WI: Oda is not slain at Honno-ji

What if Akechi didn't kill Oda Nobunaga at Honno-ji castle? How would Oda go about finishing unifying Japan (I don't think he was quite finished when he was killed)? How do you think Japan would develop with Oda and the Nobunaga Clan at the helm?
 
Nobunaga may not have gone to the socially immobilizing lengths Hideyoshi and the Tokugawa went to OTL to ensure a peaceful realm (rigid statuses, tying peasants to the land, making things harder for merchants, etc);in the aftermath of the Sengoku Jidai, it wasn't out of the question for Japan to go through a kind of "capitalist revolution" (precursor to industrial revolution), advancing the country and the world by who knows how much. Alas, the desire for peace and stability understandably led to a conservative turn, for better or worse.
 
What if Akechi didn't kill Oda Nobunaga at Honno-ji castle? How would Oda go about finishing unifying Japan (I don't think he was quite finished when he was killed)? How do you think Japan would develop with Nobunaga and the Oda Clan at the helm?

FTFY

Anyway, hard to say how much longer he could have lasted if Akechi hadn't pressed him in Honno-ji to commit suicide. He was very nasty to his vassals, and even called Hideyoshi a monkey. If Akechi didn't take him down, there's a fair chance another of his myriad enemies will.

But if he manages to survive all that, we could see slightly more open trade with Europe, in contrast to the policies of the Toyotomi and Tokugawa. He might even continue to flood Japan with Jesuits in the early stages, given how dead set he was on clamping down on the power of the monasteries. However, I can see him turning hostile as he gets wind of word of expanding European power in Asia in the path of the Jesuits. And without much reason to gain access to Nanban guns in the absence of war, he could potentially reenact Ieyasu's ban on Christianity all the same, maybe with even harsher measures to eradicate it.
 

PhilippeO

Banned
Nobunaga may not have gone to the socially immobilizing lengths Hideyoshi and the Tokugawa went to OTL to ensure a peaceful realm (rigid statuses, tying peasants to the land, making things harder for merchants, etc);in the aftermath of the Sengoku Jidai, it wasn't out of the question for Japan to go through a kind of "capitalist revolution" (precursor to industrial revolution)

But if he manages to survive all that, we could see slightly more open trade with Europe, in contrast to the policies of the Toyotomi and Tokugawa. He might even continue to flood Japan with Jesuits in the early stages, given how dead set he was on clamping down on the power of the monasteries.

I'm very skeptical of this. Hideyoshi and Tokugawa doesn't make law just because they conservative or peaceful people, Hideyoshi originally peasant, and Tokugawa participate in 100 battle.

They make laws because it is necessary; Japan had been in civil war for hundred years, and even Tokugawa still had to deal with powerful tozama lord who had divergent interest.

If Oda Nobunaga unify Japan, he would still need to do same thing; otherwise Japan would unravel again, in that case Oda would be footnote in history as someone who unify Japan for a time, but failed to make it enduring.

it should be remembered :
a ) Jesuit / Christianity is weaker during Nobunaga time, when Christianity become more powerful, it would cause problem (from European interference, from Jesuit itself, from potential of religious war, etc)
b ) Christianity is a minority faith, like Huguenot in France, even liberal king would find it necessary to deal with majority faith to keep peace.
c ) Ji-Samurai who live among peasant is main cause of instability in Japan, even if they not revolt, they could resist tax collection or law implementation. various law (rigid social order, transferring samurai from place to place, sword hunt on peasant, force samurai to move into city) is created to solve this problem.
d ) Tokugawa actually had massive trade with Korea and Japan, and even English is permitted in Dejima. English quit because it unprofitable, Spain and Portugal is kicked out because danger of christian rebellion and foreign conquest. Tokugawa is not anti-trade, they simply want peace.
e ) banning Japanese to go abroad also prevent Daimyo to invite mercenaries/foreigner/etc and re-ignite civil war. So does limiting trade to several official port.

It possible Oda could create different solution to this, but if he want peace, he has to deal with the same problem.

And even if he want war with China and Korea, he first must make Japan peaceful, and he will fail in his war, there is no way Japan would have strength to conquer Asia.
 
They [implemented these particular] laws because it is necessary...

It possible Oda could create different solution to this, but if he want peace, he has to deal with the same problem.

Well like I said, I completely understand the reasoning behind the style of government implemented by the Tokugawa shogunate. I'm only saying that, particularly at the dawn of Japanese unification, it was not the only feasible way to bind the country together, establish peace, and preserve order. Religious toleration* does not invariably lead to chaos; allowing peasants to move about (provided they're still disarmed) may lead to fewer taxes in the short term, but allow for more efficient agriculture and growth in the longer term;** and even if policies like forbidding foreign travel are based on the desire to keep peace, they did isolate Japan (with all the problems that entailed) and can quite reasonably be seen as an overreaction (if an understandable one).

So yes, Oda can create a different solution to this, and in some ways his reforms, would have to resemble Hideyoshi's -- he's still going to want (and need) to conduct a census, collect taxes, and disarm the population, for example. But more aggressively conservative policies like tying the peasants to the land, restricting foreign travel, or clamping down on foreigners and Christianity -- policies like those boiled down to trading off future prospects for modest immediate gains or risk curbing. A less cautiously minded shogun may well have found these less appealing.

It would also help a huge deal if the ultimate solution to "excess" samurai got Japan something more than a disastrous war in Korea; better still if they can be used to establish successful *colonies* for Japan, which also helps with the above problems. (For example, Japan may feel less need for taking drastic measures against "idle" peasants if they have a convenient place to send them.)

*not the modern liberal idea of "freedom of conscience", but the more timeless idea that persecution is generally more trouble than it's worth
**and no, this analysis wasn't invented by Adam Smith
 
Top