WI: Oda Nobunaga unified Japan
- Thread starter JosefStalin
- Start date
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
You could have an earlier industrial revolution -- the biggest hurdle stopping Japan in the 17th and 18th Centuries was actually socio-political, as the Tokugawa dynasty sought to stabilize the class system and held merchants among the lowest. There's all kinds of potential here.
Simple, Nobunaga learns of Akechi's treachery in time to survive the 1582 incident.
Simple, Nobunaga learns of Akechi's treachery in time to survive the 1582 incident.
He laid the groundwork for Hideyoshi and Ieyasu, both Nobnanga loyalists, who continued where he left off. One could merely posit (once one stripped away the intrigue and infighting) that if Nobunanga lived, it would continue more or less as they achieved it. As Ieyasu eventually managed to achieve.
There is a saying,"Nobunaga pounds the national rice cake, Hideyoshi kneads it, and in the end Ieyasu sits down and eats it."
Nobunanga might have been the most insightful in terms of economic reform. This may be the most important difference in a Nobunanga Japan vs. an Ieyasu Japan. The latter was more conservative once he had achieved his goal of unification.
I could see an argument made that Nabunanga's policies, if he had lived to unification, may have eventually led to an earlier kick-off to industrialization and an advanced capitalist system by his successors, down the line.
Funny, there is a new Anime starting to stream, "Nobunaga the Fool", that features Oda Nobunanga in a mecha/science fiction setting. Unification is the goal!
There is a saying,"Nobunaga pounds the national rice cake, Hideyoshi kneads it, and in the end Ieyasu sits down and eats it."
Nobunanga might have been the most insightful in terms of economic reform. This may be the most important difference in a Nobunanga Japan vs. an Ieyasu Japan. The latter was more conservative once he had achieved his goal of unification.
I could see an argument made that Nabunanga's policies, if he had lived to unification, may have eventually led to an earlier kick-off to industrialization and an advanced capitalist system by his successors, down the line.
Funny, there is a new Anime starting to stream, "Nobunaga the Fool", that features Oda Nobunanga in a mecha/science fiction setting. Unification is the goal!
RousseauX
Donor
An industrial revolution tend to be built on top of a pre-existing centralized government and the end of Feudalism rather than the other way around. You can't have an industrial revolution in a society still dominated by feudal magnates.
But hey, a Japanese sengoku scenario is bound to be interesting
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
Industrial Revolution's are also always preceded by "capitalist" revolutions (revolutions in the marketplace, in more available and transferable labor, etc), and the conservative economic policies of the Tokugawa, as I said, were the main stumbling blocs here. Nobody said there'd be steam engines by 1600 or anything; Nobunaga still takes care of the unification.
RousseauX
Donor
OH, I misinterpreted you statement, I thought you mean an IR leading up to a unification
John Fredrick Parker
Donor
No no; the Oda unify Japan, then govern in a way allowing for proto-capitalist transformations, in turn paving the way for an IR.
So its been agreed that with Oda ruling Japan there would be a earlier IR, anything else?
Ok, so what do you think? I can see him at least giving Japan a jumpstart into a IR before the Americans arriving.
One of the biggest hurdles to the economic and industrial development of Japan was transportation. Early modern Japan had an absolutely terrible road system (true of just about everywhere, but exacerbated by Japan's mountainous terrain), which acted as a drag on economic activity. Nobunaga was, in comparison to Tokugawa, much more interested in foreign cultures and technologies; it's possible that an increase in interest in European ships, which were just starting to arrive in Japan at this time, would improve the transportation situation in Japan under an Oda regency.
Why not? I'm curious.
I don't think anyone is proposing that an IR would start under Nobunaga. Just laying the road for a somewhat earlier one.
Except that the Europeans are about as likely to sell the Japanese shipping technology as they are to convert en masse to Shinto. And we know this because Hideyoshi tried to do just this. And the Portuguese didn't bite.
Well, let's just start by looking at some of the legacies of immediate post-Nobunaga rulers and see what he'd do that's the same and what he'd do that's different. Remember, a lot of things he'd do similarly to try to keep control over a recently unified, strongly militaristic population.
Hideyoshi: Forbade non-samurai from carrying weapons. Ordered samurai to take up residence in castle towns. Ordered a census. Established a capital at Osaka. Banned slavery. Persecuted Christians. Invaded Korea. Set up a Council of Five Elders as regents.
Ieyasu: Declared himself shogun. Established a capital at Edo. Abdicated in favour of his son. Distanced Japan from trading relations with Europeans. General centralization.
Hidetada: Not much significant reform.
Hidetada: Established the santin kotai system. Anti-Christian policies led to a rebellion at Shimabara. Denied trade access to all Europeans except the Dutch at Deshima. General centralization.
So what would Oda Nobunaga do differently? For starters, the capital of Japan would not be Edo (Tokyo) today. It would either be Kiyosu (a suburb of Nagoya in OTL) or Kyoto.
Given his pro-Western sensibilities (he was kind of a Western geek), I don't think Nobunaga would start a trend towards anti-Christianity or isolation. His heirs might if, like Hideyoshi and the Tokugawa, they grow suspicious of the Europeans. But Nobunaga might bring about a bit more understanding of Europe and Christianity in Japan while alive. I don't think this would lead to early industrialization, but open trade would certainly boost Japanese technology and social mobility in the next two centuries and lead to overseas ventures (piracy, trade, maybe colonization).
On the other hand, I strongly suspect Nobunaga would carry out similar centralization policies to try to keep the newly-conquered country under control. Nobunaga strongly relied on meritocracy and ashigaru peasant armies while conquering, but once in control, I think he'd want to restrict ownership of weapons in massive Tokugawa-style sword hunts.
Hideyoshi: Forbade non-samurai from carrying weapons. Ordered samurai to take up residence in castle towns. Ordered a census. Established a capital at Osaka. Banned slavery. Persecuted Christians. Invaded Korea. Set up a Council of Five Elders as regents.
Ieyasu: Declared himself shogun. Established a capital at Edo. Abdicated in favour of his son. Distanced Japan from trading relations with Europeans. General centralization.
Hidetada: Not much significant reform.
Hidetada: Established the santin kotai system. Anti-Christian policies led to a rebellion at Shimabara. Denied trade access to all Europeans except the Dutch at Deshima. General centralization.
So what would Oda Nobunaga do differently? For starters, the capital of Japan would not be Edo (Tokyo) today. It would either be Kiyosu (a suburb of Nagoya in OTL) or Kyoto.
Given his pro-Western sensibilities (he was kind of a Western geek), I don't think Nobunaga would start a trend towards anti-Christianity or isolation. His heirs might if, like Hideyoshi and the Tokugawa, they grow suspicious of the Europeans. But Nobunaga might bring about a bit more understanding of Europe and Christianity in Japan while alive. I don't think this would lead to early industrialization, but open trade would certainly boost Japanese technology and social mobility in the next two centuries and lead to overseas ventures (piracy, trade, maybe colonization).
On the other hand, I strongly suspect Nobunaga would carry out similar centralization policies to try to keep the newly-conquered country under control. Nobunaga strongly relied on meritocracy and ashigaru peasant armies while conquering, but once in control, I think he'd want to restrict ownership of weapons in massive Tokugawa-style sword hunts.
RousseauX
Donor
Openness == earlier commercial/industrial revolution is an overdone clique with no basis in reality. It should be noted that none of the more open states such as the Ottomans or the Indian princely states were actually able to industrialize despite being quite open with the west. Even western states like Spain failed to industrialize despite being a "normal" European country.
The Tokaguwa Shogunate did three things that permitted the Japanese to be the only industrializing non-European country before the 1950s:
1) They were able tame the samurai class and reduce the authority of the feudal lords. Turning Samurai from the Farmer-Warriors (Ronins) of the Sengoku era into bureaucrat-administrators while forcing the Dayimos into attending the Shogun at Edo rather than remaining in their domain. This had the effect of:
a) establishing an efficient tax collecting agency ran directly by the government (staffed by samurais) and avoiding tax farmers. Tax farmers were an universal practice in those days. Tax farmers, in states as varied as ancien regime France, Ottoman Empire, Mughal India and Qing China all had the effect of over-extracting productive sectors and strangling economic activity (like any nascent industrial sector). Their excesses also provoke resentment towards the government, lending quite a hand to the downfall of every single one of those regimes.
b) When the time came, the government was central enough so once the Modernizers sized them in the 1860s they were able to use it to effective implement top-down industrialization in a way nobody else was. It ended the era where Daiymos can hire Ronins to fight each other or the central government: imperial or Shogunate. And thus when the Japanese abolished Feudalism in the 1860s there was comparatively little resistance in the form of the Boshin war.
2) Keeping Japan out of any stupid foreign adventures like Hideyoshi's invasion of Korea. Those tend to involve a massive amount of silver being spent or exported for little/no gain. In a monetary system based on precious metals this result in massive monetary contraction and therefore overall economic activity. Also I would argue that even a -successful- Japanese acquisition of foreign territory would be of little benefit to industrialization for the most part.
3) Able to implement a lot of top-down economic policies, such as reversing the deforestation of previous eras and forcible introduction of new world crops like sweet potatoes by overriding farmer's fear of the risk of failure by adopting them. This had the effect of increasing agricultural productivity and eventually leading to a surplus that was capable of feeding industrializing cities.
Without those reforms its quite possible Japan simply falls into a second round of Civil War when Nobunaga dies, or one of his successors screw up. It could lead to a situation where the Samurai class effectively become the same class of rent seekers that the Janissary played in the Ottoman Empire and became a burden on the empire which blocks modernization. Nobunaga's heirs could have ended up embroiling the country in another stupid foreign adventure which drains the country of resources and puts the Samurais in their old role of warriors instead of bureaucrats. Basically without the Tokugawa the results might be for Japan in the 19th century to look like Qing China or the Ottoman Empire or Thailand rather than the success that it was.
Last edited:
That depends on how decisive he feels his peasant armies were for victory. He might go in the other direction and establish the beginnings of a centralized professional army that would be completely loyal to him instead of the various daimyos.
Every society reacted to "modernization" differently. But you're right. "Openness" in isolation is not a guarantee of early adoption of industrialization.
I don't think there is the evidence that Nobunaga would have indulged in foreign adventures, or to the same degree as Hideyoshi did. It is interesting that Oda's 2 immediate successors, both close to him, would take such different roads in this matter. Perhaps without the lessons learned from Hideyoshi's adventures, Ieyasu might have gone down the same path.
All in all, I agree with most of what you've laid out (a very comprehensive post)-- that these were the signal Tokaguwa achievements -- but they honestly seem very related to Nobunaga's incipient reforms. If anything, Tokaguwa (apart from Ieyasu's and his successors aversion to foreign influences) was in many ways, very much the true successor to Nobunaga's dreams. Hideyoshi, despite sharing the common aims of unification and centralization, tried it in his own ultimately self-destructive way.
I believe that the Tokaguwa did have the effect of freezing the social classes for the benefit of social control. Evidence would suggest that Oda would have been more liberal in this regard. An argument could be made for increased social mobility and more liberal attitudes to foreign influences might in time had led to greater economic liberalization and growth, as well as a quicker path to technological innovation.
We have the benefit of looking back to the OTL sum of achievements of the Tokagwa legacy. Nobunaga's, in many respects, were still-born, except for the dreams that motivated his OTL successors. We don't know what his hereditary successors (if any) would have done. Hence, he becomes AH fodder. One of the big "What Ifs?" of Japanese pre-modern history.
So, I suggest the possibility, in effect, of a somewhat less insular "Tokaguwa", with a different name, achieving much the same position for Japan, perhaps a little earlier. No more a wild surmise than for the PODs of most TLs on this Site.
Last edited:
It's not even necessary for the Europeans to sell them sailing technology; a more open attitude towards "foreign-inspired" innovation would allow a lot of experimentation with ship design, and with the knowledge that European-style ships are possible, the Japanese could advance quite a ways in improving their internal transportation.