Product Code Database
November 29, 1815 – March 24, 1860Gregorian calendar date of Saturday, March 24, 1860, is equivalent to the 3rd day, 3rd month of 7th year of Ansei (安政七年三月三日). was a daimyō (feudal lord) of Hikone (1850–1860) and also Tairō of the Tokugawa shogunate, Japan, a position he held from April 23, 1858, until his assassination in the Sakuradamon Incident on March 24, 1860. He is most famous for signing the Harris Treaty with the United States, granting access to ports for trade to American merchants and seamen and extraterritoriality to American citizens. He was also an enthusiastic and accomplished practitioner of the Japanese tea ceremony, in the Sekishūryū style, and his writings include at least two works on the tea ceremony.
Under Ii Naosuke's guidance, the Tokugawa shogunate navigated past a particularly difficult conflict over the succession to the ailing and childless Tokugawa Iesada. Ii Naosuke managed to coerce the Tokugawa shogunate to the last brief resurgence of its power and position in Japanese society before the start of the Meiji period. Ii was assassinated in the Sakuradamon incident by a group of 17 Mito domain and 1 Satsuma Domain samurai on March 24, 1860.McClain, James L. 2002. Japan: A Modern History, p. 119.
Ii became involved in national politics, rapidly rising to lead a coalition of daimyōs. In 1853 Ii put forward a proposal concerning the Japanese negotiations with U.S. Commodore Matthew C. Perry during Perry's mission to open Japan to the outside world. Realizing that Japan was faced with immediate military dangerBeasley, W. G. (1999), The Japanese Experience: A Short History of Japan, Orion House, p. 192.Beasley, W. G. (1984) "The Edo Experience and Japanese Nationalism", Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4, p. 562. Ii argued that Japan should use their relationship with the Dutch to allow them to buy enough time to develop armed forces, which could resist invasion. Ii recommended that only the port of Nagasaki be opened for trade with foreignersMiyauchi, D. Y. (1970). "Yokoi Shōnan's Response to the Foreign Intervention in Late Tokugawa Japan, 1853–1862", Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 4, No. 3, p. 271. Ii, like Hotta Masayoshi, refused to remain silent while shogunal advisor Abe Masahiro appeased the anti-foreign party.Lamberti, Matthew. (1972). "Tokugawa Nariaki and The Japanese Imperial Institution: 1853–1858", Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 32, p. 109. Ii led the fudai daimyōs in their effort to bring about the downfall of Abe Masahiro and replace him with Hotta Masayoshi. This alienated many reformist daimyōs, leading them to strengthen their association with the Imperial court.Hall, John Whitney. (1956). "The Motivation of Political Leadership in the Meiji Restoration, Yoshio Sakata", The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 16, No. 1, p. 41.
Ii Naosuke regarded the Harris treaty, which Hotta Masayoshi had negotiated with the American envoy Townsend Harris as in Japan's best interests. In accordance with the protocol he asked the three house lords of the gosankyō for their views in writing. However Ii faced a problem in the form of an obstructionist policy from members of the Hitotsubashi faction led by Hitotsubashi Keiki's father Tokugawa Nariaki.
Ii was unwilling to sign the Harris treaty without approval from Emperor Kōmei in Kyoto. However the daimyōs of the Hitotsubashi faction were preventing him from presenting the treaty to the emperor by withholding their approval.Lamberti, p. 118. At this time Harris started putting pressure on the shogunal officials to sign the treaty. Ii decided not to risk aggravating the Americans and on July 29, 1858, encouraged by the full backing of the bakufu officials, Ii ordered the Harris treaty to be signed.Lamberti, p. 119. Soon after this Ii negotiated a number of similar unequal treaties with the Dutch, the Russians, the British and the French. Bakufu critics considered the treaties signed by Ii Naosuke to have seriously compromised Japan's sovereignty, and recovery of this power became the basis of a large part of the policies formed during the Meiji period.
Due to the frail health of the shōgun Tokugawa Iesada, the members of the Hitotsubashi faction wanted to force Ii to support Hitotsubashi Keiki as the heir to the ailing shōgun. Hitotsubashi Keiki was the reformist candidate, supported by the reformist faction, headed by his father Tokugawa Nariaki; his supporters pointed to his experience and skill in handling policy decisions. Ii was aware that Japan needed strong leadership, but unlike the reformist daimyōs, Ii was not prepared to accept strong leadership from outside the traditional forms of government. The bakufu, led by Ii, wanted the 12-year-old daimyō of Kii, Tokugawa Yoshitomi, to ascend to the position of shōgun. The bakufu supported such a young candidate because they felt that it would be easier for them to influence and control a young and inexperienced shōgun.
To end meddling in bakufu affairs, shortly after he signed the Harris treaty Ii settled the matter of the shogunal succession by claiming that the shogunal succession was a matter for the Tokugawa house alone and neither the shinpan daimyōs or the Emperor had the right to interfere. As head councilor of the Tokugawa house Ii was now free to influence the decision in favor of whichever candidate he preferred without any interference. In this way Ii was able to ignore the daimyōs who supported Hitotsubashi Keiki, the reformist candidate for the office of shōgun and crowned the fudai daimyōs candidate, Tokugawa Yoshitomi who changed his name to Tokugawa Iemochi, as the 14th Tokugawa shōgun.
Ii's decision made him very unpopular with Imperial loyalists, especially with the Mito samurai. Towards the end of 1858 the reformists went to the emperor with the hopes of restraining Ii. In response to the attempt by Tokugawa Nariaki and his supporters to denounce him in the emperor's court Ii had a shogunal decree passed which allowed him to conduct the Ansei Purge. During the rest of 1858 and into 1859 Naosuke purged over 100 officials from the bakufu, the imperial court and the lands of various daimyōs. Eight of the officials who were purged were executed; the remainder were forced into retirement. During the Ansei purge Ii Naosuke was able to force Hitotsubashi Keiki's supporters to retire and place Hitotsubashi and his family under house arrest. Ii Naosuke was also able to remove officials who had expressed unhappiness with his handling of the Harris treaty and the shogunal succession from public life.
In the Sakuradamon incident, Ii was attacked by a band of 17 young samurai loyalists from the Mito Province and cut down just in front of one of the gates of the shōguns Edo castle entering to meet with the shōgun. The assassination of Ii Naosuke, who was seen as the symbol of the bakufu's power and authority, was construed as crushing any hopes for the resurrection of the shogunate's power.Lee, Edwin. (1967). "The Kazunomiya marriage: Alliance between the court and the bakufu", Monumenta Nipponica, Vol. 22, Nos. 3–4, p. 290. His assassins additionally left a note accusing him of building heretical Buddhism temples in Japan; this in fact referred to his allowing Christianity to return to the region, building on earlier Japanese Heresiology discourse.
The death of Tairō Ii Naosuke started a wave of loyalist terrorism across Japan, the poet Tsunada Tadayuki even wrote a poem praising Ii's assassins.Walthall, Anne. (1995). "Off with their heads! The Hirata disciples and the Ashikaga shoguns," Monumenta Nipponica, Vol. 50, No. 2, p. 143. Soon attempts were being made on the lives of other members of the bakufu and their informants. The wave of popular dissent also turned against officials with a connection to Ii Naosuke, no matter how distant it was. Shimada Sakon, retainer of the Kujō, (one of the Sekke families; the 5 regent houses, and among the most powerful in the court), Imperial regent, was killed by dissidents for supporting the Harris treaty and helping Ii's confidant, Nagano Shuzen, expose members of the court who were targeted during the Ansei purge.Walthall, p. 149.
The shōgun and the Bakufu were astounded and taken completely off-guard by the death of Ii Naosuke. They didn't even announce his death until several months after the assassination took place. Instead, during this time the shōgun and the bakufu first pretended that Ii was still alive and rendering service to the shōgun. Then they faked an illness and had him render his resignation to the shōgun before announcing his death. In this way Ii continued to serve the shōgun, even after death. Ii's assassins were later granted a general amnesty by the bakufu, a precedent later used by Yamagata Aritomo, a key member of the Meiji restoration and a main architect of the military and political foundations of early modern Japan and Japanese militarism, to show that any action can be forgiven if it is performed for the betterment of the emperor.Walthall, p. 166.
Accounts of the dramatic event were sent via ship across the Pacific to San Francisco and then sped by Pony Express across the American West. On June 12, The New York Times reported that Japan's first diplomatic mission to the West received the news about what had happened in Edo.
After Ii Naosuke's death, the Ii family was disgraced for many years; recently, however, Ii's actions have been looked at in a more favorable light and Ii Naosuke has taken his place as one of the most important political figures of Japanese history. On October 7, 2009, Ii Naotake, a family descendant of Naosuke, attended a memorial ceremony with the people of Fukui in reconciliation over the execution of Hashimoto Sanai in the Ansei Purge. Kyodo News, "Fukui, Hikone 'reconcile' over 1859 beheading", Japan Times, October 8, 2009.
Ii is buried in the temple of Gōtoku-ji, in Setagaya, Tokyo.
|-
|
|
