8 ms·

In short, Commodore Perry wanted to trade with Japan. Being isolationist they declined. So Perry believed they would have to be persuaded by force. He launched

In short, Commodore Perry wanted to trade with Japan. Being isolationist they declined. So Perry believed they would have to be persuaded by force. He launched a barrage of cannons while anchored in Tokyo Bay. Supposedly they were just gunpowder explosions celebrating US Independence Day, but it was likely a show of force that eventually persuaded the Japanese to open trade relations. If this were in the US or UK, Perry would likely be hated for whatever and his statue torn down. In Japan, they have multiple statues and celebrate Perry’s opening of trade relations every year with the Black Ship festival in Shimoda, Japan. The festival includes food stalls and even a parade. I’ve gone a few times, it’s nothing particularly interesting but a good experience overall.

LarryMullins 4y ago
What boggles my mind is that less than 100 years after this happened, the Imperial Japanese Navy was able to give the US Navy a serious run for their money. The rapid industrial and technological development of Japan is hard to comprehend. Medieval feudalism to an industrial powerhouse in just a few decades.
- hangonhn 4y ago
  IIRC, Japan had a very robust banking system by the time this happened so were able to finance a lot of the capital intensive developments and industrialization necessary for them to quickly catch up.
- benzofuran 4y ago
  Dan Carlin's Hardcore History (episode 1: https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-62-supernova-in-the-east-i/ https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-62-supern...) recently did a great series "Supernova in the East" on the modernization of Japan and the internal politics. If you've got some time (drive or such), it's well worth the listen and there's a great diversity of sources.
  - caycep 4y ago
    does he have a book list for that period?
    - cocacola1 4y ago
      OP replied in case you didn't see it: https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/177152.Dan_Carlin_s_Hardcore_History_Supernova_in_the_East https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/177152.Dan_Carlin_s_Hard...
  - benzofuran 4y ago
    Book list: https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/177152.Dan_Carlin_s_Hardcore_History_Supernova_in_the_East https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/177152.Dan_Carlin_s_Hard... For some reason it didn't get appended to the podcast descriptions
- JoeDaDude 4y ago
  Not to mention giving China and Russia a run for their territory, first in the 1894 Sino-Japanese war, only some 40 odd years after opening up to world trade and rapidly industrializing.
- wkat4242 4y ago
  The Japanese navy was pretty weak which was the main reason for this sneaky Pearl Harbor attack. In a direct conflict they'd have had no chance and they tried to take out as much of the fleet off the board as they could. Of course they failed miserably by hitting the legacy battleships and missing the carriers which fit better with modern doctrine.
  - chanandler_bong 4y ago
    Their biggest miss was not hitting the fuel dumps and repair facilities. Taking out a few ships, even carriers, would be easy to replace. Wiping out the logistics support capability would mean that ships would have to return to the US west coast to refuel/repair. That would have been a major disaster. Pearl Harbor was just an irritant and catalyst.
    - credit_guy 4y ago
      That's not quite correct. First of all, take a look at the map [1] of Perl Harbor from wikipedia. The oil storage tanks are listed as A, and you'll notice that they formed two different groups. By my count each had 27 tanks. If you take a look at [2], you'll see that these tanks were well separated, with an earth wall between them. It is clear that when they were built precautions were taken to prevent the spread of (accidental of intentional) fire. So, taking out the oil tanks was not as simple as dropping one bomb. You probably needed multiple passes. After the first successful pass, all others had to deal with the smoke, and more or less guess where their targets were. Of course, they would have to deal with the anti-air defenses. The second wave already took quite heavy losses, the third wave was guaranteed to incur much heavier ones. Let's say in the best case scenario, the hypothetical third Japanese wave would have destroyed half of the 54 oil tanks. It would not have made a difference. Only a success rate of 90% would have, maybe. In any case, that third wave was never planned. See [4] (written by one of hte co-authors of Shattered Sword) for convincing evidence that only 2 waves were planned, and Admiral Nagumo carried them as per the plan. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor#/media/File:Pearlmap2.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor#/media/... [2] https://pearlharbor.org/pearl-harbors-third-strike-what-could-have-been/ https://pearlharbor.org/pearl-harbors-third-strike-what-coul... [3] https://medium.com/war-stories/the-one-key-thing-not-destroyed-at-pearl-harbor-c73b287a719 https://medium.com/war-stories/the-one-key-thing-not-destroy... [4] https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1601&context=nwc-review https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl...
- Maursault 4y ago
  > the Imperial Japanese Navy was able to give the US Navy a serious run for their money. Sure, but not before taking out half the US Navy's battle fleet and leaving them out of commission for nearly half a year. Eventually, most damaged vessels were returned to service, but with escorts needed in the Atlantic, the Fleet was spread thin facing an opponent with more battleships with better torpedos, more carriers with better trained pilots flying (in a lot of ways) superior aircraft. Against the advice and strong objection of many high ranking naval officers, President Roosevelt's "eggs in one basket"-strategy ordering the Fleet to and to remain at Pearl Harbor as a show of force was a disastrous blunder that ultimately ensured the US would be dragged into the War under-prepared. Had Roosevelt not subsequently ordered Yamamoto taken out in 1943, the Pacific may very well have been lost.
senthil_rajasek 4y ago
"If this were in the US or UK, Perry would likely be hated for whatever and his statue torn down." I am originally from India. There are still monuments commemorating British kings ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_of_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_of_India) personally I want them to be torn down. I am not comparing Japan with Colonial India but I know that in 2023 colonialism and imperialism should not be celebrated.
- hef19898 4y ago
  If the statutes of british monarchs were raised during their reign, or shortly after, those statues now represent history. A bad bit of history, but history none the less. If they were erected way later, they celebrate this bad pit of history and can be torn down. History does not have to be celebrated, it definitely has to be remembered so.
  - senthil_rajasek 4y ago
    If walls can become memories, statues and monuments can be torn down without losing their place in history.
    - bboygravity 4y ago
      What?
      - thelock85 4y ago
        Berlin Wall.
      - Luc 4y ago
        I guess the Berlin Wall is a memory... Not quite because parts of it remain.
        hef19898 4y ago
        And not leaving parts it up was not appreciated by everyone.
pfisch 4y ago
Don't tell thanksgiving.
blipvert 4y ago
Japan has a very compliant and deferential citizenship - how do you think you’d get along with that? (Edit: had -> has. flippin’ phone)
linksnapzz 4y ago
The Japan-American Society of RI has a complementary Black Ships festival in Newport & Bristol; not a huge show but there's usually a formal dinner & taiko concert with representatives from the City of Yokohama and the JMSDF.
leviathant 4y ago
>If this were in the US or UK, Perry would likely be hated for whatever and his statue torn down. You're being ridiculous, @notadev. While I realize that by engaging, I'm falling into the trap of wrestling with a pig, no one's torn down any statues of Matthew Perry in the US.
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  I think the gp meant that if some foreign figure had forced their way into to the US or UK with martial threats, they would not be celebrated today the way he is in Japan - though I also wonder how enthusiastic this celebration is, as opposed to politely commemorating it.
zizee 4y ago
> If this were in the US or UK, Perry would likely be hated for whatever and his statue torn down I'm not much of a history buff, but the UK has been subject to invasions/colonialism multiple tines in tbeir history, and there are statues and events to commemotate these events. I haven't much time, but here is an example, commemorating the Battle of Hastings: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-37649912 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-37649912 I'm sure there are many other and better examples to be found.
wrp 4y ago
> If this were in the US or UK, Perry would likely be hated... The context you are missing is that the forcible opening of Japan led to the overthrow of the Shogunate and advent of the Meiji era, which was/is seen by most Japanese as a very good thing.
fomine3 4y ago
Moreover, US nuked Japan twice and bombed civilians but there have been military alliance and good feelings (at least JP to US). People know that beating closed Tokugawa shogunate and pre-WW2 regime were finally somewhat good thing so they don't blame them so much.
idiocrat 4y ago
Interestingly, during the isolation there was not a complete informational blockade. The progressive Japanese knew what is going on in Europe and how China/Asia is suffering from European colonization. So to preempt being colonized they worked on the Japan's opening and planned a rapid industrialization. (The Meiji Revolution) The Perry's conquering of Japan is a concession to the West by Japanese.
dekhn 4y ago
Don't forget- the Dutch and Porteguese both had limited trading outposts (basically monopolies, but incredibly restricted). See https://iisg.nl/exhibitions/japaneseprints/ships.html https://iisg.nl/exhibitions/japaneseprints/ships.html and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dejima https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dejima

LarryMullins 4y ago

What boggles my mind is that less than 100 years after this happened, the Imperial Japanese Navy was able to give the US Navy a serious run for their money. The rapid industrial and technological development of Japan is hard to comprehend. Medieval feudalism to an industrial powerhouse in just a few decades.

hangonhn 4y ago
IIRC, Japan had a very robust banking system by the time this happened so were able to finance a lot of the capital intensive developments and industrialization necessary for them to quickly catch up.
benzofuran 4y ago
Dan Carlin's Hardcore History (episode 1: https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-62-supernova-in-the-east-i/ https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-62-supern...) recently did a great series "Supernova in the East" on the modernization of Japan and the internal politics. If you've got some time (drive or such), it's well worth the listen and there's a great diversity of sources.
- caycep 4y ago
  does he have a book list for that period?
  - cocacola1 4y ago
    OP replied in case you didn't see it: https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/177152.Dan_Carlin_s_Hardcore_History_Supernova_in_the_East https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/177152.Dan_Carlin_s_Hard...
- benzofuran 4y ago
  Book list: https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/177152.Dan_Carlin_s_Hardcore_History_Supernova_in_the_East https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/177152.Dan_Carlin_s_Hard... For some reason it didn't get appended to the podcast descriptions
JoeDaDude 4y ago
Not to mention giving China and Russia a run for their territory, first in the 1894 Sino-Japanese war, only some 40 odd years after opening up to world trade and rapidly industrializing.
wkat4242 4y ago
The Japanese navy was pretty weak which was the main reason for this sneaky Pearl Harbor attack. In a direct conflict they'd have had no chance and they tried to take out as much of the fleet off the board as they could. Of course they failed miserably by hitting the legacy battleships and missing the carriers which fit better with modern doctrine.
- chanandler_bong 4y ago
  Their biggest miss was not hitting the fuel dumps and repair facilities. Taking out a few ships, even carriers, would be easy to replace. Wiping out the logistics support capability would mean that ships would have to return to the US west coast to refuel/repair. That would have been a major disaster. Pearl Harbor was just an irritant and catalyst.
  - credit_guy 4y ago
    That's not quite correct. First of all, take a look at the map [1] of Perl Harbor from wikipedia. The oil storage tanks are listed as A, and you'll notice that they formed two different groups. By my count each had 27 tanks. If you take a look at [2], you'll see that these tanks were well separated, with an earth wall between them. It is clear that when they were built precautions were taken to prevent the spread of (accidental of intentional) fire. So, taking out the oil tanks was not as simple as dropping one bomb. You probably needed multiple passes. After the first successful pass, all others had to deal with the smoke, and more or less guess where their targets were. Of course, they would have to deal with the anti-air defenses. The second wave already took quite heavy losses, the third wave was guaranteed to incur much heavier ones. Let's say in the best case scenario, the hypothetical third Japanese wave would have destroyed half of the 54 oil tanks. It would not have made a difference. Only a success rate of 90% would have, maybe. In any case, that third wave was never planned. See [4] (written by one of hte co-authors of Shattered Sword) for convincing evidence that only 2 waves were planned, and Admiral Nagumo carried them as per the plan. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor#/media/File:Pearlmap2.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor#/media/... [2] https://pearlharbor.org/pearl-harbors-third-strike-what-could-have-been/ https://pearlharbor.org/pearl-harbors-third-strike-what-coul... [3] https://medium.com/war-stories/the-one-key-thing-not-destroyed-at-pearl-harbor-c73b287a719 https://medium.com/war-stories/the-one-key-thing-not-destroy... [4] https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1601&context=nwc-review https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl...
Maursault 4y ago
> the Imperial Japanese Navy was able to give the US Navy a serious run for their money. Sure, but not before taking out half the US Navy's battle fleet and leaving them out of commission for nearly half a year. Eventually, most damaged vessels were returned to service, but with escorts needed in the Atlantic, the Fleet was spread thin facing an opponent with more battleships with better torpedos, more carriers with better trained pilots flying (in a lot of ways) superior aircraft. Against the advice and strong objection of many high ranking naval officers, President Roosevelt's "eggs in one basket"-strategy ordering the Fleet to and to remain at Pearl Harbor as a show of force was a disastrous blunder that ultimately ensured the US would be dragged into the War under-prepared. Had Roosevelt not subsequently ordered Yamamoto taken out in 1943, the Pacific may very well have been lost.

senthil_rajasek 4y ago

"If this were in the US or UK, Perry would likely be hated for whatever and his statue torn down." I am originally from India. There are still monuments commemorating British kings ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_of_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_of_India) personally I want them to be torn down. I am not comparing Japan with Colonial India but I know that in 2023 colonialism and imperialism should not be celebrated.

hef19898 4y ago
If the statutes of british monarchs were raised during their reign, or shortly after, those statues now represent history. A bad bit of history, but history none the less. If they were erected way later, they celebrate this bad pit of history and can be torn down. History does not have to be celebrated, it definitely has to be remembered so.
- senthil_rajasek 4y ago
  If walls can become memories, statues and monuments can be torn down without losing their place in history.
  - bboygravity 4y ago
    What?
    - thelock85 4y ago
      Berlin Wall.
    - Luc 4y ago
      I guess the Berlin Wall is a memory... Not quite because parts of it remain.
      - hef19898 4y ago
        And not leaving parts it up was not appreciated by everyone.

pfisch 4y ago

Don't tell thanksgiving.

blipvert 4y ago

Japan has a very compliant and deferential citizenship - how do you think you’d get along with that? (Edit: had -> has. flippin’ phone)

linksnapzz 4y ago

The Japan-American Society of RI has a complementary Black Ships festival in Newport & Bristol; not a huge show but there's usually a formal dinner & taiko concert with representatives from the City of Yokohama and the JMSDF.

leviathant 4y ago

>If this were in the US or UK, Perry would likely be hated for whatever and his statue torn down. You're being ridiculous, @notadev. While I realize that by engaging, I'm falling into the trap of wrestling with a pig, no one's torn down any statues of Matthew Perry in the US.

anigbrowl 4y ago
I think the gp meant that if some foreign figure had forced their way into to the US or UK with martial threats, they would not be celebrated today the way he is in Japan - though I also wonder how enthusiastic this celebration is, as opposed to politely commemorating it.

zizee 4y ago

> If this were in the US or UK, Perry would likely be hated for whatever and his statue torn down I'm not much of a history buff, but the UK has been subject to invasions/colonialism multiple tines in tbeir history, and there are statues and events to commemotate these events. I haven't much time, but here is an example, commemorating the Battle of Hastings: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-37649912 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-37649912 I'm sure there are many other and better examples to be found.

wrp 4y ago

> If this were in the US or UK, Perry would likely be hated... The context you are missing is that the forcible opening of Japan led to the overthrow of the Shogunate and advent of the Meiji era, which was/is seen by most Japanese as a very good thing.

fomine3 4y ago

Moreover, US nuked Japan twice and bombed civilians but there have been military alliance and good feelings (at least JP to US). People know that beating closed Tokugawa shogunate and pre-WW2 regime were finally somewhat good thing so they don't blame them so much.

idiocrat 4y ago

Interestingly, during the isolation there was not a complete informational blockade. The progressive Japanese knew what is going on in Europe and how China/Asia is suffering from European colonization. So to preempt being colonized they worked on the Japan's opening and planned a rapid industrialization. (The Meiji Revolution) The Perry's conquering of Japan is a concession to the West by Japanese.

dekhn 4y ago

Don't forget- the Dutch and Porteguese both had limited trading outposts (basically monopolies, but incredibly restricted). See https://iisg.nl/exhibitions/japaneseprints/ships.html https://iisg.nl/exhibitions/japaneseprints/ships.html and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dejima https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dejima