4 ms·
It's a plausible argument I suppose. And Europe never went through a comparable period of peace and unification (at any rate prior to the present day), so it s
by Lazare 9y ago
It's a plausible argument I suppose. And Europe never went through a comparable period of peace and unification (at any rate prior to the present day), so it sort of makes sense that Europe stuck with its guns and Japan did not.
And yet it still raises questions. It happened very suddenly as these things go (over a few years or decades, rather than centuries), and seems to have been accompanied by a deep, long-lasting cultural shift. Even after Japanese isolation ended in the mid 19th century, there didn't seem to be any real reversion (hence, indirectly, the originally linked article). If the establishment of the Tokugawa Shogunate was enough to make Japan give up the gun, why was it's collapse not enough to make Japan re-embrace it? If the answer is "unique Japanese culture", why was it not present at the start of the Sengoku period? It's not like the Sengoku period was just way more violent than the 1850-1950 period.
Anyhow, the book I linked (which I last read over 10 years ago, so I'm a bit fuzzy on some of the details) goes into a lot more detail, digging through historical records and evaluating most of the obvious theories. I highly recommend it!
- rangibaby 9y agoJapan didn't embrace gun culture but certainly built up its military after being forced to abandon isolationism by (literal) threats of destruction from western powers.
- Lazare 9y agoQuite right. The question is why? If culture is driven by events, it feels like they should have embraced gun culture given how huge that event was. If it's not, then when triggered the earlier abandonment?
- boomboomsubban 9y agoThe abandonment was triggered by the shogunate having a large amount of control over anyone wealthy enough to own a gun. Afterwards, the military certainly embraced gun culture, but civilian gun culture largely rises from colonialism.