Criticisms of the Japanese Government Authorization of Japanese History Textbooks - the Case of "Koko Nihonshi B" (Senior High School Japanese History Textbook B) published by Meiseisha

Koko Nihonshi B ( Senior High Japanese History Textbook B) published by Meiseisha (hereafter referred to as Meiseisha's textbook), approved by the Ministry of Education and Science on April 9, 2002, is a revised edition of Saishin Nihonshi (hereafter Newest Japanese History) published by Kokushokankokai. Newest Japanese History was a revised edition of Shinpen Nihonshi (hereafter Newly Edited Japanese History) published by Harashobo, which was approved by the Ministry in March 1994.

Newly Edited Japanese History was written by the National Council for the Protection of Japan (currently Japan Council). The textbook was criticized for its support of the return to traditional values in Japan and was referred to as the "Emperor's Textbook" It aroused international concern at the diplomatic level. Textbooks for senior high schools are selected by teachers themselves and this textbook was not popular. At its peak time in 1989, 9,357 copies were used. After that the number used fell to only 2,682 (14 schools) in 2001 and 2,117 (13 schools) in 2002. Kokushokankokai took over production of the textbook from Harashobo, the original publisher of the textbook, to produce the 1995 revised edition under the title Newest Japanese History. However, Kokushokankokai eventually decided to withdraw this publication as it became financially unviable. Subsequently, Meiseisha took over publication of the book.

When Newly Edited Japanese History was published, many historians and journalists strongly criticized it in books, journals and newspapers. However, when the later edition, Newest Japanese History, came out, it escaped controversy and was largely ignored by critics because it was no longer so popular. Against a continuing background of debate about textbook content from 1996, the Tsukuru Kai (Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform ? hereafter SHTR) and the Japan Council formed a united front to campaign for increased use of the textbook among school teachers.

This is alarming and cannot be ignored. With cooperation from historians and educational professionals, we have clarified our position by reassessing all the details of Meiseisha's present textbook and the one currently proposed, especially revised points and comments made by the authorizing panel.

Point-by-Point Analysis of Meiseisha's History Textbook

1.Increasing emphasis on Imperial history:

(1)Imperial lineage chart in stead of chronological table

It is a common feature to have a chronological table in the appendix of history textbooks for primary, junior high and senior high school in Japan. Tables usually show the names of Japanese eras as well as the Western calendar. However, Meiseisha has changed this in their revised textbook and instead has inserted a table showing only Japanese eras arranged by imperial lineage.

Chronological tables are very important information in history textbooks which provide students with a general overview of history. Tables usually show the names of eras, emperors and shoguns arranged in relationship to the Western calendar. They also list major events and incidents, as well as key moments in politics, the economy, society and culture, which are aligned with major world events. However, all of this has been completely replaced by a table showing only Japanese eras arranged according to the imperial genealogical chart.

(2)Problems associated with the imperial genealogical chart established by the Order of the Imperial Family Genealogy Both the Order of the Imperial Family Genealogy proclaimed in 1926 under the Imperial Household Law of 1889 and the version revised after the war contain inaccuracies which affect the study of the pre-modern history of Japan.

1)　The existence of nine emperors following Emperor Kanmu has been widely accepted as being fictitious by historians, but in Meiseisha's textbook the nine emperors are listed in the chronology in the same way as other emperors who actually existed.

2) The Nihon Shoki¹ clearly states that Prince Otomo did not ascend the throne. However, using a later interpretation used in the textbook Dai Nipponshi (The Great Japanese History), Meiseisha's textbook includes him as a legitimate emperor under the name of Emperor Kobun. His ascent to the status of emperor was only posthumously established by the Emperor Meiji in 1870.

3) Emperor Kogon, who was anointed as emperor by Emperor Godaigo and who he followed, has been relegated to a separate lineage.

In this way, the method of arranging chronology using imperial lineage suffers from inaccuracies as it is not entirely based on historical facts and is mixed with unsubstantiated oral tradition. Therefore, history textbooks in general do not use this method. The only textbooks which use this method are SHTR's editions published by Fusosha and Meiseisha, and one by Yamakawa Shuppan.

(3)Meiseisha's textbook is worse than SHTR's in terms of emperor-oriented historical accounts, especially in the section on medieval to modern history For example, in the section on medieval history alone, the Meiseisha textbook introduces seventeen emperors. They are written about either in the main text, or in the footnotes. Even Yamakawa's textbook only features eight. Meiseisha's text also depicts them positively by introducing stories about well-known clans who were their loyal subjects, twenty-one of whom were on the Nancho side. For example, "The life story of the Kusunoki clan who valued loyalty has been handed down for generations in Japan. It subsequently influenced Japanese thinking for generations".

(4)Is the main building of the Ise Shrine older than Horyuji?

Meiseisha's textbook places the description of the main buildings of Ise Shrine and Izumo Shrine in the chapter on the Kofun Era (late 300s to mid 600s), and that of Asuka Temple and Horyuji Temple in the chapter on the Asuka Era (mid 600 to early700). However, the pagoda of Asuka Temple was completed in 596 and Horyuji Temple in 607. The architecture for temples came first and then Shinto shrines. Shrines began to be built on the funeral sites where primitive animist worship was practiced. According to the Nihon Shoki, Izumo Shrine was constructed in 659 and according to the Daijingushozoujiki , Ise Shrine was built in 690. Therefore, the correct chronology should be that the Asuka and Horyu Temples were built in the Asuka Era, and the Izumo and Ise Shrines in the Hakuo Era.

This kind of inaccuracy leads students to believe that Shinto shrine architecture has an older history than that of Buddhist temples. This particular manipulation of historical facts comes from their intention to shift the historical emphasis from Buddhism to Shintoism. This kind of manipulation continues in the textbook right through to the present.

2. Valuing the Meiji Constitution and Kyoiku Chokugo (The Imperial Rescript of Education), but being critical of the post-war constitution

Meiseisha's textbook highly values the Imperial Rescript of Education and presents the entire text of the Rescript. This is also seen in the SHTR textbook. It stresses that the Meiji constitution embraces Japanese tradition, but does not refer to any of the significance of the new constitution, or how it was received by the Japanese people.

The textbook states "the abolition of the Imperial Rescript of Education was decided in the Diet under the instruction of the Occupation Forces". However, this is also a manipulation of historical facts. The decision was made voluntarily by the Japanese Diet members. This particular statement totally ignores their initiative and does not give any credit to the then members of both Houses of the Diet.

On the whole, Meiseisha takes a similar line to SHTR and is critical of the post-war constitution and the Fundamentals of Education Act.

3.Meiseisha's textbook will not help to educate children to appreciate neighboring Asian peoples．It manipulates history and will teach them a biased view of Japan's historical relationships with China and Korea.

(1)The textbook does not treat Hideyoshi's military expedition to Korea as an "invasion", but as "resistance" against colonial aggression in China by Spain and Portugal. It doesn't give any explanation of what actually happened, nor about Japan's plunder of the cultural assets of those lands.

(2)It uses the term "Amalgamation of Japan and Korea" rather than "Annexation of Korea", and tries to depict the merger as if both parties were on an equal standing. Even the Kominka Kyouiku (Education for Imperial Subjects) is only mentioned briefly in a footnote to the implementation of conscription which took place towards the end of the Asia-Pacific War, and the statement "the Annexation affected ethnic pride deeply" has also been removed from the new edition. However, the Ministry of Education and Technology has not done anything about this. The textbook tries to justify Japanese colonization policies in Korea by emphasizing what Japan achieved in the country (this was recommended by the textbook screening panel).

Their treatment of both the 3.1 Independence Movement organized by the Korean people and Japanese suppression of them is only brief.

Meiseisha's new textbook has removed all reference to Soshi Kaimei (Japanization of names) and learning of the Japanese language which were imposed on the peoples in Korea and Taiwan as part of Japanese colonial assimilation policies. This account is included in the current edition. The textbook screening panel requested them to put it back.

(3)The present edition tries to show that China was to blame for the China-Japan War in the same way as SHTR did. It also tries to justify the Manchurian Incident by saying that China launched a campaign to regain its vested interests in Manchuria which China had lost to Japan. It puts an emphasis on Japan's loss. Their revised version has added a further sentence which reads, "At the height of anti-Japanese sentiment, damage continuously occurred to Japanese residents and Japanese vested rights and interests". The screening panel has requested them to change "At the height of" to "Under the increasing", and from "continuously occurred " to "increased".

Their account of the Second Shanghai Incident has also been manipulated. They assert that China caused the incident. The account included in the textbook reads "Japan ended up sending troops because one Japanese naval officer was murdered at Shanghai", and the troops were sent "to protect Japanese residents there". Their 1986 edition contained a similar account and passed the textbook screening. However, this account later attracted criticism from the international community and the then Japanese Ministry of Education ordered Meiseisha to remove the account. However, the current Ministry of Education and Technology has taken no position on this.

The term Nikka Jihen (Japan-China Incident ) was commonly used in the approved history textbooks used in pre-war years. The Meiseisha textbook uses the same term to refer to the Japan-China War. Furthermore, it has eliminated such sections as "suffering experienced by Chinese people resident in places where battles were fought was serious". This description of "suffering experienced by Chinese people" was added to the textbook as a result of the 1986 screening. The panel thought it was more appropriate for the textbook to use an expression which indicated more Japanese aggression. Other accounts of Japan's aggression in China, such as the Nanjing Massacre, are only covered in footnotes in Meiseisha's new edition.

(4)The Meiseisha textbook uses the term Daitowa Senso (the Great East Asia War) and takes a position which denies Japanese aggression in the Asia Pacific War.

The textbook constructs a historical context without any critical assessment of the objects of the Greater East Asia War. It puts emphasis on the Greater East Asia Conference and the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere doctrine. In the section in the new edition on Japanese colonization of Southeast Asia, for example, it has inserted "there were also many people who wanted to assist the Japanese military because they wished for their country's independence". This is the same as the SHTR version. They try to give the impression that the war was not intended as aggression, but to free the Asian region from Western colonization. However, this didn't pass government screening and has been removed. This kind of manipulation totally ignores the damage and suffering inflicted upon on the residents of the Southeast Asian and Pacific regions. Furthermore, it blurs the line where the responsibility for these sufferings experienced by the Asian peoples lies. The SHTR version has done the same in this respect.

(5)Meiseisha's textbook does not describe how ordinary Japanese citizens lived during the war in Japan.

The textbook's description is one-sided and only refers to how the Japanese public prepared to endure hardship during the war in order to support the national war effort. It totally ignores any anti-war movements which existed among the people.

The description of the Battle of Okinawa is also one-sided. It reads, "the Okinawan people, including junior high school boys and girls, formed a united front to fight against the Allies". The textbook does not refer to any of the massacres of the Okinawan people conducted by the Japanese army, or their sacrifices during the war. This is also seen in SHTR textbook.

In conclusion, Meiseisha's revised textbook glorifies Japanese aggression during the war. The content is antagonistic to Asian peoples and only fosters xenophobic sentiments. The textbook is not only internationally unacceptable, but also isolates Japan from the rest of the world.

4.The textbook ignores existing historical research and is not suitable for high school students

As already mentioned above, the history which the Meiseisha textbook constructs ignores new historical findings produced by researchers and is largely based on unsubstantiated evidence. The textbook is full of expressions that are abstract and hard to comprehend for high school students. It is not user-friendly. Furthermore, it forces their one-sided views of history on students and is distorting their historical understanding.

On the Issue of the Deletion of Accounts about Comfort Women

There has been a considerable reduction in numbers of junior high school history textbooks which include descriptions of the issue of "comfort women" under the Japanese army. This tendency is also seen in senior high school textbooks.

Apart from Meiseisha's textbook, Japanese history textbooks for senior high schools currently contain some description of the issue of comfort women. However, deletion is noted in other subject textbooks. They include one on World History (published by Teikoku Shoin), two on Modern Society (Kyoiku Shupan and Kirihara Shoten), and one on Ethics (Kyoiku Shupan).

This seems to have been done at their own initiative, but is most likely that they were influenced by the recent textbook disputes. The international community has made recommendations to the Japanese government that they keep teaching about comfort women in schools. The recommendations were formed as a result of decisions made at two international meetings - the UN Human Rights Committee in August 2001 and the International War Criminal Court on Issues Concerning Females. We strongly object and urge the publishers to revise their position on this matter.