The period of 1333-1336, though including little more than two years of time, is of great significance as marking the existence of a temporary mikadoate. The fact that it lasted so short a time, and that the duarchy was again set up on its ruins, has furnished both natives and foreigners with the absurd and specious, but strongly urged argument that the Government of Japan, by a single ruler from a single center, is an impossibility, and that the creation of a dual system with a “spiritual” or nominal sovereign in one part of the empire, and a military or “secular” ruler in another, is a necessity.
During the agitation of the question concerning the abolition of the dual system, and the restoration of the Mikado in 1860-1868, one of the chief arguments of the adherents of the shogunate against the scheme of the agitators was the assertion that the events of the period 1333-1336 proved that the Mikado could not alone govern the country, and that it must have duarchy.
Even after the overthrow of the shogun Keiki, known as the “Tycoon,” in 1868, foreigners, as well as natives, who had studied Japanese history, fully believed and expected that in a year or two the present mikados Government would be overthrown and the “Tycoon” return to power, basing their belief on the fact that the mikadoate of 1333-1336 did not last.
Whatever force such an argument might have had when Japan had no foreign relations and no aliens on her soil to disturb the balance between Kioto and Kamakura, it is certain that it counts for naught when, under altered conditions, more than the united form of the whole empire is now required to cope with the political pressure from without.
Previous article Next article
From General Nelson A. Miles
Thrilling Stories of The Russian-Japanese War, 1904