zhu Xi C◎nfucianism， the d◎miDant school of
Neo・Confucianism， was an ethical system that was tigh七1y bound up with
七he hierarchical social order−to attack七heゐ頭混允was to attack morali培
and vice versa， i．e．， to modi蝕Zhu Xi teachings was七◎m◎d均the poli七ical
order．
According to Albert Cτaig in“Science and ConfUcianism in Tbkugawa
」apan，”the n・七i・n・f the刀’（ヱ《 i］a Chi】αese）was centraB・Zhu Xi
一18一
Confucianisn1．11 Theヱゴis of㌃en translated as“principleノ’but m Zhu Xi
thought this was the idea that zゴwas the ultimate p亘nciple七hat℃egulated
the universe and was the source of七he natural and ethical orde主 This
ordering p主inc鯉）le existed both within people and withm nature． People
could appτehend the 1ゴthough il比℃ospection or meditation， or through the
investigation of nature． In the later Zhu Xi Confucianism， it was believed
that one could gain knowledge of the刀’thτough the study of七he ancien七
Chmese tex七s of the sages． As Craig explains， the Confucian idea of
meditation was ve℃y similar to the notion of meditation垣Z頭Buddhism．
垣Z飽one looked into one’s own na七ure and by so doing， realized the
ultima七e Buddha nature， i．e．， ultimate truth．12 But because the Confucian
zゴof natuτe and汕man beings were one and the same， a person could also
know theガby studying“things as they are，”which Craig describes as“a
七his・worldly mysticisln．”13 Craig argues tha七Neo・Confucianism had
‘‘
窒≠狽奄盾凾撃≠撃奄唐狽奄メhposs丑）ihties that Buddhism did not． 1」ater this rational，
nature・investigating side of ConfUcianism would be extended to Dutch
Studies（ヱ習刀8ヨ」ヒロ）．
Craig underlines the血ct that fbr Edo’Pe℃iod intellec七uals， knowledge
and v江tue were identica1． 「rhe Confucian tradition held that a person
could attain wisdom through selfdisciplmed study Wisdom was achieved
by acquiring㎞owledge and virtue． Although in the early Edo Pe垣od，
selfdisciplined s敏dy would have been interpreted as the study of C］垣nese
texts， in the latter part of the Edo Period，七hat s七udy came closer to“things
as they are”伽asmall but sig雌cant number of scholars．14 Yamagata
Ban七6（1748−1821）， a successful merchant and amateur schola葛exemp1迅ed
this kind of thinking． In seeking to know the zコ’of things and nature，
Bantδre飽rred to this endeavor as“inves七igating things and penetrating
theヱ∼’（ム加加敏λγ励）． Other Co㎡ucian scholars such as Kaibara
Ekken（1630・1714）and Matsuoka Joan（1669・1747）had also taken an
interes☆n this kind ofヱスin making catalogs of flora， f≒una， and minerals．
Such zゴinvestigation， whie sti且c皿ceived of as part of the ethica1担；
probably made easier the later inclusion of Dutch Studies in the Confucian
一19一
oτde℃ In the time ofA℃ai Hakuseki some had already begun to think of the
Westem science fbund in Dutch Studies as“one branch of the 8tudy ofヱゴ’
alld hadピecognized its practical benefits．15
Craig o］艶rs three explanations圭br why science did no七8ign迅cantly
alter the domina跳Neo・Co㎡uciarl worldview of the Edo Period：Japan！s
Westem science was the result of the mastery of lbreign languages， i．e．，
sci頭ce was inlbr咀tion that was tra迫slated ra七he℃than practiced；
Neo“Confuciani8m∼s pre鍛exis七ing ra七ionalism was capable of absorbing
Westem science−this zゴof nature could stiU be pa姓of the ethica1刀’；and
We就ern science was th◎ught of a8 morally in企rior and could be trivialized
aS irreleVant tO the majOr取）kUgaWa inte且eCtUahSSUeS．16
1f Craig’s explanations have some validi培then one could argue that
the introduction of Western science did not have any mεUor repercusSions on
the Confucian worldview in Edo Japan immediately even while it did allow
K）τarational， scientific type of zゴ七hat would enable the abso主ption of
Western scie延e and an◎w允r the rationahzation and modemization of li企
of various kinds． As l w丑1 explaロ1 be1碑this helps explam why students
of Westem Lear垣ng such as Fukuzawa YUldchi， Nishi Amane， and Mori
Arin頭（1847・1889）saw n◎thing wrong with proposing radical re長）rms of
the 3apanese language， such as discontinuing Chinese characters and using
colloquial writing rather than classical Chinese， a practice that had been
considered‘‘vulga〆’（zo左口）in the Edo Period． Craig suggests that this
analytica11ゴー‘‘the 1フ’of things”（ゐηおαヱ∋−takes on greεしter and greater
importance， and scholars such a8 Sakuma Sh6zan（1811・1864）begin to
make a distinction between the 1ゴof things（加お辺コ）and the刀’of v亘tue
（ぬ2∋，171n the end， scholars of Westem thought such as Nishi Amane
completely severed the 1ゴof things￡rom theヱゴof virtue．18
Nishi’s ancestors had be頭 studying Dutch leam垣g since the
seventeenth cet比ury when◎ne of Nishi’s ancestors became a personal
physician to his由王111yδ（fbudal lord）in Nagasaki through his knowledge of
Dutch medicme． It was expected that Nishi would take his father’s place
as a physician， but in hi8 1ate teens he was ordered to s斑dy
一20一
Neo・Confucianism． He wa8 disappointed because， although he had
・riginally c・nsidered medicine a 1・w ca1五ng， he had recently changed his
mmd a丘er readingα）1ηmθ刀伽y（戊η紘θ血a必cお（ヱηη80c力∂by Ogy口Sorai
（1666・1728）at the age of 160r 17． He realized that‘‘Sung metaphysics
served no pu］哩）ose fbr people’s daily五ves．”19 His reading of Sorai Studies
（5b臓Z田」劫caused him to take an interest in medicine and to be more
concemed with everydaX Practical af蝕丘s， so he supe㎡cialb complied with
七he order to study Neo・ConfUcianism， but he continued to adhere to Sora輌
Studies， which he believed to be true． According to Havens， this su（lden
switch in Nishi’s thought was a“wate℃shed”in Nishi’s intellectual growth
It marked a move towards everyday prac七ical af㊤irs．
Ogy6 S◎rai was part of the Ancient Learning Schoo1（」20願2ヒの， which
had laτgely rejected the Neo−Confucian no七ion of the 1ゴーthatのe could
know七he 1ゴthrough the study and me七aphysical contemplation of the
ancient Chinese texts． The Ancient Learning School dhトected students，
energies toward practical human af￡airs． 伍order to do this， Craig
explains， S・・ai made a distin・ti・n b・七ween the ethica1刀’（品∂and the・ゴ・f
“order”（ンbヱ分， and that Sorai wanted to f士ee ethics丘om nature． Nishi did
something simiar bu七dif克rent． Nishi aimed to＆ee science丘om e七hics．
Craig and Havens disagree on the extent to which Nishi’s thought
resembled Sorai Studies， but in any case， it appears that the possibility長）r
the distinction between ethics an戯he natural order had been op頭e己p by
Sorai． This reconceptualization of Neo−Con」飯cianism by Sorai was
necessary fbr Nishi because Nishi needed to dispense with the
NeぴConfucian unity between ethics and nature， in order to孤ake way五）r
the modem separation of human mora五ty from scienti丘c七τuth・20 Nishi
had to dismantle much of七he pre・existing Con負1cian conceptual struc七uオe
so that he could transmit neW Western thought systems such as Westem
SClence．
In the MeUi Period Nishi introduced a tremendous range of Wes七em
thought systems to Japan through his writ註1gs and lec七ures， and in such a
way that would be consona批with the needs of the modem， Me填
一21一
nati⑩鑓state． Wes七em science was one． Another was nationalism． Early
in Nishi’s lifb he dem皿strated a strong commitment to what woWd
eve鋤ually become the Nation of Japan wh頭，登ustrated by the罪e8tricting
co珊se along which his position a8 a fbudal retaine驚was taking him， he
resolved to rellounce all obligatiolls to hisゴ』∼ゴヱ刀yσand serve the na七ional
interest as a servant of the力a2ξα允（Shogunate）． Thi8 dangerous action
七hat he took（佐坦ρ8刀）was corlsidered a serious of允nse．21 Nishi’s education
up to that point had been輌n the a且一encompassing thought system of
Neo−Confucianism． Freed丘om his lord， he cho8e his own new path．
Since he diむot adhere to the p鷲evalen七slogan“Eastem moralit蕩Westem
七echniques， as so many others （hd， but instead be五eved that Westerxl
insti七u七ions and Western thought were superior to Japa〆s， his search fbr
knowledge about the West led him七〇the study of Western philosophy He
re飴］〔Ψed to p］磁080phy as“the clari五cation of wisdom and virtue．”22 1t輌s
元mportant to remember here that wisdom and virtue were also the
purported goals of Con血cialUsm． Although he rejected many
NeぴConfucian methods of reaching that goa1， the goal of h輌s study of
Westem ph丑osophy was the same as his o亘ginal goal in Sorai Studies．
Once in the service of theβ没丘ロ允he was assigned the job of丘guring
out a course of action to prevent the Russians ￡rom taking control of
Hokkaido． Hi8 propo8al was characte亘stic of his broad concem｛br the
ent詮e nation． Rather than an imLmediate mihtary solution， he proposed a
‘‘
窒?撃b窒香揩?@samurai morali㎏”23 He reasoned七hat without a re最）rm of the
miitary institution and the mora五ty upon which it was based， better
weapons would be useless． This kind of app℃oach was typical of
Enlightenment（22θz’1η∂intellectuals． They believed that they needed to
de8troy丘udal traditions and values， and lead the people口18uch a way that
they acquired‘‘the European spirit of rationality practical experience，
personal pro丘t， and se1仁awa肥ness of mdivid囎h元ghts．” Nishi did no七
advocate the overthrow of the加丘輪so he did not actually advise a
complete dismantling of the髭〕udal system though24 He genera1妙believed
ill restructuring， n◎t delnolition．
一22一
When Nishi was sen七to Europe by his govern］nent to study Westem
govemlnent and instituti皿s， he主eques七ed his host at七he University of
Leiden to teach him s七a七istics，1aw》economics， po五tics， and diplonlac鵠bu七
he also made an additional personal request that he be七aught these“within
七he realnl of philosophy，’25 He wished to study not only the institutions
themselves， but also the ethical thi垣ng behind the皿． Was he not，
consciously or unconsciously looking 丑）r an a11・encompassing thought
syste董n correspondhlg to the Confucianism of Japan that could u垣te the
s・cial and p・h七ica1・rder with the natura1・rder？The・1d恥kugawa
system was being dismantled， and some new ethical system that could
ra七iona五ze the new Me亘i“spirit of rationahtヱ”“personal pro丘t，”‘‘individual
rights，”and might I add， patriotisln， was required． Nishi had shown an
interest in iss℃【es relaもing to‘‘justice and fairness”in Europe・26
Because Dutch schola宝ship had a‘‘B亘tish o亘entation，”the philosophy
that Nishi was in七roduced to consisted of Adam Smith， the Anglo−French
positivism of Comte， and the English ut山ta亘anism of M且1， and anlong
these， the distinguishing免ature of Nishi，s philosophy and the malor
impetus長）r many of his wri七ings was u七丑ita漁垣sm・27 Craig convincing汐
shows that from the七ime Nishi began his study in Leiden until the end of
his ca翌eeちNishi was a committed advocate of u七ilitarian ideas垣the civil
sector．
In the mi五tary 8ector he advocated values謎erent l壬om classical
liberalism， includmg 1・ya1観brave苓and・bedience．”28 L・yalty and
brave培 he 企1t， ah1eady existed in the national characte払 Japan had
faiもhf㎞1ness（o力辺アδ）an（i comphance（1励（放z∼）， buもdi（1 not have obedience．
Smce“mechanization”was required， Nishi had to七rans｛brm the 7bkugawa
loyahy that was directed toward a 8upe鷲ior or lord into loyalty that would
be d丘ected toward the empero蛤 It was necessary允r the soldier to obey
any and all orders七hat came丘om above， regardless of the person＆om
whom the order came． Thus， Nishi repeatedly stressed the need Ibr
obedience and“was wiUing to borrow in part登om the Japanese past to
reinfbrce i七．”2g Nishi did not supPort the instaUation of飴uda且stic samu主ai
一23一
values in the modem soldieちbut iden鑓ed many t鴛ai七s thaもcould be usefUl
in the military sector七hat already existed in Japanese七raditions．30 He
gave in｛1uential advice about how to buid a modem army These were
inco宝po℃ated into the Universal C岨scription Law of 1873， so his ideas had
an impact on the way the Jap孤ese miht叡y was established．311n the
8ame yea鵬1873， he helped establish the in舳ential Me加ku Society with
M磁Arinori and others， a量）rum through which Nishi， Arinori， Fukuzawa，
and Maejima Hisoka（1835・1919）advocated Enlightenment罫efbrms． A且
Ibur of these men advocated rad輌cal relbrms of language．
嘗bretum to七he civ量sec七〇葛Iwould suggest that although he was
trying to亘d Japaylese of七he Confucian notion that social relationships are
part of the natural order』 a且 the same he argued ｛br utilitarian
individualism on the basi80f nature． He wrote that people have a“naturaI
主ight to seek the three七reasures，”i．e．， health， wealth， and knowledge．32
Although the idea of naturahight8 came from Westem philosoph又the
entτenched Co㎡ucian notion that the human ordeτwas based on the
natural order had the potential to aid the acceptance of the Western concept
of right8 in Japan．
Ano七her E垣ightenment thinke葛Fukuzawa YUkichi， also did not
completely throw out the connection of e七hics to nature． （At least he did
not at鉦st． Later in his 1浪he became dis迅usioned with the war and
impe亘alism he saw all a℃ound in Ibreign countries in Asia， and， al）and◎ning
the natural order concept， became convinced of the Sp頭cerian survival of
the飽test）．桓his ear］y thought we血d a con8tant appea1枚）the naturahless
of individuahights and freedom． C主aig state8 that“七he most fUndam頭捻1
assumption in his［Fukuzawa’s】ea℃ly writings was七hat七heτe is an order in
the universe， that a11七垣ngs functi◎n according to natural laws， and thaも
these apPly both七〇the natural world and t◎human socie取，，33
1n a so℃aned translaもion of a Western book on economics， Craig teUs
u8 0f an intere8thlg instance where Fukuzawa “Conl甑c輌anized”the
o亘ginaL34 The o1元ginal had，‘Trom these飴w examples， it is pe罫ce輌ved that
P◎1i七輌cal economy is not an arti丘cial system， but an explanatio泊of the
一24一
operation of certain naもural laws．” Fukuzawa translates this passage，
“Economics is in its essen七ials clearly not a man−made Iaw． Since the
pu・p・se・f ec・n・mics is t・explain natu・al laws（缶ロ刀θ刀刀・缶斑鋤that
a℃ise spontaneously in the world＿”The parenthetical phrase“that arise
spontaneously in the world”fbllowing the exp主ession“na七ural laws”was
clearly noもin the origina1， and is a very Confucian idea−that the laws of
naもure as well as of man“arise spontaneous1ピ This idea of the
naturalness of the status（1uo could be used to rationa五ze and just均the
power of o伍ce holders in the Meili period just as in the Edo Period．
（Surely the concept of“natu℃al laws”was also used to lust運y the sta七us quo
in Eur・pe． The飽ct that the n・ti・n・f natural laws apPealed t・Fukuzawa
in his early encounter with Westem thought is signi且can七）．
No七〇nly economics bu七also Fukuzawa’s beloved freedoln was also
natural fbr hhn：‘『rherelbre， throughout the wo℃1d in an countries and
am・ng all pe・Ples， se謄de七e・mined＆eed・m is a law・f naもu・e（缶刀品刀・
力δθo左∂． 面other words， each individual is indeperld頭t alld society is Ibr
the good of a11． Man is bom詮ee．”35 Again Craig丘nds Confucianization：
“Society is＆）r the good of a11．” This ph℃ase o1ヨginally mean七七hat the
emperor was supposed to use his Heaven・bestowed亘ght to rule fbr the good
of the whole socie観not fヒ）r himse1￡1）ut Fukuzawa pu七s the individual in
the place of the ruler with his use of this phrase． Fukuzawa did make the
individual sovereign， a master of his o℃her own destiny butもhe individual
was expected to live virtuously using his or her sovereignty fbr the good of
a五the people． Nishi did hkewise， appealing to the idea that the human
order was natuτaL36
Nishi also placed the good of society over the good of the individua1， so
one may question how deeply Enlightenlne批intellectuals such as Nishi
and Fukuzawa actually believed in individua11ヨghts and丘eedom． One
may also ask which segments of七he population they believed should have
those rights．（Nishi explicitly withheld these rights f壬om the soldie葛as
m頭tioned above）．3？Some have argued that the utilitarianism of Mil was
adopted as an“ideological prop by the townsmen，”but Havens允els that
一25一
they癒批o see七hat the peoPle wh◎promulgated utilita亘anism were mostb
“of aristocratic bi碑h．” 〈Nishi was also of aristocratic b鉋th）． Thus Havens
apPears to accept that the ideas of＆eedom and natura1亘ghts were an
ideological prop serving the interes七s of the state and he implies that this
mOVement fbr WeStern Va1UeS WaS nOt a pOpUlar mOVement．38
For Fukuzawa civi五zation is the most natural sもate because it is the
reahzation of the‘‘true nature”of humankind．3g He reasol18，五）r example，
七hat peoPle like七〇be clean， but they canllot be clean as long as they remain
in a barbaric state． りR）reach a state of phy8ical cleanliness is to realize
thehごtrue nature． IfFukuzawa saw the We8t as the pinnacle of civi五zation，
perhaps he concluded that Westem“civilization”had enabled human kind
to reahze their natuτal aspira七ions．（Yet cleanliness wasμ◎bably valued
more in Japan than in the West）． He seems to have had a veryオosy picture
of Westem civihzation i曲is early days．
3．Conclu8ion
The Neo・Confucian concept of七he孜’was flexH）1e enough that it could
include a rationa五st elem頭t， and this rationalist elem題t was being valued
三n◎re and more du1ヨng the la枕er half of the Edo Period． Although Dutch
Leaming scholars were a very sma日min◎rity unt丑the ve主y end of the Edo
Period， they had akeady couched Western science in ConfUcian terms that
made it easier to accept． Nishi Amane‘s though七pr◎gression went丘om a
belief in Ne◎・Conf㎞cianism to its rejection， and belief in Sorai Studies．
With the sh土ft to Sorai Studies came a greater in七erest j且Dutch Studies and
We8tem studies in genera1． In Fukuzawa and N輌shi’s wriもings⑩ethic8，
politics， and society one鉦1ds strong rationalist elements that stemmed as
much＆om thelピEdぴPeriod educa七ion as￡rom the輌r 8tudies of Western
institutions in the Me亘i Period． They used their understand輌ng of the
earhe主ConfUcian worldview to七rain七heh↓翻ow citセens in the new）
Westem ethical system of individuahight8 and freedom． They re允renced
native belie偽in order to ms七ill new belie飴am皿g“commoners，”“the
people，”and citiz頭s m new illstitutions七hat they impor七ed or adapted｛壬om
一26一
the West．
Refb】re鳳ce8
1Fukuzawa Y遠ichi，（㌔加迎o刀ηo sα5u1ηθ， Iwanami bunko（笛）kyo：Iwanami Sho七en，
1996）．
2Naoki Sakai，賜cθ8αζ紐θ乃8ρ功θ5頗加50f L8刀9ロ8ξθ加盈抽缶㎝云力’Ob刀加η7
吻ρaロθβθ疏860ロぴθ（1七haca：Corne且UP，1992）． For Eng且8h translations of 80me of
Norinaga‘s writings， see Motooピi Norinaga，“Uiyalnabu皿i，”Monumenta NipPo垣ca
42．4（Winte℃1987）；Motoori Norinaga，‘‘Tamakushige，”Monumen七a Nipponica 43．1
（Spring 1988）；and Motoori No碧inaga，“Naobi no Mi七ama，”Monumenta Nipponica
46．1（Sprmg 1991）、 For shor七， mt宝oductory es8ays to the8e tran81ations主espective1鵠
8ee Sey Nishimu∫a，“F註8七Steps Into the Mountains：Motooτi Norinaga‘s
Uiyambumi，”M⑩umen七a Nipponica 44．4（Winter 1987）；John S． Bτownlee，“The
Jeweled Comb・Box：Motoori Norinaga‘8 Tamakushige，”Monumenta沌pponica 43．1
（Spring 1988）；and Sey Mshimura，“The Way o銑he God8：Mo七〇〇ri Norinaga’s Naobi
no Mitama，”Monumen七a Nipponica 46．1（Spring 1991）．
3Fo℃more on the Mito Schoo1， see］Bob「radashi Wakabaya8hi，∠4刀百，動ヱ功淫加bzη∂刀（了
陥ぶ缶mLθ8ヱ刀血ξ垣』勾W㎜由zη」口W8〆Z6θ2Ww乃θ8θs of 1825（Harvar（1 UB
1986）．
4 Masao Ma主uyama，ぷ加也8 加 功θ 1）コ6θ必炬o’1どa1協60巧7 0τクb必α9没陥 e1友区凋刀
（Princeton：Princeton UP，1974）．
5See Mi。ubara A垣t。溺品駒肪吻鋤勧励卿， K6da頑a gendai s姐nsh・（恥㎏・：
Kδ（1ansha，1994）20−21．
6Robert W Leutne葛 3λ磁垣5冶刀わ88η∂乃θ Obm∫o 刀ぼば泌o刀加砲o且o毎o刀，
H蝕va℃d・’面ching ln・ti七ute M・n・雛aph Se・ies， v・1．25（C鋤b主idge， MA：Hawa・d UB
1985）40−53．
7 A《iam Lewis Ke翌n，聞o助泣ξ5moセこ乃わ8coo 乃α（功θあ L〆缶坦巧75∀励島 没刀ゴ
A励、斑泣1P唖σ加功θ溜・励81α痂6澱・莇〔辺o在鋤励・τ品刀面泣㎡θ刀
σ761’18「6ノ（Doctoral the8is， Ea8t Asian Languages and Civj玉zations， Harvard
Univer8琵況1997）．
8Benedict R．0’G Anderson，1｝η8留力θ∂α）z四互2ロ刀毎θ8ご刀θ血o励刀●o刀功θ0亘鈎8刀∂
励τθθ∂oヂハを泊ρη没施」m，Rev and extended ed．（Lond皿：Ve翌so，1991）．
9Zhu Xi（1130・1200）wa8 a S皿g Dyna8ty Confucian scholar who became the most
infhlential rationa1旭t NeぴConfucian in China． He as8igned specia18ig雌cance to
the Analect80f Confucius， the Mencius， the Great Leaming， and the Doc七亘ne of t｝1e
Mean （the Fou芳 Books）， emphasized the inves撮gation of 七hings， and greatly
過uenced C｝Unese g・ve宝nment｛br centuries． Th・ma8 R・H・Havens，胸力品m8刀θ
8ロ∂ノレあ飽zrロ∂返ρ8刀θ5θ刀∼oロ9力鰺（P］dnceton：P】亘nce七〇n UP，1970）10．
10Havens 10．
一27一
11
Albert Craig，“Science and ConfUcianism in Tbkugawa Japan，”α∼8刀8垣g∂砲8刀θ3θ
∠4云雄η∂已8クb微ヱゴ」ぬぬ1w血毎oη（Princeton：Princet《）n UP，1965）136，138．
12
braig，“Science and Con釦cia垣8m iガn）kugawa Japan”138．
13
braig，“Sc輌ence and Conf㎞ciam8m in璽bkugawa Japan”139．
14Cra輌9，“Science and Co㎡ucia垣sm in Tbkugawa Japan”139．
15
braig，“Science and Co㎡㎞cianism in Tbkugawa Japan”140−41。
16Craig，“Science and Co血cia垣8m in倭bkugawa Japaピ’149・50．
17Craig，“Science and Co血ci鋤ism in浪）kugawa Japan”153・54．
18
b蟹aig，‘‘Sci題ce and Co互血cia垣sm in「衰）kugawa Japan”154・55．
19Haven823・25．
20
Havells 137・38．
21Haven830．
22Have烈834．
23
24
@Haven837．
@Haven839．
25Havens 49・50．
26Havens 43．
27
ieremy Ben七ham’8致）主mulation of泣ilita壬輌anism 8eems close8t to Nishi・8
Ut伍ta亘ani8m鋤d One Of Bentham，8 COre idea8， POSSibly the“aX輌Om”i8，‘ヨt i8七he
greate8t hapPi蛎80f the…葬eate8ぬumbe翼tha七is七he m㈱ure of right and w烈）ng．”
∠4瓦ぼ8mθ刀60刀6bワθmヱηθ刀云（Lon（10n：1776）．
http：〃www．constitution．orgOblfrag∴gov」htm
28
29
gav斑8209．
gaven8206．
30
正lave118206．
31Hyman Kubliパ‘The‘Modem’A主my of Ear］y Me萄i Japan，”Z力θ及τ』ら漉m
ρzど没τ6θ1カvo1．9， no．1（Nov：1949）20−41．
32
Hεwen855．
33
`lb・・t M． C・・ig，‘T・k・・aw・丘垣・垣・Th・脳…ph輌・・1 F・und・t三⑩・・f M，亘i
Nationa五8mt，” 拓品’αオ∫刀θγθ吻」mθ刀6加 刀4b∂巴m ∂没P没鶏 Robe翌t E． Ward， e〔玉．
（P「inceton：P亘nceton UP，1968）106．
34
The book he Co㎡㎞cianized wa8ψb品’o凌1刀硲ηαmy愈τ西θ加3励oo函．顕∂血
飽慨施血繊ロα巨b刀by WU五am and Robe主七Chambe翌8．
35
b翌aig，‘？ukuzawa YUkichi：The PhUosophical Founda加n80f Me巧i N滋ionah8m・
107．
36
Haven8154． According to Haven8，‘Nishi c皿負18ed the di8tinctim betwe頭
human and phy8ica互principles which he had皿ade in輌＆ロ勧〆8掘mo刀by
clas8ifying a8‘品tぼal law’the rule that tho8e wi磁trea8uオes｛Nishi’8‘‘health， wealth，
and knowledge”］couM cont翼oi those without them．，，
一28一
37Havens 155．
38
39
gavens 143．
b・aig，“恥ku・awa Wkic垣： The Philosophical Foundation80f Me遍i Nationa五8m”
109．
一29一