| 7. In the Edo Period and the Meiji Period, the difference is
only whether the anarch is a tycoon (Aizu type) or an emperor (Mito or Meiji type).
Bureaucrats, or responsible guardians of citizens, have been in charge of the management
of a nation, while generals or emperors were not responsible for it at all. The essence of the concepts of the Mito or Aizu clans, esteemed to be extremely nationalistic, was imported from the Chinese regime. That is why, in the former, I said that the core of the following story is in the phrase "referring to China." The heart of the matter of various "regulations," being a current topic, lies here, too. After all, regulations are, by nature, to "protect" citizens. |
||
|
||
| 8. "Hagakure chivalry" Contrary to the Tokugawa chivalry, this Hagakure chivalry is criticized as "affected martial arts as Kyoto style." First of all, let's begin with the formation of Hagakure. Hagakure was a dictation work by an attendant who heard what another attendant of the Nabeshima family, govering the Saga clan in the latter of the 16th Century, told. |
||
|
||
|
||
| In those days, Nabeshima Katsusige, the seignior of the Saga clan, whose heart ached for self-immolation of his attendants, issued the prohibition against self-immolation in 1661. As a result, Yamamoto Tsunetomo, an attendant of Mitsuhige from infancy, retired to be a priest at the northern suburb of Saga, because he had always wanted to immolate himself for the seignior. Then, he compiled what he told to Tashiro Tsuramoto, a visitor to the place of retirement, and finally completed Hagakure, as his codification on chivalry, in 1776. | ||
|
||
|
||
