Can imperial Japan survive and thrive?

We all know some images d'Épinal about the feudal-medieval past of Japan - samurai, geisha, armed monks, etc... Hideyoshi, Nobunaga, Sengoku Jidai...

But before it - the age of samurai, there was a another epoch, quite different. The imperial system(s) of Heian and Nara, if I am right. A theoricaly united, bureaucratic state inspired by the chineses (Tang dynasty was an ideal), ordered by the Emperor and servants, the court nobles...

Was it's decay and disapearance, fading in irrelivence, inevitable? Was it possible to renovate, extend it's longevity and reach, and perhaps make it live to colonial era?

From what I remember, the problem was inner weakness that gave delegated power to the countryside lords, servants and warriors, the seed of the samurai nobles, daimyo system, shoguns and all. The effective control passed in the hands of Fujiwra and related lines, and the court controlled less and less.

Could we change this fate, to keep it alive, and perhaps dodge the rise of samurai?

Would taking away or restraining the Fujiwara help? Dynastic strict rules? Could there be reforms of the state bureaucracy?

Or was it doomed, impossible to workout in reality?

What are good PODs? What would it change to the history of Japan, Asia?

the problem is in the main change the japanese made to the chinese model- the nobility.
china did things in a relatively meritocratic way. anyone, no matter their birth, could in theory take any amount of power within the existing system. in japan though you had to be a noble to become powerful within the system- hence it was quite inevitable people would try to work around the system. thus you get the theoretically powerful nobles and the army with the actual power.

also important was another big japanese change to the chinese system- there was no mandate of heaven. the emperors were divine people of special blood. in china anyone could overthrow the emperor and take over without altering the system. in japan though...powerful warlords couldnt become emperor like in china. so they had to become shogun, the de facto leader but not de jure with all the tradition.

Indeed, they practiced constant cousin marriage to try and maintain legitimacy for a while there. Maybe since Tenmu usurped the throne.

Tyr said:

the problem is in the main change the japanese made to the chinese model- the nobility.
china did things in a relatively meritocratic way. anyone, no matter their birth, could in theory take any amount of power within the existing system. in japan though you had to be a noble to become powerful within the system- hence it was quite inevitable people would try to work around the system. thus you get the theoretically powerful nobles and the army with the actual power.

also important was another big japanese change to the chinese system- there was no mandate of heaven. the emperors were divine people of special blood. in china anyone could overthrow the emperor and take over without altering the system. in japan though...powerful warlords couldnt become emperor like in china. so they had to become shogun, the de facto leader but not de jure with all the tradition.

Click to expand...

Yeah, good points. Now.... can at least the first be changed, hum...

Silla and Japan were both designed in 7th and 8th century based on Tang China - with concessions to local aristocracy.

All three started to change and disintegrate in 9th century. With different outcomes.

Both Tang and Silla disintegrated in civil wars, and the dynasty was overthrown. Tang dynasty was less than 3 centuries old and a heir to 4 longloved and numerous shorter dynasties - but Silla dynasty dated from immemorable times - 1000 years, and no serious predecessors. Yet it too was overthrown.

Whereas Japan stayed tranquil. The administration changed, and Fujiwara quietly usurped power, but the imperial family remained.

How could a Heian Japan be made more stable, to prevent overthrow by provincial warriors?

chornedsnorkack said:

Silla and Japan were both designed in 7th and 8th century based on Tang China - with concessions to local aristocracy.

All three started to change and disintegrate in 9th century. With different outcomes.

Both Tang and Silla disintegrated in civil wars, and the dynasty was overthrown. Tang dynasty was less than 3 centuries old and a heir to 4 longloved and numerous shorter dynasties - but Silla dynasty dated from immemorable times - 1000 years, and no serious predecessors. Yet it too was overthrown.

Whereas Japan stayed tranquil. The administration changed, and Fujiwara quietly usurped power, but the imperial family remained.

How could a Heian Japan be made more stable, to prevent overthrow by provincial warriors?

Click to expand...

Was the Fujiwara a positive or negative in this ATL scenario? Would removing them from the equation help or hinder?

In 1155, Song China, Koryo Korea and Heian Japan all had civilian governments.

Heian Japan was overthrown by warriors in 1156 - they having been called in a dispute between several abdicated emperors.

Koryo Korea civilian givernment was overthrown by military coup in 1170, including deposition of Emperor Uijong. Koryo military acted on their own initiative.

Southern Song never was overthrown by military. Song China maintained big, expensive and not particularly efficient military that never interfered in politics after the coup founding Song, last of a series of Wudai coups, and before the Southern Song military fell to Yuan advance in 1270s.

What could have averted Hogen Disturbance?

Not totally sure... any more thoughts and ideas?

Maybe a strict policy on watching the army before?

I'd think the best way would be to be more flexiable with the imperial bloodline.
Make it so it is possible for a powerful military leader to marry the daughter of the emperor, and take over for himself.
Its not too huge a stretch considering most of the big families were at some point in the distant past branches of the imperial family.
We basically have to get things to a stage where if somebody takes over and becomes the number one man in Japan he can just become the emperor and continue business as usual under him rather than having to do a work around and become shogun.

I think the problem here is the same problem that plagues a lot of alt history: things happen for a reason. If you posit the western Roman empire surviving through the middle ages, you have to find something to do with all of the very real factors that led to its collapse. That's why most alt history writers try to find the smallest possible point of divergence. It's hard to imagine the social unrest in Bosnia in 1914 simply disappearing. It's much easier to imagine an assassin missing the Archduke by a few inches. This is why so much alternative history is highly personalized, almost to the point being like a soap opera, because it is easier to imagine PODs on a human scale than on a societal scale.

[Of course, if we live in a deterministic universe, there is no difference between a small or large POD. If you sneeze today, it's partly because of Napoleon. Everything that happens is the result of everything else that has ever happened. But speculative fiction almost always assumes that the universe is not fully deterministic, and that makes for much more fun literature, so let's go with that.]

The forces that led to decentralized government in Japan were huge and complex. You're not going to eliminate them without creating enormous "plot holes" in your history. You could have the leader of the Fujiwara clan fall in a well, but there are still countless regional barons with the same power to dismantle the central government.

Tyr said:

I'd think the best way would be to be more flexiable with the imperial bloodline.
Make it so it is possible for a powerful military leader to marry the daughter of the emperor, and take over for himself.
Its not too huge a stretch considering most of the big families were at some point in the distant past branches of the imperial family.
We basically have to get things to a stage where if somebody takes over and becomes the number one man in Japan he can just become the emperor and continue business as usual under him rather than having to do a work around and become shogun.

Click to expand...

So, paradoxally, the solution is to give him what he want, and so bring him and his future line 'in the system"? Okay.

Albeit can the reverse be dibe, and stop the rise of the military leaders and such at all, blocking a takeover?

The Ubbergeek said:

So, paradoxally, the solution is to give him what he want, and so bring him and his future line 'in the system"? Okay.

Albeit can the reverse be dibe, and stop the rise of the military leaders and such at all, blocking a takeover?

Click to expand...

Yeah, its why China endured.
Invaders came in but they could just install themselves as the new emperors no problem. No need to totally overhaul the existing system, via the mandate of heaven they were now the new rightful rulers.
In Japan I don't think we can change things that much but nonetheless some flexiability would help the system to endure.


To get rid of the rise of the military I'd think you'd need a peaceful and quite pacifist Japan...which is pretty hard to get when they've the Ainu to fight and the potential threat of China and Korea nearby. Not to mention all those internal factors...I really don't know enough of early Japanese history to comment but I do wonder whether we couldn't get a system like feudal Europe with the samurai/knights being few in number and most armies being temporarily called up from the peasents when danger arrises.

The answer is yes, but you need to have certain factors take root ITTL that did not necessarily IOTL, such as an elite whose ties are by bureaucracy *and* landholding, as opposed to *soldiering* and landholding. The best way to get this is a system functioning like the Chinese Empire's scholar-gentry, and to enshrine in Japan a Chinese imperial ideological view of soldiers as a necessary evil as opposed to a positive good.

dont attack the US

japan could survive if they stay out of war with the united states
Yamto relised this with quats like "if we invade America there will be a gun behind evrey blade of grass" so if imperial japan can finish its drive in china
japan should be able to take the dutch east indias without us invernsion and with that oil they sould be able to build there empire

anamarvelo said:

japan could survive if they stay out of war with the united states
Yamto relised this with quats like "if we invade America there will be a gun behind evrey blade of grass" so if imperial japan can finish its drive in china
japan should be able to take the dutch east indias without us invernsion and with that oil they sould be able to build there empire

Click to expand...

This thread is about medieval Heian Japan, not the Imperial Japan beginning with Emperor Meiji!

One big difference between Heian Japan and Koryo Korea was that Japan didn´t *have* an army.

Seriously. After Japan was united up to the Tsugaru Strait, early 800s, the Heian government disbanded most of the armed forces they had had back in 8th century. There were tiny guards units in the capital, and these were pretty unprofessional and spending their time with everything else than actually guarding or training to do so. The actual imperial palace was pretty unsafe against common criminals intruding to steal, and when the warrior monks of Hieizan demonstrated, the court had no forces of its own either.

Compare USA which in 1861 had regular army of just 16 000 for a population of 31 millions - USA had at least had Indian wars to justify keeping at least this level of standing army.

Whereas Koryo Korea needed a regular army to deal with their northern frontier against Jin.

The 1170 Korean coup was organized by regular army. The Japanese rebellions of 1156, 1160 and 1180 were uprisings of bands of armed gentlemen, facing an unarmed government.

Their contemporary, Song China, successfully averted military coups and maintained civilian government - and that in the aftermath of Wudai period coups.

Which reforms could early Heian emperors, Fujiwara rulers or insei emperors have undertaken which incidentally would have ensured continuation of civilian court rule?

hmm...so it sounds like the key is having an actual proper Japanese military rather than outsourcing the soldiering business to feudal lords.

Pretty expensive that though, and hard to justify...have some minor conflicts with Korea? A stronger and more challenging Ainu?- perhaps we could introduce a WI I posted yonkies ago. WI the Ainu had 'civilized' and developed a country.

Tyr said:

hmm...so it sounds like the key is having an actual proper Japanese military rather than outsourcing the soldiering business to feudal lords.

Click to expand...

Koryo had a military - but that mutinied, too.

Song military stayed out of politics, though.

Tyr said:

Pretty expensive that though, and hard to justify...have some minor conflicts with Korea? A stronger and more challenging Ainu?- perhaps we could introduce a WI I posted yonkies ago. WI the Ainu had 'civilized' and developed a country.

Click to expand...

They came close to that point, or PAST that point, in late 8th century.

The Koryo and Song regimes were both designed in the aftermath of disintegration of Silla and Tang respectively, in late 9th, early 10th century.

Heian Japan did have some trouble with pirates and samurai rebels as early as late 9th century. And there were the famed double rebellions of Fujiwara no Sumitomo and Taira no Masakado in 935...941.

But nothing as bad as what brought down Silla and Tang. Heian court managed to suppress these rebellions and keep peace for 2 more centuries.

Could the Heian court have undertaken any reforms which incidentally would have averted the samurai takeover in 12th century?

A little bump to see more cogitation if possible..

Tyr said:

hmm...so it sounds like the key is having an actual proper Japanese military rather than outsourcing the soldiering business to feudal lords.

Pretty expensive that though, and hard to justify...have some minor conflicts with Korea? A stronger and more challenging Ainu?- perhaps we could introduce a WI I posted yonkies ago. WI the Ainu had 'civilized' and developed a country.

Click to expand...

Sounds like the problem is that we need to give the warriors someone to fight. Centuries later, when Hideyoshi wanted to control the samurai in a newly-united Japan, he decided to just throw them at Korea and China (although they never did get to the latter). Heian Japan was a little less warlike than Sengoku Japan, so this doesn't need to be an attempt to outright conquer everyone. Just a little more involvement with other peoples.

Perhaps we can start with Japan building a strong alliance with one of the Korean kingdoms - I think they were already in good terms with Silla in Prince Shotoku's day - and then become militarily involved in Korea protecting their ally's interests. They might later become more strongly involved... perhaps some sort of diplomatic marriage and union?