Death of a Dynasty: Emperor Komei of Japan and only heir die in Kinmon incident_1864

In August 1864 Radicals Associated with the Chosu domain sought to kidnap/protect the emperor in Kyoto, setting fire to much of the city in the process. What would be the reprecussions if the conflagration spun out of the control, killing the emperor and his (only) heir, OTLs future Meiji?

You can assume that the radicals will blame the Bakfu for killing him, and that the Bakfu blame the Chosu radicals- that's more or less what happened in 1867. But TTL the heir to the throne is gone as well (of course, eliminating Komei and placing Meiji under Tokugawa "protection" for his own safety is also an interesting alternative, but not the one I am contemplating).

Probable short term consequences:
a. The first Chosu expedition does not back down. It may be defeated or suffer from defections but any legitimacy of rule by the Tokugawa requires they exterminate Chosu, compromise is not an option.
b. Given the abyysmal performance of the Tokugawa in the second Chosu expedition winning outright may not be possible - but the cracks in the Bakfu system, and the outright defection of the Satsuma ware not as advanced. So defeat may give the Tokugawa a bit more of a breathing space to modernize and prepare themselves for the onslaught of the outer lords.
c. Without the loss of legitimacy and resignation of the Togugawa following OTL's imperial support of the rebel outer lords, the Tokugawa may succesfully halt the rebel advance in the alternate boshin war long enough to arrive at a truce - or for EUropean powers to take sides and force a settelement.
d. Divided Japan? Ongoing Feaudalism/warlordism?
e. Do the Japanese imperial dynastic rules allow for succession by a collateral line? If so, who is the closest heir? Can the Tokugawa produce a credible one?

Thoughts?
 
e. Do the Japanese imperial dynastic rules allow for succession by a collateral line? If so, who is the closest heir? Can the Tokugawa produce a credible one?
Japan didn't had any succession law set in stone before the Meijj era, it was just accepted for the Emperor to pass the throne to one son, but there were cases where one line was prioritized (ie Northern vs Southern court) it'll probably fall to the bakufu to decide which Sumeragi will be enthroned, bht it may not be widely accepted, you may get the Boshin War as the War of the Japanese succession.
 
Japan didn't had any succession law set in stone before the Meijj era, it was just accepted for the Emperor to pass the throne to one son, but there were cases where one line was prioritized (ie Northern vs Southern court) it'll probably fall to the bakufu to decide which Sumeragi will be enthroned, bht it may not be widely accepted, you may get the Boshin War as the War of the Japanese succession.

Any Idea why Meiji Japan defined the 14th century Southern Court as the legitimate one in 1911? I thought it was descended from the Northern Court. This offers an interesting cleavage point for between Tokugawa loyalists and the southwestern outer lord alliance. Any suggestions for potential succesors/pretenders from that branch?

Is this fellow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kujō_Michitaka (or his sons) a contender for the Tokugawa selection or am I reading the Imperial family tree wrong?

Perhaps this fellow
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Fushimi_Kuniie
Or his son
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Kuni_Asahiko
Could be the outer lord candidate?
 
Actually not all that much happens. Emperor Komei had adopted several Princes from the branch lines before Meiji's birth (which was rather routine considering the high infant mortality rate), so one of them would inherit. If they all died, then the Bakufu decide on the new Emperor, in consultation with the Imperial Court in Kyoto. The idea that a succession conflict breaks out 9r someone from the Southern lineage succeeds are both very out there, if not near ASB.
 
Actually not all that much happens. Emperor Komei had adopted several Princes from the branch lines before Meiji's birth (which was rather routine considering the high infant mortality rate), so one of them would inherit. If they all died, then the Bakufu decide on the new Emperor, in consultation with the Imperial Court in Kyoto. The idea that a succession conflict breaks out 9r someone from the Southern lineage succeeds are both very out there, if not near ASB.

So there is a clear line of succession- Do you know who the adoptees were?

Obviously they aren't going to all die- they may not even all be in Kyoto when this takes place. If there is a cleare line of succession, then room for dispute about the "rightful heir" seems limited which does not make this scenario (Komei and Meiji die) much diffirent than Komei dying and Meiji surviving. In either case you have a more malleable, presumably underage, emperor, though if he is not Meiji I suppose his family's political position will impact the extent to which the Bakfu can control him.

Either way, if the Emperor is underage and under Bakfu control I suppose the first edict he will issue (If the Tokugawa think it is in their interest to have him issue edicts) is to exterminate the emperor murdering Chosu- especially if there are rumors that the Tokugawa are actually responsible for his death.
 
So there is a clear line of succession- Do you know who the adoptees were?

Obviously they aren't going to all die- they may not even all be in Kyoto when this takes place. If there is a cleare line of succession, then room for dispute about the "rightful heir" seems limited which does not make this scenario (Komei and Meiji die) much diffirent than Komei dying and Meiji surviving. In either case you have a more malleable, presumably underage, emperor, though if he is not Meiji I suppose his family's political position will impact the extent to which the Bakfu can control him.

Either way, if the Emperor is underage and under Bakfu control I suppose the first edict he will issue (If the Tokugawa think it is in their interest to have him issue edicts) is to exterminate the emperor murdering Chosu- especially if there are rumors that the Tokugawa are actually responsible for his death.

I know that one was Prince Kan'in Kotohito, later head of the Kan'in Shinnōke branch, one of the four lines eligible to succeed to the throne if the main line failed to produce an heir. I can find some adopted sons of Emperor Ninko, Komei's father. Not sure if they were still eligible though. Kotohito is the most likely candidate, but the Bakufu had several Imperial Princes in custody as Buddhist Priests/Abbots. I know one was proclaimed or was going to be proclaimed Emperor by the anti-Imperialists during the Boshin war. It wasn't odd for the main line to die out; it had happened as late as 1780, with the accession of Emperor Kōkaku.
 
Last edited:
I know that one was Prince Kan'in Kotohito, later head of the Kan'in Shinnōke branch, one of the four lines eligible to succeed to the throne if the main line failed to produce an heir. I can find some adopted sons of Emperor Ninko, Komei's father. Not sure if they were still eligible though. Kotohito is the most likely candidate, but the Bakufu had several Imperial Princes in custody as Buddhist Priests/Abbots. I know one was proclaimed or was going to be proclaimed Emperor by the anti-Imperialists during the Boshin war. It wasn't odd for the main line to die out; it had happened as late as 1780, with the accession of Emperor Kōkaku.

Prince Kan'in Kotohito was born more than a year after the Kinmon incident. But I get your point- If Komei and son die there are other adopted sons in the line of succession.

The questions are:
a. Does the percieved legitimacy of the line of succesion of adopted sons derive from clearly defined "primogenture "(When they were adopted and/or from what lines) or is the precedent simply that the Bakfu, or the imperial court, or an undefined consultation process, choose the heir based on occult political pull?
b. Are any of the adopted sons out of the direct control of the Bakfu and/or are their natural families associated with the anti-Tokugawa camp?

If the answer to both questions is yes, then some manner of "War of succession" does still seem to me possible so long as:
a. The first Chosu expedition ends in defeat and defection.
b. The timing is such that the members of the post expedition rebel coalition have not allready commited themselves to recognizing the Tokugawa choice for Emperor.
c. A "rescue the Emperor" slogan seems unfeasible or unattractivve to the rebels -for example, if the war becomes a stalemate and they require a unifying symbol and source of legitimacy under their own control to administer their portion of the country.

mind you, that's a lot of If's.
 
Last edited:
I seem to recall that Meiji succession laws was diffirent. It barred female Emperors. And post-war (WW2) succession law was different too.
 
Top