What if the daimyo all wake up with explosive collars around their necks and are forced to fight over Japan to the last man?Okay. If so, what would be something that allows the Japanese Civil War to prolong by several years (Chinese civil war-style is most "satisfactory", so to speak)? Is there nothing that allows this?
AHC: Japanese Civil War
- Thread starter mlp
- Start date
Well, the Chinese warlords didn't need that to keep the civil war ongoing for 20 years...
.....or didn't they?
PhilippeO
Banned
Originally Posted by zeppelinair
Okay. If so, what would be something that allows the Japanese Civil War to prolong by several years (Chinese civil war-style is most "satisfactory", so to speak)? Is there nothing that allows this?
Originally Posted by Emperor Constantine
Nothing I can think off. I mean the Meiji Restoration was pretty much a perfect storm scenario. By the point of the Restoration there was nothing the Shogunate could do to help.
There are several think that may help :
- less support from Imperial Court to Satsuma and Choshu, giving them Imperial banner is decisive point.
- more aggressive and competent shogun, the last shogun didn't pursue war that aggressively and surrender while still have some support.
- more modern and capable shogunal army. a less decisive Toba-Fushimi might give breathing space.
- a genuine succession conflict for Emperor. if there are several emperor candidate, they can prolong the war. the succession should be genuine questionable to most Japanese, some daimyo must also believe Satsuma-Choshu candidate as questionable as Shogun candidate, not just shogun create puppet Emperor.
- more conflict between Satsuma and Choshu.
- more conflict between traditionalist ( Saigō Takamori type ) and reformist on Emperor group.
These are all good points. We've been assuming that the POD is at the start of the Boshin War, but we may actually be able to have an earlier POD that leads to war but creates two more evenly matched sides.
The formation of the Satcho Alliance seems like one possible place.
Emperor Komei is another target for changing. His expulsion order led to the Shimonoseki battles with the Westerners and the retaliatory expeditions against Choshu. Although exactly what would need to be changed to still get the civil war but not have it be so one-sided is beyond me.
Considering the presence of the foreign threat, more evenly matched opponents need not mean a prolonged civil war - an obvious alternative would have been rapid political agreement on terms slightly different from what was finally reached.
For example, a peaceful accommodation with Tokugawas was on the cards and widely supported on both sides from November 1867 to January 1868 - the shogunate was formally surrendered by Tokugawa in November 1867, and it was only in January 1868 that the extremists like Saigo Takamori managed to press through the demand to confiscate the Tokugawa domains.
So... Suppose Tokugawa win the battle of Toba-Fushimi. What next?
Will they go back on their surrender of formal title of shogun?
Will the defeated but, let´s assume, not crushed forces of Choshu and Saigo Takamori surrender to the Tokugawa under whatever their new name is, or drag out the war from their Satsuma, Choshu and Tosa domains?
For example, a peaceful accommodation with Tokugawas was on the cards and widely supported on both sides from November 1867 to January 1868 - the shogunate was formally surrendered by Tokugawa in November 1867, and it was only in January 1868 that the extremists like Saigo Takamori managed to press through the demand to confiscate the Tokugawa domains.
So... Suppose Tokugawa win the battle of Toba-Fushimi. What next?
Will they go back on their surrender of formal title of shogun?
Will the defeated but, let´s assume, not crushed forces of Choshu and Saigo Takamori surrender to the Tokugawa under whatever their new name is, or drag out the war from their Satsuma, Choshu and Tosa domains?
Think of this:
- Initial alliance between Choshu and Satsuma.
- Both "restore" the Emperor and declare war on the Shogun.
- Shogun wins against alliance in the battle of Toba-Fushimi. Stalemate between "Imperial" and Shogunate forces along natural borderlines.
- Great conflict within the Imperial court. Some wish to support the Choshu-Satsuma alliance, some wish to support the Shogun.
- Shogun, thinking the Choshu-Satsuma alliance is still supported by the Empeor, declares a new Emperor, causing even more confusion.
- Within this mess, a Russian-backed Ezo rebellion allows establishment of the Kingdom of Ezo.
- Individual daimyos support either the Shogun, the Emperor or the "New Empeor". Alliances shift constantly.
- Death of several foreigners caught within the conflict prompt foreign powers, such as the US, Russia, Britain, the Netherlands and France to deploy troops in individual domains.
- Angry things did not go as planned, Choshu declares war on Satsuma. With the dissolution of his empire and foreigners taking power, Emperor Komei dies in a fit of anger.
- New emperor meiji declares neutrality from the war. His action is unseen, however, as there already are multiple self-claimed "emperors" within Japan.
....and how possible is this? I don't know. So I ask you whether it is
Last edited:
nobody wants to comment on this? there must be somebody who's knowledgeable in Japanese history....Think of this:
- Initial alliance between Choshu and Satsuma.
- Both "restore" the Emperor and declare war on the Shogun.
- Shogun wins against alliance in the battle of Toba-Fushimi. Stalemate between "Imperial" and Shogunate forces along natural borderlines.
- Great conflict within the Imperial court. Some wish to support the Choshu-Satsuma alliance, some wish to support the Shogun.
- Shogun, thinking the Choshu-Satsuma alliance is still supported by the Empeor, declares a new Emperor, causing even more confusion.
- Within this mess, a Russian-backed Ezo rebellion allows establishment of the Kingdom of Ezo.
- Individual daimyos support either the Shogun or the Emperor. Alliances shift constantly.
- Death of several foreigners caught within the conflict prompt foreign powers, such as the US, Russia, Britain, the Netherlands and France to deploy troops in individual domains.
- Angry things did not go as planned, Choshu declares war on Satsuma. With the dissolution of his empire and foreigners taking power, Emperor Komei dies in a fit of anger.
- New emperor meiji declares neutrality from the war. His action is unseen, however, as there already are multiple self-claimed "emperors" within Japan.
....and how possible is this? I don't know. So I ask you whether it is
If anyone could bring PhilippeO, Dom Pedro III or somebody who is knowledgeable in Japanese history and make them critique what I wrote...
1) Which natural boundaries? Satsuma-Choshu forces in Kyoto, as per the premise, lose battles of Toba-Fushimi - but, again as per premise, large Satsuma-Choshu forces manage to escape being trapped and massacred in Kyoto (east of the shogunal castle in Osaka) and retreat towards Choshu. How will the Shogunate force fare in pursuit? What happens to Okayama and Hiroshima?
2) Komei WAS dead. Meiji had been Emperor ever since February 1867.
Here is a major point of divergence:
a) The retreating Satsuma-Choshu forces manage to carry the Emperor in retreat. In that case, it is logical that the Shogunate needs a new Emperor.
The Shogunate had been keeping an Imperial prince in Edo since 17th century for the specific purpose of deposing the Emperor and substituting their own figurehead Emperor. In 1868, that prince was Kitashirakawa Yoshihisa, and he was duly made the Emperor for the Northern Alliance.
But, considering that as per the premise, the Shogunate recovered Kyoto, they may have access to other imperial princes left behind in Kyoto.
b) Emperor Meiji manages to stay behind. Satsuma extremists are proclaimed scapegoats for intimidating the court (which is perfectly true).
Would the Shogunate then consider distrusting Meiji so far as to consider deposing him? Replacing the Emperor would weaken the propaganda value of having Emperor on their side.
PhilippeO
Banned
agree with chornedsnorkack. there are no natural boundaries. Stalemate can only happen when neither side managed to control Kyoto.
This will cause massive loss of respect to Shogun. they cannot just depose an emperor.
chornedsnorkack scenario :
in this case, position of Shogun is a lot stronger to depose Meiji. He already leaving Kyoto, possibly abducted. I still think depose Meiji is not that easy, he is Komei only son.
in this case, there are no need to replace Emperor, Shogun position is already very strong, Meiji is in their hand. propaganda value is much more valuable. Meiji still teenager at this time, he could be influenced, and apparently he is not as anti-foreigner as his father. Shogunate even could convince him that Choshu fanatic that assassinate his father.
Choshu-Satsuma alliance is very strong at this point. Choshu resist second invasion with help from Satsuma. and civil war on Imperial side at this point is very destructive. this is very unlikely.
in above scenario Shogunate position seems too strong, if Choshu-Satsuma fighting each other while Shogun hold Kyoto and Emperor, civil war will not last that long.
Dom Pedro is better, i only wikipedia reader, not that knowledgeable.
Hi. Thanks for your enthusiasm. And we all base our basic knowledge on wikipedia, so no problem seen there.
I did not state that.
No, it can happen with either side in control of Kyoto.
Treating the case Tokugawa controls Kyoto:
Shogunate had tried to attack Choshu in 1866. And that was a clear defeat of shogunate - under the truce, Choshu was left controlling some lands of shogunate and allies.
But in 1867, Shogunate had embarked on a crash course of military modernization.
Meanwhile, Choshu samurai infiltrated Kyoto for their sneak attack on 2nd of January 1868.
Now, just because Tokugawa´s newfangled modernized troops manage to defeat the infiltrated Choshu "vanguard" at Kyoto does not mean that they would suffice to defeat Choshu main forces entrenched at home. They ALSO have had over a year for extra training, and preparation of fortifications, and the bulk of Choshu forces stayed at home not infiltrate to Kyoto (and, as per the premise, not all of the latter were lost). So if the Tokugawa undertake the Third Choshu Expedition, that might be a stalemate.
Where?
Well, they would not start fighting unless one of the sides has an agreement with Tokugawa. Which they might reach if the alliance looks like losing.
so, if there are to be multiple "Japanese Empires", the old capital of Kyoto needs to occupied by both sides at least once? because, it seems, the satsuma-choshu alliance can have Emperor Meiji and the shogunate can have whoever was kidnapped...
Shogunate need not. Prince Kitashirakawa Yoshihisa was under their control in Edo OTL as per a long standing policy, and he duly was made Emperor by northern alliance.
As per that policy, there were no other princes outside Kyoto, so Satsuma-Choshu alliance needs to occupy Kyoto at least once. But this they did per OTL, from 2...3 January 1868. With PoD after that, they can lose Kyoto and still have an emperor.
OTL, prince Yoshiaki was appointed the nominal commander of imperial armies during the battles of Toba-Fushimi.
WI the PoD is that the Tokugawa win the battle of Toba-Fushimi, and the defeated Satsuma-Choshu forces do not succeed in picking up emperor Meiji in their retreat, but do carry away prince Yoshiaki?
Would they go on to proclaim Yoshiaki emperor, or would they not?
The Japanese dialects West and South of Kansai are conservative compared to Kansai and North of it is quite phonologically identical to Ainu perhaps a two way split could work..I think there would be a Three way split to Japanese - Honshu Japanese, Southern Japanese(Kyushuan) and Ryukyuan the dialects south and west of Kansai are as different to standard japanese as asturian is to spanish perhaps the speakers of those dialects could gain their own identity.
Last edited: