Overcoming the Period of Two Capitals

　Medieval Japan began in the Kamakura period. Japan’s new rulers were the samurai. They were the first people in Japanese history to break away from the ancient dynasty. The samurai established their own government and ruled eastern Japan. At that time, the land of Kanto (eastern Japan), far from Kyoto (the capital of ancient Japan), was close to a lawless land. Still, a number of local governors were boldly undertaking contract governance. Many samurai also competed with each other to develop the manor and expand their territories, and the Kanto region was literally in a state of chaos. This is where the Kamakura shogunate was established. The founder of the Shogunate was Minamoto no Yoritomo, a military commander who put down a coup d’etat.
　On the other hand, the ancient king still reigned over Japan. However, the king’s control was centered on western Japan. This was because the ancient capital was located in western Japan, and the samurai government was established in eastern Japan, where its own rule was unfolding. As a result, the ancient king established a centralized system in western Japan as before, and continued his tyrannical government. The aristocrats owned many manors and lived affluent lives, and yet, they also took a sidelong glance at the independence of the samurai.

　Japan was entering a special period. It was the period of two capitals. Two governments were born in one state, an ancient dynasty existed in and ruled western Japan, while a samurai government was established in and ruled eastern Japan. This was what early medieval Japan looked like. This period of two capitals lasted about four centuries from the Kamakura period to the Muromachi period. This period in which ancient rule and medieval rule coexisted side by side was unique to Japan and found in no other state. It was a remarkable event in world history.
　Similar to Japan, states that progressed from an ancient era to a medieval era were Western European states. However, they did not experience the period of two capitals, because the ancient Kingdom of the Franks (late 5th to 10th centuries) self-destructed. The Kingdom of the Franks was a huge, centralized state, headed by the Frankish kings that ruled all of Western Europe for centuries. The Frankish king dispatched aristocrats to various parts of Western Europe to administer local governments, or ordered local ruling families to govern, and carried out contract governance. This was an archetype ancient rulership, showing the ancient kings, centralized system, and tyranny as the ruling body.
　The Kingdom of the Franks self-destructed in the 10th century. The kingdom split into three, but after that each collapsed and Western Europe became a lawless land, but from among them several medieval states were born. These included medieval France and medieval Germany (Holy Roman Empire), which became France and Germany, etc., today. The Middle Ages in Western Europe began at this time. Therefore, before the 10th century, Western Europe was ancient, and after that it transitioned to the Middle Ages. A vertical line was drawn in the chronology of history. Therefore, there was no period of two capitals.
　(It is generally believed that the Middle Ages in Western Europe began in the 5th century. Namely, after the fall of the ancient Roman Empire. It was then that the Kingdom of the Franks was born and the Middle Ages began. However, this view of history is erroneous, because this kingdom was an ancient state. The Kingdom of the Franks was a centralized state with the king at the top, and it was ruled with tyranny. This was the ancient ruling body,and the same as the ancient dynasty of Japan. This book also proves that the Middle Ages in Western Europe began in the 10th century.)
　After the fall of the Kingdom of the Franks, many feudal lords emerged across Western Europe. Many of these feudal lords were the ruling classes (aristocrats) who held senior positions in the central government or were local governors in the Kingdom of the Franks. During the kingdom’s collapse, they acquired military power and transformed into knights. They defended the territories that they had previously ruled. They banded together their knights, advanced to feudal lordships, contested neighboring lords, and eventually chose one of them through elections to be their king. That person was, for example, the king of medieval France. This was the first medieval state in Western Europe.
　Therefore, in terms of the origins of feudal lords, medieval Japan was quite different from Western Europe in the Middle Ages. In Western Europe, aristocrats transformed into knights, while in Japan, aristocrats remained aristocrats and did not transform into samurai. This was because the ancient Japanese dynasty did not self-destruct and continued to rule the west. And, the nobility continued to look down on samurai as lowly.
　In the Heian period, samurai were the servants of the ancient dynasty and nobility. They included the descendants of military aristocrats in charge of the ancient dynasty’s military affairs, manor administrators, tax collectors, and former local officials and influential peasants who developed their own manors.Many of them belonged to the lower classes of the ancient dynasty. Perhaps for this reason, the samurai dared to set themselves apart from the nobility and attempted to prove themselves as a new class. Samurai devised a simple and sturdy way of life. It was Bushido, the moral code which they should strictly kept as warriors. And the samurai was soon established as an independent race alongside or even surpassing the nobility and priests. Medieval Japanese feared the samurai, but also respected their way of life. Even many Japanese people today, to varying degrees, understand that way of life, and try to live honestly.
　There is another difference between Japanese history and Western European history. That is, while the samurai overthrew the ancient dynasty by force, the knights of Europe did not overthrow the ancient dynasty, and there was no need to do so, because (as already mentioned) the ancient dynasty self-destructed. Japan was the only state in the world that began the medieval era by overthrowing the ancient dynasty. (Medieval England experienced its own kind of transformation from ancient. This will be explained in detail in Chapter 3.)
　Nevertheless, as with Japan, Western European states formed the medieval world. A new class of knights was born, overcoming ancient despotism and building a medieval world (feudal society). Japan and Western Europe were the only places in the world where samurai and knights emerged as independent warriors from ancient dynasties. Samurai practiced bushido, and knights practiced chivalry.
　Samurai and knights were a class that never existed in other states of the world. In states around the world, such as Russia and China, warriors have always been subordinates to ancient dynasties. In this regard, they can be referred to as ancient warriors.
　Samurai and knights, on the other hand, were medieval warriors. They were self-reliant, owning land, but neither agents nor contractors of ancient kings. Both the Kamakura shogunate and the Capetian dynasty, each established by samurai and knights, respectively, were independent regimes from ancient states. This difference is crucial.
　Samurai and knights opened a new era . This era gave rise to a historical concept of feudalism which contrasted with ancient despotism and modern democracy. Hence,history appears as a transition between despotism (ancient), feudalism (medieval), and democracy (modern). Feudalism functioned in Japan for 700 years from the Kamakura period to the end of the Edo period.
　The author will discuss medieval Japan and feudalism in turn, but the term feudalism will no longer be used. Instead of feudalism, this book uses the word ‘divisionism.’ Divisionism is a term coined by the author. This is because the term feudalism has many different interpretations, and its meaning is very vague. By comparison, the term “divisionism” is simple and inorganic, rejecting nuance and suitable for the construction of theory. This word expresses the state of the medieval era in a concise and substantive manner.
　Let us return to the story here. The period of the two capitals was, of course, a period of instability. In the early days of the period of two-capitals', Japan was vaguely divided between the ancient state in the west and the medieval state in the east. Neither had decisive power, and there was a repetition of cooperation and confrontation while appraising one other. However, this period of two capitals ended with the victory of the samurai. In the Sengoku period, the samurai overthrew the dynasty, and the dynasty practically and totally disappeared. The samurai spent about 400 years wresting power from the dynasty. It marked the process of the samurai becoming the sole leader of Japan.
　The samurai triumphed four times against the dynasty. One was the appointment of military governors and lords (1185). The Kamakura shogunate dispatched samurai from Kanto to various regions to maintain public order as military governors, and as lords to manage manors and collect taxes. The former was called shugo, and the latter jito. By Yoritomo who quelled the coup d'etat, the ancient king was forced to accept this policy on the pretext of restoring public order throughout the state. It was a bold intervention into the regional governance of the ancient dynasty. The result was dual administrations. This was because there were already officials dispatched by the dynasty and administrators of the manor lords in various places, and they were working. Naturally, the two competed for the same job. It was a clash between the local rule of the dynasty and the local rule of the shogunate. This confrontation ended in a definitive samurai victory. This was because the samurai drove king and aristocrats away using force. The dynasty repeatedly protested to the shogunate against this tyranny, but this ultimately ended in vain. The dynasty’s local rule was gradually being eroded.

＜Chronology of Medieval Japan＞

Century 12　　　　　　　　　14　　　　　　　　　　　15　　　　　　　　　　　16　　　　　　　　　　　17　　　　　　19
	Two-capitol period
Dynasty	Ancient dynasty and Kamakura shogunate	Ancient dynasty and Muromachi shogunate	Sengoku period	Momoyama government	Edo shogunate
Capital	Kyoto, Kamakura	Kyoto, Kyoto	------------	Osaka	Edo
Founder	Ancient King and Yoritomo Minamoto	Ancient King and Ashikaga Takauji	------------	Toyotomi Hideyoshi	Tokugawa Ieyasu
Major events	Appointment of military governors and lords, Jokyu Rebellion	Japanese architecture Japanese gardens	Collapse of the ancient dynasty, collapse of the Muromachi shogunate, fall of the existing feudal lords, end of the manorial system, and emergence of the sengoku daimyo	Unification of Japan, establishment of the rice assessed tax system, forced relocation of feudal lords to different domains	Sankin-kotai, establishment of the three branches of the Tokugawa family, Buke Shohatto

※The Sengoku period refers to the period from the end
　of the 15th century to the late of the 16th century.

　Another victory for the samurai was the Jokyu Rebellion (1221). The Kamakura shogunate fought against the dynasty and won overwhelmingly. This is also a famous battle. The ancient king wanted to reign as the sole ruler of Japan, and did not want to recognize the samurai government of the east. Therefore, after Yoritomo died, the ancient king plotted to overthrow the Kamakura shogunate. He did this by ordering samurai from across the state to avenge Hojo Yoshitoki (representive of the Kamakura shogunate at the time).
　The Kamakura shogunate became a de facto enemy of the ancient king's court. However, the shogunate did not flee or bow down, and chose to fight the ancient king. It sent a large army towards Kyoto. The result was an overwhelming victory for the samurai. The shogunate expelled the mastermind of the rebellion, the ancient king, and his followers from Kyoto. Furthermore, the shogunate deprived the dynasty of military power. The dynasty no longer had its own army, but the shogunate set up a military governor in Kyoto to keep watch of the dynasty at all times. This placed the samurai in a position of managing the dynasty rather than coexisting with it. The dynasty’s fall was clear.。
　The third victory of the samurai was the collapse of the manorial system. In the Muromachi period, the samurai usurped the manors owned by the ancient king's lineage and court nobles. The samurai had already opened a gaping hole in the local rule of the dynasty, but they also usurped the manors themselves, and took away all the annual tax (taxation and tax collection rights of the manor lords). Therefore, the samurai were no longer the manor lords’ servants (manor administrators) and became the new owners of the manors, receiving the revenue from the manor in its entirety. This process was completed in the Sengoku period.
　In the first half of the 14th century, the Muromachi shogunate was established in Kyoto, a second samurai government that lasted for about 230 years. The problem was the infighting of the shogun lineage. In the middle of the Muromachi period, the families of the shogunate and the powerful feudal lords all suffered missteps due to hereditary succession, resulting in a nationwide civil war. It was the beginning of the fall of the Muromachi Shogunate and the beginning of the Warring States period, which lasted for about 100years.
　The Muromachi shogunate was weakened, and there was practically no “medieval king” to secure the territory. Therefore, more than 50 feudal lords fought for life and death to defend their own territories, seize neighboring territories, or unify Japan. It was a bloody period marked by surprise attacks, assassinations, betrayals, political marriages, and alliances. In the midst of the war, all existing powers collapsed, such as the ancient dynasty, the Muromachi shogunate, and the feudal lords that had been so powerful up to that point all fell. Those who appeared in their place were new feudal lords called sengoku daimyo, who eventually unified Japan and established medieval Japan. (Missionary Francis Xavier visited this war-torn land of Japan.)
　It was during this period of disturbances that the manorial system also collapsed. Manors were an essential source of revenue for the ancient dynasty, ancient king's lineage and nobility. By owning a manor, these people somehow managed to survive the loss of military power and the weakening of local rule. However, they lost everything to the samurai, even their source of revenue.
　The fourth victory of the samurai was the introduction of free markets and open guilds. During the Sengoku period, sengoku dimyo invited merchants and craftsmen into their territory and allowed them to operate freely. Moreover, sengoku dimyo did not take taxes from them. It was a policy aimed at revitalizing the state’s market economy and making the state richer and stronger militarily.
　Until then, some merchants and craftsmen had been under the control of the ancient dynasty and temples, having been granted special privileges, and they continued to carry out their lucrative activities in their own way. Therefore, they paid taxes to the ancient dynasty and temples.
　However, with the introduction of free markets and open guilds,almost all merchants and craftsmen moved their activities to the states of feudal lord and started doing business freely. And, of course, they no longer paid taxes to the ancient dynasty and temples. It was a break from the rule of the ancient dynasty and temples, as the ancient dynasty could not stop the migration of such merchants and craftsmen.
　Thus, the ancient dynasty lost its military power, was stripped of its manors, lost taxes from the peasants, and lost taxes from the merchants and craftsmen due to their estrangement. The ancient dynasty had been boxed in from all sides. It was game over.
　On the other hand, the samurai ruled fully over the nobility, temples, peasants, merchants and craftsmen, as the ruler of Japan had clearly been replaced. This marked the end of ancient rule. The ancient king lost the powers of military, financial, and local rule. Literally, the king was left stripped of everything. The ancient king could no longer say that he was the ruler of the nation.
　Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1537-1598) was the warlord who controlled the Sengoku period. He won battles against feudal lords across the state, unified Japan, became the new medieval king, and established the Toyotomi government. The capital was Osaka. It was the beginning of the Momoyama period (1585-1603). This was a short, but important period, for medieval Japan.
　Hideyoshi had given the ancient king the coup de grace. Hideyoshi effectively ruled Japan, although formally he followed the ancient king. It was to make the king a symbol of the state.Hideyoshi supported the ancient king financially, and allowed the royal family to continue their hereditary succession. In return, he stripped the ancient king of all real power, confined him to the ancient king's palace in Kyoto, and gave him only the duties of conferring official ranks, changing the name of the periods, and ceremonial duties of the dynasty. It was merely formal work. The ancient king had become a titular existence. This was the state of ‘reigning but not ruling.’ The ancient king lived in a world of learning, a condition that continued until the Meiji Restoration in the 19th century.
　In this way, the ancient ruling body (ancient king, centralized system, tyranny) completely disappeared, and ancient Japan collapsed. This was about 1,000 years after the Asuka period. Hence, that which disappeared during the Sengoku period was ancient. And the medieval era , which began with Yoritomo, passed through the period of two capitals, blossomed with Hideyoshi, and reached its zenith in the Tokugawa period. This is an overview of 700 years of medieval Japanese history.
　Now, the symbolization of the ancient king is a wonder of the world that occurred only in Japan. This is because in world history, ancient kings were either murdered or self-ruining. The ancient king of the west Frankish kingdom self-destructed. This took place in the 10th century. And the ancient king of England was murdered in the 11th century in the Norman invasion of England. That is a famous historical event called the Norman Conquest. Then the Normans established the Norman dynasty in England.
　In the 17th century, the Glorious Revolution broke out in England. This happened 600 years after the Norman Conquest. As a result, the medieval dynasty was overthrown, and the medieval king was deprived of real power, becoming king in symbol only. This was the state of reigning but not ruling. The people (former feudal lords, the wealthy, etc.) assumed sovereignty over England and convened the world’s first national parliamentary government.
　The royal family of the medieval England has survived until today in the 21st century, repeating hereditary succession while being isolated from the political arena. For example, the late Queen Elizabeth was a descendant of this royal family. She was a medieval symbolic queen. Therefore, an ancient symbolic king does not exist in England nor in the world. The ancient imperial family of Japan is the only royal family in the world that has survived three histories: ancient, medieval and modern. This is why the ancient kings of Japan are the only kings in the world to be called emperors.
　An emperor is a king among kings or a ruler above kings. Thus, the ancient king as a ruler above Hideyoshi (a medieval king) in the Momoyama period can be said an emperor, albeit a symbolic one. And the ancient king still reigns symbolically over the Japanese people today.

Sovereignty of Medieval Kings

　Let us discuss specifically the medieval era . First, let us take a look at the rulers,the medieval kings - of this time period. In Japan, medieval rulers were the samurai, or more precisely, feudal lords. Feudal lords changed over time, but there were dozens or even hundreds in Japan. They owned large territories, had many samurai under their command, boasted great military power, and ruled over the peasants. Their names have changed over time; they were known as jito, shugo daimyo, sengoku daimyo and daimyo.
　The feudal lords the choose their leader from among them. And they grant him the great authority to decide on the ownership of land. For example, the lords of Kanto chose Yoritomo as their leader, and Yoritomo recognized the land ownership of the lords with this great authority, and the criteria for this decision were that the lord owned and controlled the land for many years, that the lord had been loyal to Yoritomo, and that the lord had fought the enemy spectacularly and protected Yoritomo.
　The feudal lords obey Yoritomo’s ruling on land ownership because they want it, and because it is the only way to officially recognize and guarantee their land ownership.
　Yoritomo granted the feudal lord lordship as well as relief of his lands. Lordship is the right of a feudal lord to rule over his subjects (warriors and peasants). The feudal lord is the ruler of his domain. He used the samurai to fight neighbouring enemies and expand his domain, and the peasants to produce agricultural products, accumulate wealth and stabilize the management of the domain.
　And lordship is a right of existence and a human right that emerged for the first time in Japanese history. The existence of lordship was a fundamental distinction between ancient and medieval times, because only kings hold power in ancient countries. Therefore, there was no right to existence or human rights in ancient countries.
　By the way, the samurai leader used to be one of the companions of the feudal lords, but once they became their leader, they ruled over the lords strictly. As soon as Yoritomo became the leader of the lords, he began to command them. For example, when they were ordered by Yoritomo to avenge the Heike, the feudal lords risked their lives to fight the Heike army. This clear distinction that emerged between ruler and ruled was commonplace and inevitable for medieval people.
　This raises questions: such were the strange acts of feudal lords - because they elected a medieval king, and that person ruled over them. At first glance, it appears ironic; it was a strange development.
　Yet, we in the modern world do the same thing. The people of a modern state enact a constitution as a national consensus, and that constitution is ruler based on the rule of law. In fact, people live according to the constitution. Citizens of modern states and feudal lords of the medieval era act the same. Those who choose are ruled by those who are chosen. However, the difference is that feudal lords chose a person (medieval king) as their ruler, and that is a world of rule of men. On the other hand, the people of modern states choose the law (constitution): a world of rule of law. This is a crucial difference.
　Ancient rulers, medieval rulers, and modern rulers are thus essentially different beings. Therefore, the rulers of Japan underwent the following transformations in order of ancient king, medieval king (feudal lord), and constitution (citizen). And it took a lengthy period of 700 years for rulers to transition from king to constitution. This time period was the medieval era . The king of an ancient state was a person, and the king of a medieval state was also a person. In other words, in the ancient era and the medieval era , the rulers were men and so it can be said that the ruling system was the rule of men.
　The medieval king, on the other hand, only existed by agreement of the feudal lords. The constitution, which is the modern ruler, is also established based on national consensus. The medieval era and the modern era share the fact that the ruled chooses the ruler. In either case, this is because there is no absolute ruler like the ancient king.
　From these facts, we can say the following: rulers known as feudal lords existed between ancient and modern eras, and the medieval era was a transitional period in which the rule of men was replaced by the rule of law, and the ancient king was replaced by the constitution. Thus, the medieval era represents a historical intermediary that closely connects ancient era and modern era, possessing half ancient elements and half modern elements. This epitomizes the duality of the medieval era . And, this is an essential aspect of the medieval era .

Medieval Land Division

　It was an honor for a medieval king to be given the prerogative of determining land ownership, but at the same time it was a challenging obligation. Because, his determination had to be fair. For the feudal lords who fought for their lives on a daily basis, it was only natural that rewards should be granted fairly. This is why they chose a medieval king.
　Rights come with obligations. Rewards were determined by reality (combat merit and loyalty), and they must be fair. They were not decided by injustice, of course, nor favoritism arising from blood ties or connections, nor formats such as age or status. Needless to say, the king was not allowed to use this right for personal purposes.
　Therefore, if a medieval king did not exercise fair judgment, he was often accused by feudal lords of breaking the inviolable rule of the medieval era , or met a tragic end. Unilateral rulings were condemned or demanded to be rescinded, or resulted in the king being dethroned or assassinated. This was an example of feudal lords exercising their right of resistance. This fair rule was known always as a necessity for rulers by many medieval kings of Japan, including Yoritomo, Hideyoshi, and Ieyasu.
　The concept of fairness existed even in the ancient era . Ancient kings were expected to be fair when resolving various disputes that occurred domestically. However, the ancient king was absolute ruler and never assumed any obligations. Yet ancient thinkers expected the king to be fair and held the opinion that he was virtuous. This is because fair rule stabilizes the state and makes the people obedient. However, the ancient king who fulfilled these expectations was rare. It was inherently difficult for ancient kings to be fair, because in ancient states they held absolute power, i.e., there were no lords and therefore no right of resistance. Thus, there was nothing to stop the sovereignty, and it expanded without limit. This was an environment in which great rulers were hard to come by and tyrants often emerged. This is easily understood by looking at the ancient nations of the 21st century, Russia and China.

Sovereignty of Medieval Kings, Again

　The feudal lords gave the medieval king the prerogative of division and apportionment, but they also bestowed upon him another privilege. It was a matter of course, but this privilege was the power to rule over Japan. There were three forms of power that the medieval king used to rule over Japan. One was the power to control the feudal lords, and another was the power to control all of Japan. And the other was the power to govern their own territory.
　The first form of power involved the direct command and orders of the medieval king to the feudal lord. For example, Yoritomo ordered the feudal lords of Kanto to capture rebels. Or Hideyoshi ordered the feudal lords to conquer Korea. Upon receiving the order, they quelled the rebellion or immediately crossed the sea. Thus, the medieval king set the feudal lords to work in an arrogant fashion, as this was his prerogative. At first glance, this appears like the tyranny of an ancient state, but such politics were not a tyranny; they represented the unique politics of the medieval era. This was because a medieval king could control a feudal lord individually, but not his people.Those who ruled over their people were feudal lords.
　This marked the existence of lordship. Lordship is a kind of extraterritoriality. It was the administrative power that a feudal lord used to rule over his own people--the judicial power, the right to tax, the right to collect taxes, and so forth. Medieval kings respected this lordship and could not intervene in the feudal lord’s territorial rule, as the medieval king was the one who granted the lordship.
　On the other hand, all power is held by the ancient king in the ancient state, and is not divided. The nobles are also the king’s subject and have not lordship. Therefore, there is nothing to block his order. The king’s order become absolute and reach each and every citizen directly, whether rational or emotional. That is tyranny, and it is extremely dangerous politics.
　State power had changed. The state power of the medieval Japan was divided into two: one was sovereignty and the other was lordship. The king was no longer absolute ruler, as he had become the equal of a feudal lord. This dichotomy of state power meant the disappearance of ancient absolute power, and marked a transition from absolute rule to mixed rule. It was historically groundbreaking.
　The king recognizes the power of the feudal lord and no longer infringes on it. The division of royal power was a powerful blow against despotism, which put a certain limit on the exercise of royal power. The ancient autocratic rule lost its legitimacy, and decentralized rule was established.
　Tyranny existed absolutely in ancient era, but in the medieval era it became a half-hearted existence, appearing at some times and disappearing at others. Unfortunately, despotism was strong and did not disappear completely in the medieval era. It erupted, especially in the late medieval era, in its cruel form, causing people to suffer.
　Then the people needed another blow to overthrow tyranny altogether. It was the second blow, carried out at the end of the medieval era and during the Meiji Restoration, when revolutionaries did not reduce the royal power but annihilated it itself. In other words, the symbolization of the king, or the killing of the king. Two blows, one in the early medieval era and one in the late medieval era erased tyranny from human society altogether. (More on the second blow, and why despotism in the medieval era was halfway, will be discussed in detail later.)
　The author refers to this equality between the medieval king and the feudal lord as “the equality of two.” This marked the emergence of egalitarianism. Then the medieval era overcame ancient despotism, and medieval divisionism was born. This equality was not just a medieval phenomenon, it was also a historical one. This is because the equality of two changed its appearance through the modernization revolution and transformed into the “equality of all people.” This was the birth of true rule of law. Thus, egalitarianism evolved from ancient inequality, to the equality of two in the medieval era, to the equality of all people today.

Ancient era	Absolute monarchy	Sovereignty only	Tyranny
Medieval era	Mixed monarchy	Sovereignty, lordship, resistance right	Lord-Subject Politics

　It should be noted that neither sovereignty nor lordship is unconditional, for there were no absolutes in the medieval era . It is one of the core aspects of the medieval era, though, they were established under certain conditions. First, sovereignty was established when the king respected the lordship of the feudal lords, did not infringe on them, fairly evaluated their loyalty and military exploits, and rewarded them appropriately. If so, their right of resistance would not emerge and the sovereignty would be fully recognized.
　On the other hand, feudal lordship was established when feudal lords were loyal to the medieval king and completed their campaigns. In that case, their lordship was recognized and their territorial control established. This was the essence of medieval rule in Japan. In the medieval era , which gave rise to the relationship between rights and obligations, people clearly recognized the obligations to obtain rights, and the rights obtained after fulfilling these obligations. Unilateral absolutism had already been eliminated.
　This relationship between the medieval king and the lord in the medieval era was basically the same as the relationship between the constitution and the people of a modern state. This is because, as long as the people obey the law and carry out civic duties such as paying taxes, the constitution guarantees the people’s safety and security. And as long as the constitution is a consensus of the people, the people will respect the constitution and will not amend it. In this respect,the people and the constitution are equals.
　In the medieval era , there were three forms of sovereignty. The second power was the sovereignty of complete control held by the medieval king over Japan as a whole. It was used only for matters that extended beyond feudal territories to all of Japan, such as the land system, tax system, control of feudal lords, military affairs, and diplomacy. The purpose was to create order and maintain security throughout the state.
　Yoritomo judged land disputes between feudal lords and prevented strife. The Kamakura shogunate established the samurai law (Goseibai Shikimoku), controlled the samurai, and established order in samurai society. Hideyoshi promulgated the rice assessed tax system to all feudal lords and all peasants, and established a unique land system and tax system for samurai families. The Tokugawa shogun clarified and strengthened the lord-subject relationship of the samurai through the institutionalization of Sankin-kotai (alternate attendance at the shogunate).
　The third power of the medieval king was local governance. For example, the Tokugawa family had a special power to rule only the land of Kanto, which was their own territory. The Tokugawa family implemented detailed policies closely related to daily lives of the samurai, peasants, and townspeople living in the Kanto region. Since this form of politics was unique to the Tokugawa family, other feudal lords had no relation to it. This was because they all had their own territorial sovereignty. Even so, they may have sometimes referred to Tokugawa’s local politics.
　This was the sovereignty of a medieval king. If including the prerogative to divide the land, then there were four forms. This was the result of the division of state power.
　The difference between ancient sovereignty and medieval sovereignty is therefore clear. Symbolically speaking, this was the difference between absolute and mixed. Or the difference between concentration and division. Or the difference between dictatorship and cooperation. Based on this difference, the form of the state (ruler, state system, political form) was divided, and each unique state was formed. This was the ancient state, and the medieval state.

Decentralized System Developed by Yoritomo

　This section will explain the decentralized system. Decentralization was one ruling body of the medieval era , and it was a state system unique to this time period. This system was born in the Kanto region in the 12th century. At that time, this region was a land of lawlessness, where unrest continued. There were about 20 small and medium-sized feudal lords competing with each other for power. Under the manorial system, they put their energy into developing the land, or they snatched land from each other. But their real enemies were the local officials. The local officials had been contracted by the ancient king's dynasty to administer the provinces, but they abused their power for personal gain, and embezzled the lands of the feudal lords according to petty reasons. Also troubling them (as the author has already mentioned) were relatives of Kiyomori, the individual who started the coup d'etat. They took advantage of Kiyomori’s power to increase their power and oppress the neighboring feudal lords.
　Decentralization was developed in a land of such turmoil. The biggest problem for the feudal lords was that there was no absolute person who clearly recognized land ownership in the Kanto region. But they no longer wanted to depend on the ancient king, because he was incapable of ruling Kanto; rather his officials were tyrannical and tormented them. The feudal lords had given up on the ancient king and sought their own rule. Such feudal lords attempted two things. One was to possess the military might to oppose local officials, and the other was to create an authority to legalize land ownership. These two were essential to restoring order to the Kanto region.

　The feudal lords chose Minamoto no Yoritomo as their leader. Yoritomo descended from a distinguished military aristocrat and his grandfather was a warlord respected by the Kanto samurai. Yoritomo would become their representative and an authority in the Kanto region. The samurai rallied under Yoritomo, entered into a lord-subject relationship, formed a powerful samurai group, and murdered or expelled high-handed local officials from the Kanto region. At the same time, Yoritomo responded to their requests by exercising his prerogatives, and clearly reassured the feudal lords of the land they had previously controlled as their property. These land ownership rights became official in the Kanto region. Therefore, anyone who encroached on their territory was beheaded by the feudal lords who had a lord-subject relationship with Yoritomo. (The lord-subject relationship will be detailed later.)
　The Kanto region had become a patchwork state. As a result of Yoritomo’s land rights, the land, people and power of Kanto were divided among 20 or so feudal lords. Lords owned their own territories, governed their people, and accumulated wealth. This was medieval divisionism and decentralized governance.
　Yoritomo was their leader and ruler, but he did not control all of Kanto. He owned only Kamakura (the capital of the Kamakura shogunate, part of Southern Kanto), and did not more than govern it. There was no absolute power, centralized system, or tyranny there. Rather than the power of one person, multiple people cooperated based on trust, formed a ruling class, and ruled. This was the basic form of medieval rule in Japan.
　The feudal lords of the Kanto region were nameless samurai, unlike the aristocrats and powerful temples of the capital. For them, the emergence of the manorial system was ground-breaking, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. It became possible to own land, which meant being self-reliant. This resulted in liberation from slavery. The acquisition of land was a free competition, which excluded power and privilege. It was the denial of despotism. As a result, the feudal lords awakened to relativism. They asserted themselves through land ownership, but at the same time recognized their competitors. To recognize oneself was to recognize others. Self-reliance was not just for the individual, but other people as well. It was a world of mixed rule. It was a world that did not recognize the reign of an absolute ruler. The birth of this relativism became the driving force behind the transformation of history, and created a new form of rule in the Kanto region called divided government. In that respect, the manorial system, which allowed private ownership of land, prepared the medieval era for the future and greatly advanced the history of Japan.
　This was the moment when the samurai strengthened their spirit, and that strengthening opened a hole in the side of the ancient despotism and established divisionism, creating a new ruler in the form of the samurai, a new society in the form of feudal society and a new country in the form of medieval state.
　And in Japanese history, once again, a strengthening of the spirit occurred. It’s time for a modern revolution. Its strengthening was the second blow to despotism, and its annihilation. At that time, royal authority would completely disappear and a modern nation ruled by law would be born. （More on the second blow to despotism later.)
　Becoming mentally tough is not a momentary thing. It spread throughout Japan over several centuries. For example, the spirit that determined　Japan’s medievalization was not limited to a few samurai, but spread out and deepened over time, inhabiting samurai in all regions, and eventually even peasants and townspeople did. As a result, the ancient despotic system was gradually eradicated.
　The transition from ancient times to the medieval era to modern times is not simply a chronological change, nor is it due to the appearance of heroes. This is the result of people’s spirits becoming stronger and history evolving. This is the fundamental reason why Japanese history was divided into three parts: ancient, medieval and modern.
　In the 14th century, the Kamakura shogunate collapsed, transforming Japan into a land of chaos, with strife raging across the state for decades. Ashikaga Takauji (1305-1358) settled this upheaval, unified Japan, and established the Muromachi shogunate in Kyoto. The Muromachi shogunate was Japan’s second medieval dynasty. Ashikaga divided the land of the whole state among thirty-odd feudal lords. At that time, the decentralized system had spread all over Japan, making it literally a decentralized state.
　The Muromachi shogunate lasted for about 200 years, but in the latter half of the period, the power of the Shogun weakened, and as a result, land ownership rights ceased to function effectively. No one trusted the land ownership rights administered by the Shogun. Naturally, the land fell into a state of war, marking the failure of the decentralized system. The feudal lords built castles with donjons, armed themselves with guns, and with brave samurai as their subjects, they began to plunder their territories. Japan found itself in a period of rivalry. Only force guaranteed survival. The borders of their territory changed day by day and were constantly influx. Many lives were lost.
　In the latter half of the 16th century, however, the period of conflict finally ended. Hideyoshi unified Japan. He won many battles and took control of feudal lords all over the state. Choosing Osaka as his base, he built a magnificent castle and reigned as the new medieval king. Feudal lords across the state recognized him as the leader of the samurai families and followed him. It is said that it took around 100 years of war for the samurai to decide their leader.
　As a principle of the medieval era, feudal lords gave Hideyoshi the prerogative of land ownership rights. He therefore divided the land and gave them territories according to their merits and loyalties. This marked the revival of decentralization. They all became masters of one domain and one castle. No one occupied all of Japan. Hideyoshi only owned the Kinki region, which was just part of the state. The rest of the land was divided among the feudal lords. Hideyoshi respected the lordship of the feudal lords and did not interfere in the management of their territories, did not deprive them of their right to collect taxes, or intervene in the territorial laws they established.
　At the beginning of the 17th century, Hideyoshi’s short reign ended. His successor as the new medieval king was Tokugawa Ieyasu (1543-1616). Tokugawa established his shogunate in Edo (today Tokyo), dividing the land into 260 parts and giving each to 260 feudal lords.
　In this way, the land of Japan had been divided repeatedly for 700 years since Yoritomo. This marked the deepening of divided government. The Tokugawa shogun did his best to maintain public order. The 260 feudal lords also competed with neighboring provinces for the management of their territories, and worked to develop the industries and cultures of their territories. As a result, the land of Japan was literally developed to every corner, and national power increased. The Edo period was a peaceful time that lasted for 270 years. (It was around this time that the German doctor and botanist Engelbert Kaempfer visited Japan.)
　Edo-period Japan was like a federation of 260 different states. This gave rise to 260 independent administrative and judicial organs, 260 standing armies with excellent combat capabilities, 260 different economic policies in force, and 260 kinds of special products, local cuisine, academic institutions, sake, and festivals. How many states in the 17th century world had such a vibrant, diverse society and military might?
　The reason why Japan is a tourist powerhouse today is precisely because of the decentralized system. This is also thanks to the peace of the Edo period. Modern Japan is still home to not only ancient aristocratic culture and temple architecture, but also many unique medieval industries, traditions, and cultures that have existed since the Kamakura period in towns and villages throughout the state. The townspeople’s culture flourished especially in the Edo period, symbolized by kabuki, ukiyo-e, kimono, haiku, sumo, travel, and fast food. Many of these are beloved by people all over the world today. In that respect, Japan has become a destination that tourists from all over the world never tire to experience.
　The tourism business of ancient states, however, is modest, and it can be said that ancient states are small tourism states. This is because there is not much to see in ancient states - to put it bluntly, it is only the capital of the state. These destinations often contain the gorgeous palaces of ancient kings and majestic religious buildings. (In Japan, it would be Kyoto.) Meanwhile, their rural areas are lonely and poor. There are no unique traditions, cultures or industries. ――― Except natural spectacles, of course.
　This is because ancient states are ancient centralized states. Since they have not progressed to a medieval era , the land was not divided, there were no feudal lords, and therefore provinces were just lands to be ruled and taxed by local governors. Provincial governors did not feel attached to the land, and returned to the capital as soon as they finished the term of office of several years. So the regions of an ancient state are destitute. The only thing that flourished in an ancient state was the capital of the ancient king. This cruelty and deformity are major characteristics of an ancient state, and the inevitable result of its form of rule. Therefore, ancient states can be said to be small tourism states where there is indulgence in just one luxury.

＜Click on the image to see it larger.＞

　However, Japan soon experienced a major setback. At the end of the Edo period, Japan was a wretched state. In the 19th century, when Western European states and America entered Japan, Japan was already a backward state. It had fallen far behind and lagged in many fields, including diplomacy, weapons, medicine, science and technology, administration, and justice.
　What interrupted Japan’s development, ironically, was the long period of peace during the Edo period. This was because in the Edo period, Japan did not hasten forward, but simply laid down and rested for a long time. A peaceful state without fierce competition loses momentum and naturally stagnates. And Japan’s surrounding states were all ancient states; they also practiced isolation and did not actively interact with other states, so Japan was free to enjoy its idle peace.
　By comparison, much of the history of medieval Western Europe was a series of wars. It was a cycle of long wars and short peace. In that respect, the medieval history of Western Europe was considered to be their warring states period. With conflicts between medieval kings and feudal lords, conflicts between feudal lords, internal strife within dynasties, conflicts between medieval kings and the Pope, the Crusades, the pandemic of the Black Death, wars with neighboring states, multilateral wars emanating from religious revolutions, and finally, civil wars of the modern revolution, -----medieval Western Europe fought almost nonstop. This long period of war hardened Westerners; they not only evolved weapons, but also established realism. It was the vanishing of authoritarianism, formalism, precedent and religious forces in the realpolitik. Things began to be considered frankly, coldly, and rationally.
　In the 19th century, these Western European powers advanced into peaceful Japan. Japan was surprised and panicked. The low-ranking samurai of the western part of Japan decided on emergency defensive measures and Japan’s future course, using trial and error. They became the revolutionaries of the Meiji Restoration and took the first steps to abolish the divided government system. They crushed the feudal states throughout the country, deprived the feudal lords of privileges and concentrated all power in Tokyo. It was the decisive execution of the return of land and people to the dynasty and the abolition of the han domain system. This made Japan a centralized state and unified the will and actions of the nation. The decentralized system that supported Japan for 700 years disappeared.
　This marked a great gyration of history. The revolutionaries not only changed the state system, but also wiped clean the medieval king (Tokugawa) and the feudal lords and put the constitution in place as the new ruler. And they held a congress. This is when the modern ruling body of constitution, centralized system, and democracy were established. It was a modern revolution that destroyed the medieval era and established the modern era . Today’s Japan is an extension of this.
　While a bit rushed, this concludes the author’s explanation of the emergence and disappearance of Japan’s decentralized system. Decentralization is a medieval state system that existed between the ancient centralized system and the modern centralized system. The land, people, and state power, which had been a single mass in the ancient era , were first roughly divided during the Kamakura period, and then subdivided into various forms over time. That is the 700-year history of medieval Japan.
　Therefore, Japanese history is represented by the transition from the ancient era (tyranny) to the medieval era (divisionism) to the modern era (democracy). The history of Japan was a beautiful transition that progressed step by step. The medieval era was directly and successively into the modern era. Hence, Japanese history cannot adopt the history of an early modern era . Wherever the early modern era is inserted into Japanese history, it distorts the gradual development of this history. The reason why the early modern era is unnecessary will be explained in detail in Section 2 of Chapter 2.

Lord-Subject Politics of Feudal Lords

　The author will continue his description of the ruling body of the medieval era . This section deals with lord-subject politics. Politics peculiar to the medieval era appeared after the disappearance of the founders of shogunates, such as Yoritomo and Ieyasu. The shogunates, which lost their authoritative founders, sought a guideline for rule. Shogunates fell into confusion for a time, as powerful lords began to clash over control. Lord-subject politics was thus the invented medieval politics, which was the original politics of decentralized rule.
　It was load-subject politics in which medieval kings and feudal loads shared power and exercised it jointly.
　Representatives of feudal lords held meetings under the medieval king, formed their agreements, and decided on various policies, managing Japan as a whole. Medieval kings usually selected a small number of trusted feudal lords to participate in lord-subject politics. The participants tackled the rule of Japan as those who governed the samurai family and at the same time as those who maintained the existing system. Lord-subject politics first centered on the samurai family, and then the king’s lineage. This form of politics (as the author has already mentioned) focused on four things. First was land ownership rights, second was control of individual feudal lords, third was control of Japan as a whole, and finally fourth was control of one’s own territory.
　Lord -subject politics changed its name over time. The Kamakura period’s lord-subject politics is called Shikken politics, the muromachi period ‘s politics Kanrei politics, and the Edo period’s Rojuu politics. This succession of politics forms shows　 that medieval kings and feudal lords clearly recognized tyranny as the politics of the past and lord-subject politics as the medieval ones, although each of these three types of politics had its own peculiarities and differences to some extent.

＜Political Transition in Japanese history＞

	Ancient state	Medieval state
The ruling body	Tyranny	Lord-subject politics
The means of control	Direct imperial rule, regency cloistered rule	Sikken, Kanrei, Rojuu politics

※One of the medieval theories holds that the medieval era began with the initiation of the cloistered rule, but this is incorrect. As seen above, the cloistered politics is a means of control　of the ancient state, but not the ruling body that　marks history. It is merely one of tyrannies that support the ancient rule, as well as direct imperial rule and regency.

　As for the number of rulers(politicians), ancient countries have an ancient king alone, medieval countries have a few to dozen feudal lords, and modern countries have several hundred professional politicians as a representative of the people. The shift of this number from 1 to 10 to 100 symbolically expresses the process of fragmentation of state power, while revealing the development of egalitarianism. History progresses in stages.
　Democracy is the last form of government that humankind has attained, and the highest. It may have its drawbacks, but democracy is far superior to tyranny or lord-subject politics. In this regard,Japanese people had indeed achieved one of their dreams.

Difference Between Central Government and Lord-Subject Government

　Japan in the Edo period did not have a national flag, national anthem, or national treasure, because Japan in the Edo period was a decentralized state, but not a central state. For example, the flag of the Tokugawa shogun was the flag of the Tokugawa family, not a national flag. Each of the 260 feudal lords had their own family flag, meaning there were 260 family flags in Japan at that time. Japan’s national flag, national anthem, and national treasury were born in the Meiji period when the centralized system was established by the modern revolution. In other words, the modernization revolution can occur and function legitimately only when the ruling system of the previous period was decentralized. Therefore, if the Edo period had been a centralized system, the revolution would never have come to pass.
　Well, the revolutionaries set up a provisional government in Tokyo to create a centralized Japan. This would soon become the central government of modern Japan. The central government literally indicates the center of Japan, controls all of Japan’s land, people, and state power (military, legislative, administrative, judicial, taxation, tax collection, etc.), and governs Japan in a unified manner.
　On the other hand, the shogunate in the medieval era cannot be called a central government. The Edo shogunate was a place where the shogun and feudal lords jointly executed politics; it was a lord-subject government that had not a national treasury. The Edo shogunate’s financial resources were based only on taxes collected from the Kanto region, not taxes from all over the country. The right to levy and collect taxes in the Edo period was clearly divided among the 260 feudal lords. Therefore, the shogunate cannot be called a central government.
　This is not just a matter of language, but the narrative of the basis of the medieval era. Calling the Edo shogunate the central government is a big mistake. Calling it a central government reveals a lack of real understanding of the state system in history. Today’s history textbooks and many history books describe the Edo shogunate as the central government, but this is an error and should be corrected. They should explain to children and readers precisely the difference between lord-subject government and central government.
　Both lord-subject politics and lord-subject government are coined by the author. This is because until now there has been no word to describe the medieval politics and government. This is because the history of medieval Japan has been vaguely understood, and in many ways, misunderstood.

The Revolution called the Medieval Revolution

　Today, the term “medieval revolution” does not exist in Japanese history or world history. This is because the author created it. The word “medieval revolution”is associated with the word of “modern revolution.” The history of humankind, especially the history of Japan and Western Europe, has developed through these two revolutions.
　The medieval revolution in Japanese history is one in which the samurai overthrew the ancient dynasty, drove out the ancient ruling body, introduced the medieval ruling body, and established a new regime, the samurai government. It was an armed revolution that took about 400 years from Yoritomo to Hideyoshi, and overlapped with the period of two capitals.
　The table below shows the transition of the ruling body. The shift in history is the shift in the ruling body.

＜Evolution of the national system＞

	Ancient Japan	Medieval Japan	Modern Japan
Ruler	Ancient king	Medieval king (feudal lord)	Constitution (people
State system	Centralized system	Decentralization	Centralized system
Political form	Tyranny	Lord-subject politics	Democracy

　The medievalisation revolution basically stemmed from the strengthening of the people’s spirit: in the 12th century, samurai became enthusiastic about cultivating and owning land, and through their self-ownership of land, they developed an idea of relativism and recognition of others. It was a denial of despotism and encouraged the samurai to break free from despotism, transforming their worldview. And indeed, the samurai grew strong on the basis of that ideology, developing the divisionism and (as I will explain later) bilateral contracts that were at the heart of the medieval era. It eventually culminated in a medievalizing revolution that overthrew the ancient dynasties and established Japan as a medieval state.
　Japan is the only country in the world that decisively carried out a medievalisation revolution. The samurai took 400years to overthrow the ancient dynasties by force. Western European countries also advanced to the medieval era, but they did not overthrow the ancient dynasties, because, as already mentioned, their ancient countries had destroyed themselves. The knights and feudal lords were keen to develop and own the land lay before them after the collapse of the ancient state. Their desires were the same as those of samurai, and they too developed the idea of recognizing others through their competition. This eventually led to the development of divisionism and bilateral contracts, remaking Western Europe into the medieval world. It is a clear evolution from ancient times to the medieval eras.
　On the other hand, ancient countries such as Russia and Chiana did not experience medievalising revolutions. Their revolutions are simply the replacement of old and new ancient dynasties. The new dynasty is also an ancient country. No samurai or knights appeared, no forces overthrew despotism, and neither divisionism nor bilateral contracts were developed. Thus their countries remained despotic and did not evolve into the medieval eras. So ( in Japanese history) it is as if these countries stopped in the Heian period, because they did not move on to the Kamakura period.
　It is interesting to note that Yoritomo and Hideyoshi had no knowledge of the medieval revolution and all of the medieval people knew it, either. The rulers merely continued to deal with the disputes, incidents, and accidents right in front of them for centuries, and yet their actions resulted in the divisions of the land, the people and the state powers.
　In that respect, it seems that there is a certain, unwavering will at work in history. Medieval kings and nameless people unconsciously followed the intention of history; that is, a strong rejection of despotism and a trust placed in relativism. This is the result of people’s spirits becoming stronger. These were the spirit of the medieval revolution. It can be said that both Yoritomo and Hideyoshi were great dancers who brilliantly performed the dance of divisionism in the palm of history based on this spirit.
　There was another revolution in Japanese history. It was a modernizing revolution that modernized Japan. As a result, Japan can be considered a state with three histories and two revolutions.