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, and after that, a number of medieval states appeared. 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. 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. Hence, 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.
　In the early days of medieval France, the newly formed feudal lords fought over the expansion of their territories, and eventually they stopped fighting and gathered together to hold election. It was an election to choose their king from among them. The chosen one was Hugues (898-956), the head of the Capetian family, who ruled the Paris region. He was the first king of medieval France, and the equivalent of Yoritomo in medieval Japan. From this time on, medieval France began to take shape.
　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 of the 16th century, 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 ynastic officials and tax collectors of manor lords away from the manors using force. The dynasty repeatedly protested to the shogunate against this wickedness, 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 (The waring state 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	Emergence of Shugodaimyo 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	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.
※The Kamakura period and the Muromachi period constitute the two- capitol period.

　Another victory for the samurai was the Jokyu Rebellion (1221). The Kamakura shogunate fought against the dynasty and won overwhelmingly. This was 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 set up a military governor in Kyoto to keep watch of the dynasty at all times As a result, the dynasty lost not only its military power, but also the right to give military orders to samurai throughout the country. 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 lost the power to determine the ownership of the feudal lords' fiefdoms. It was that the samurai society lacked the core of its establishment and turned Japan into a lawless zone. The feudal lords were at a loss, as a result of which they were forced to defend their territories by force of their own arms.
　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，ninja, 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. Then they lost almost all their powers, making it difficult for them to stand on their own.
　The fourth victory of the samurai was the introduction of free markets into his domain. 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, leading 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 ,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.It was the end of the period of two capitals.
　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.

＜Osaka Castle＞

1598 Castle built by Hideyoshi
1629 Castle rebuilt by Tokugawa Hidetada

　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 kings lost their right to command their people and became a symbolic presence of the state. 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 was 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(1926-2022) 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.
　

Sovereignty of Medieval Kings

　Now let's talk specifically about the medieval Japan. First, it is about the medieval kings, the rulers of the medieval era.
　The medieval rulers were samurai, or more precisely, feudal lords. They owned large territories, had many samurai under their command, boasted great military power, and ruled over the peasants. They increased in number over time, from dozens to hundreds. And they were called different names over the years: jito, shugo daimyo, sengoku daimyo, and daimyo.
　It is remarkable that the feudal lords chose one of their fellow feudal lords and made him a medieval king (the head of the samurai family). Be proactive or passive, it was their agreement. In the history of Japan, medieval kings include Yoritomo, Hideyoshi, and Ieyasu.
　The reason why feudal lords chose one as their king, was that the place where they were working was a lawless land where no one determined land ownership. They had no privileges, were ordinary beings, and were all equals. As it was, they were tantamount to land thieves, and they had to defend their land on their own from the villains without a moment's pause. So, they vitally needed the authority to decide on land ownership.
　(On the other hand, in ancient times, there was an absolute, the ancient king, who judged all matters directly or indirectly.)
　The lords of Kanto religion, chose Yoritomo as their king and grant him grand authority to recognize the land ownership. The criteria for this decision were that the lords had owned and controlled the land for many years, that the lords had been loyal to Yoritomo, and that the lords had fought spectacularly against the enemy and defended Yoritomo. The feudal lords obeyed Yoritomo’s rulings on land ownership because that was what they wanted. And because it was the only thing that publicly guaranteed their land ownership.
　Yoritomo granted lordship to the feudal lords as well as relief of their lands. It meant that Yoritomo recognized the feudal lords the ruler of their domain. Lordship was the right of a feudal lord to rule over his subjects (samurai and peasants). He used the samurai to fight neighbouring enemies and expand his domain, and the peasants to accumulate wealth and stabilize the management of the domain. Lordship was the first human rights to emerge in Japanese history. The establishment of lordship was what fundamentally differentiated the ancient and medieval eras.
　As a result, the authority of the land of Kanto belonged to Yoritomo, but the power of Kanto was divided and owned by more than 20 feudal lords, including Yoritomo. It was the beginning of a decentralization system that lasted for 700 years.
　It was the birth of a new king, a ruler who did not hold full power. It was a spectacle unique to the medieval eras and the starting point of the medieval duality. In comparison, an ancient king was the one who held both authority and power as one.
　
　By the way, the medieval king was once one of the feudal lords, but as soon as he was elected king, he gave various strict orders to the feudal lords. 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.
　Japan's modernization revolution in the 19th century buried the medieval form of government, that is, revolutionaries expelled medieval kings and feudal lords from the political realm, abolished the rule of men, introduced the Constitution as the ruler of the country, and transformed Japan into a country governed by the rule of law.
　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

　Ownership of land and its securing have always been essential, and gaining or losing land often affects life, and even survival itself.
　To resolve the issue of land ownership, feudal lords in the Kanto region chose Yoritomo as their medieval king who publicly recognize land ownership. This was the creation of authority.
　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.
　Rights come with obligations. Rewards were determined by reality (combat merit and loyalty), and they had to 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 , 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 their right of resistance. This fair rule was recognized 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.

	ruler	sovereignty
Ancient era	Ancient Kings	Absolute kingship
Medieval era	Medieval kings (Feudal lords)	Kingship and lordship
Modern era	Constitution (Citizen)	Popular Sovereignty

Sovereignty of Medieval Kings, Again

　The feudal lords gave the medieval king the prerogative of division and apportionment of land, 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 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.Despotism stubbornly survived and did not disappear completely in the medieval eras. In fact, tyrannical rulers sometimes arose in medieval Japan, and ruthlessly ignored the lordship of their feudal lords and treated them like slaves. They were anachronistic rulers who pretentiously took on ancient kings. (We will show these medieval kings and their tyranny later.)
　 Still, the task of the medieval eras was to defeat despotism once and for all. The second blow to despotism was carried out in the Meiji Restoration, the revolution of modernization in Japan. It was not to divide the royal power in two, but to extinguish the royal power itself. That is, to expel medieval kings and feudal lords from political circles, and to make the Constitution the ruler of Japan.
　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 in the medieval history of Japan, but it was still important in modern Japan. 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. It was a beautiful evolution of egalitarianism.
　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 naturally 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.
　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 might 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 samurai who officially owned the land became self-reliant. They could earn a living by their own efforts and no longer had to be subordinate to the ancient kings or nobles. The samurai were the first people in Japanese history to become independent from the ancient kings. They were medieval samurai, different from the servile samurai of the ancient times. It is important to clarify the difference between the ancient samurai and the medieval samurai.
　Another important thing was the birth of realism. In the land of Kanto, the samurai were all equal in position, had no privileges, and therefore the acquisition of territories was free competition. The samurai were freed from despotism in every sense of the word, and competed for the acquisition of land on merit.
　The samurai asserted themselves through land ownership, and at the same time, they acknowledged the independence of their rivals. To "acknowledge oneself" necessarily means to "acknowledge others." This new recognition created a new worldview and fundamentally reshaped the Japanese state system. This was a decentralized system in which the samurai recognized each other's ownership of their lands. It was a system of sharing power based on mutual trust.
　The evolution of history is neither due to the change of periods, nor the emergence of heroes or great men. It was because people strengthened and advanced their spirit by gaining mutual trust through the free competition to acquire land. This was the core of the medievalization revolution that switched antiquity to the medieval era, and finally dividing Japan history into three parts: ancient, medieval, and modern.
　However, mental toughening was not a momentary thing. It spread throughout Japan over the centuries. The spirit that determined the medievalization of Japan was not limited to a few samurai, but spread and thickened over time, reaching the samurai of all regions and eventually the peasants and townspeople. And with it, the despotism of antiquity was gradually driven out. And the decentralization system existed as the state system of Japan for 700 years from this time, and that period was the medieval era.
　Yet decentralization was also a living thing. Decentralization was born in a vivid way, but it did not exist without problems for 700 years. Unfortunately, decentralization broke down twice in the medieval era. The first time was in the middle of the Kamakura period, and the second time was in the Muromachi period. It was a clear indication of the limits of decentralization.
　The first bankruptcy was triggered in the middle of the Kamakura period. The Yuan dynasty in ancient China crossed the East China Sea with a large army and attacked Japan. Hojo, who was the leader of the samurai family at the time, hastened to centralize the state system in preparation for the invasion of the Yuan army. They tried to make the state a monolith and take on the Yuan army. It was the transition from decentralization to centralization.
　This was because, under the decentralization system, the power and financial power of the state were dispersed among a number of feudal lords, and it was not possible to form a single cohesive and comprehensive force. Therefore, Hojo tried to centralize under himself the power and financial power of the feudal lords through the country and form a huge national power. Hojo also demanded that nobles and temples and shrines provide funds to work with the samurai to defend the country. It was like creating a national army and a national treasury.
　As a result, the warriors, who had strengthened their unity, fought hard and defeated the Yuan army in a short period of time. Originally, the invasion of Japan failed. The war ended instantly, which meant that the Hojo clan's centralization of state power was no longer necessary.
　However, Hojo was not willing to let go of the policy of centralization, but rather pushed for centralization. It was to abolish the communal government that had been practiced so far, and to establish the tyranny of the Hojo clan. Hojo sought to return to antiquity and become a dictator. But it was an anachronistic attempt.
　Naturally, the feudal lords and samurai rejected the tyranny of the Hojo clan. They were medievals, self-reliant, and had already awakened to the wonders of self-reliance. Needless to say, they refused to be Hojo's slaves. but defended their territory, people, and lordship. It was an essential confrontation over state power, and of course, the country was in turmoil, and security continued to deteriorate. In the end, the feudal lords abandoned the Hojo clan and drove the Kamakura shogunate to ruin.
　Three years after the fall of the Kamakura shogunate, the decentralization system was rebuilt by the Ashikaga clan. Ashikaga established the Muromachi shogunate in Kyoto, and as a medieval king, he gave feudal lords relief and recognized their lands and lordship. It was to make Japan a decentralized country. The decentralization system quickly spread from the Kanto region to the whole country.
　But decentralization was broken again. There were two main reasons. One was that the feudal lordship of the Muromachi period was incomplete, and the other was that the feudal relief (division of fiefdoms) did not work. And the root cause was that the Muromachi period was the time of rapid growth in the medieval era.
　First of all, the author wants to talk about the imperfection of lordship. During the Muromachi period, there were about 30 feudal lords called Shugo-daimyo throughout the country. As a result, land, people and state power should be neatly divided into 30 fiefdoms, peoples and lords. But in fact, they were subdivided into more than 30. This was because in each fiefdom, in addition to the Shugo- daimyo, there were several feudal lords, who had their own territories and powers.
　During the Kamakura period, Shugo and Jito were the bearers of local governance. Shugo was in charge of maintaining public order, while Jito was in charge of the manor. During the Muromachi period, the Ashikaga shogun gave Shugo money and great power, and asked him to quell the numerous conflicts that broke out as the times changed. Shugo led a strong army to quell those conflicts and eventually became the ruler of the fiefdom. That was the birth of Shugo- daimyo. And there were about 30 Shugo- daimyo throughout the country.
　On the other hand, Jito, along with Shugo,ruled the country. Jito was in charge of the manor, but in fact he embezzled the manor and grew into a feudal lord with a certain amount of power. However, since the Muromachi shogunate did not give the jito any new powers, many jito were forced to bow to the burgeoning Shugo-daimyo and become his vassals.
　But, some of Jito were at odds with Shugo-daimyo and maintained their independence as a single feudal lord. There were at least a few such independent Jito in the fiefdoms ruled by Shugo daimyo. That was why there were more than 30 feudal lords at the time.
　As a result, the lands and power (lordship) in the feudal territories were not only in the hands of the Shugo- daimyo, but also in the hands of several former Jito. Of course, there was not a single faint-hearted feudal lord willing to give up his power, but rather every feudal lord was eager to gain more territory and power. Such territorial conflicts broke out all over the country, and eventually they began to fight by force.
　The struggle between Shugo- daimyo and the former jito eventually came to an end. The victor was sometimes Shugo- daimyo or one of the former jito, who took full control of the dominance of the realm. He was called Sengoku daimyo, and there were about 120 of them throughout the country. They were fierce men who excelled in strategy and tactics. Today, many Japanese loved these warlords.
　Sengoku daimyo promptly enacted territorial laws in his country, controlling the people (samurai and peasants) and ensuring control of the territory.
　Then, they began to fight with neighboring countries for the further maintenance and expansion of their territory, and this marked the beginning of the full-fledged Warring States period. No one could decide on land ownership, and the decentralization system was on the verge of collapse.
　Another cause of the breakdown of the decentralization system was the internal strife of the ruling class. The Ashikaga shogun and the powerful Shugo- daimyo had hereditary problems in their respective houses almost simultaneously. And it developed into a fierce armed struggle within the ruling class, which lasted for 11 years. As a result, both the shogunate and Shugo- daimyo were exhausted, and their rule was significantly weakened.
　The Ashikaga shogun lost the power to control the feudal lords. Sengoku-daimyo of the whole country no longer trusted the shogun's instructions to relieve their domains. It meant that the prerogative of territorial relief would not work, and that the samurai society could no longer be established. So, Japan became a lawless country where all the feudal lords were no different from land thieves. It was, literally, a breakdown of decentralization.
　The Sengoku-daimyo of each country had to defend themselves with their own armed forces. It quickly escalated into a nationwide scramble for territory. This civil war lasted for 100 years. This period is called the Warring States Period.
　The man who ruled this war-torn world was Toyotomi Hideyoshi, one of Sengoku-daimyo. It was the unification of Japan. Through many battles, he succeeded in subduing the Sengoku daimyo throughout the country. His era, called the Momoyama period, was a period of peace, and order was finally restored to both the central and local areas.
　Hideyoshi became the new medieval king, built a magnificent castle in Osaka, and established the Toyotomi government. He wielded great power, and as a principle of medieval era, carried out the relief of fiefdoms, distributed land, people and state power to feudal lords. It was a brilliant revival of decentralization.
　Hideyoshi became the new medieval king, built a magnificent castle in Osaka, and established the Toyotomi government. He wielded great power, and as a principle of medieval era, carried out the relief of fiefdoms, distributed land, people and state power to feudal lords. It was a brilliant revival of decentralization.
　Hideyoshi was a true medieval man. He did not seek to establish a centralized state, but still maintained a decentralized system and faithfully recognized lordships of the feudal lords. In that regard, he was not a revolutionary who transformed the state system. No one owned all of Japan. Hideyoshi only owned a part of the country called Kansai. The rest of the land was divided among the feudal lords. And he did not intervene in the management of the feudal lords' fiefdoms, did not deprive them of their right to collect taxes, and did not interfere with the laws of the territories they had set. It showed that the unification of Japan and the centralization of state power are two completely different things.
　Samurai who centralized Japan was not Hideyoshi, but a couple of groups of the low-ranking samurai in the late 19th century. It was the Meiji Restoration. They expelled medieval kings from the realm of politics and deprived the feudal lords of all power. They were true revolutionaries who transformed the system of decentralization into the centralization. turning Japan from a feudal country into a democratic country.
　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. They did not attach to the land. All they did during the term of office was to extort taxes and build up a huge fortune, and they returned to the capital as soon as they finished the term of office of several years. People were treated as serfs and abused and the provinces were 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. This was in the 19th century, when the Western powers and the United States came to Japan to start trading. It was when Japanese people realized that Japan was left behind in many aspects of civilization, such as diplomacy, administration, weapons, and scientific thought.
　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.This was in contrast to Japan in the Edo period for two centuries; it was a peaceful country, shrouded in rigid formalism.
　Japanese people were surprised and panicked by the advance of Western Europe. In the face of this crisis, groups of the low-ranking samurai rose up, formed revolutionary forces, turned their backs on Edo shogunate and pursued the future course of Japan.
　Their first goal was to abolish the decentralization system and introduce a centralized system. It was basically the same as what Hojo tried to do 600 years ago on the occasion of the invasion of the Yuan army. Tough confrontations and wars with other countries inevitably centralize the system of the state. And the abolition of the decentralization system this time was thorough.
　The revolutionaries abolished the feudal lords by taking away all the fiefdoms, peoples and lordships, and together them turned into the realm, the nation, and the power of the state. Finally, it led to the centralization of will of the state and to the full-fledged creation of the army and the national treasury. The decentralization system that had supported Japan for 700 years disappeared here.
　The revolutionaries of the Meiji Restoration were completely different from the Hojo clan. Their centralization was aimed at democracy, while the centralization of the Hojo was in pursuit of ancient tyrannical rule. State power of Japan was held by the people. but not by one king. It was to make Japan a democratic country.
　The revolutionaries installed the constitution as the new ruler of Japan. And they started democracy by setting up parliaments and holding elections. So, the modern ruling body of the < constitution, centralization, and democratic politics > was established. This marked a great gyration of history. Today's Japan is an extension of this.
　Hence, it can be said that the history of Japan has undergone a gradual evolution from ancient times to the medieval eras and then to the present day, passing through various realities. The medieval era was directly and successively into the modern era.

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. It was the original politics of decentralized rule, in which medieval kings and powerful feudal lords shared state power and jointly executed politics. After the founder of the shogunate was gone, its hereditary and powerful daimyo often vied for control and over new policies of control, causing disturbances in public order. Lord-subject politics was designed to prevent such a thing from happening.
　Now the feudal lords in the Kanto region achieved independence because they were granted lands and lordship by Yoritomo. The next thing they sought was the independence of East Japan. This was because their personal independence could only be achieved with the stability of East Japan.
　What was needed for the formation of order and discipline in East Japan was the establishment of shogunate. Yoritomo and the feudal lords opened the Kamakura shogunate, and determined the various laws, institutions and organizations of East Japan. What took place there was medieval politics; which the author names lord-subject politics.
　Originally, lord-subject politics was supposed to be carried out by all the lords of the Kanto in one place in Kamakura. But it was realistically difficult, because some of them lived far from Kamakura, and took a few days to come to Kamakura, while others could not come due to special business, or someone were indifferent to politics.
　Thus, the medieval king chose a few of the feudal lords who specialized in politics, and presided over the actual politics. That was lord-subject politics. It seems like a medieval version of indirect democracy practiced in modern democracies.
　Lord-Subject politics was a communal government, but not a dictatorship ruled by a single ancient king. Medieval kings and feudal lords shared power and exercised power jointly. The medieval king ultimately decides on policy, but the decision was made with the consent of the feudal lords, or the medieval king finally confirmed that the feudal lords had made the decision.
　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 the Kamakura period to the Momoyama period , 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.