【特集：慶應４年──義塾命名150年】座談会：慶應４年の福澤諭吉

This year, 2018, marks 150 years since 1868, which was the fourth year of the Keio era (the era name changed to Meiji 1 in September). Therefore, today I would like to talk with you all about Yukichi Fukuzawa in the year Keio 4. That said, I hope to bring the Fukuzawa Yukichi image at the point of Keio 4 into focus by looking not only at that year, but also at the ten years or so before and after it.

I believe the ten years prior to Keio 4 were a very important decade in which Fukuzawa discovered his life's work, and the ten years following could be called the decade in which the foundation of Fukuzawa's thought was established.

Furthermore, it goes without saying that Keio 4 was a period of upheaval for Japan, as the Tokugawa Shogunate fell and the Meiji government was established, but this year was also a time of great change for Fukuzawa. It was in this year that Fukuzawa's Juku moved to Shinsenzaza, was named Keio University, and full-scale education got on track.

Keio 4 is exactly the point where Fukuzawa had just passed the halfway mark of his 66-year life. It is precisely the turning point of "living two lives in one body."

Regarding the period before that, when he went to Paris as a member of the mission to Europe in 1862 (Bunkyu 2), the photograph of Fukuzawa taken by Nadar shows him as truly handsome. Looking at this, I think Yukichi was handsome even inside his head. Fukuzawa was only 28 years old, but he was in high spirits; having come to Europe for the first time, he realized that Europeans were not opponents to be so intimidated by. Wearing a black haori and crisp pleated hakama, with a sedge hat on his head tied with a white cord at his chin and two swords tucked into his waist, he walked the streets of Paris alongside the likes of Koan Matsuki and Shuhei Mitsukuri.

This was the period when Fukuzawa was about to truly take flight, as if standing on a catapult. He was intellectually very fulfilled and full of curiosity; whatever he saw or heard, he would make it his own.

Even looking at Fukuzawa's "Seiko Techo" (Western Voyage Notebook) from this time, he was writing freely from right to left, left to right, top to bottom, and bottom to top in English, French, Dutch, and Classical Chinese, capturing everything of interest with a remarkably agile mind. Moreover, he didn't just take notes; he properly assigned meaning to them himself.

What kind of impact do you think such Western experiences had on Fukuzawa afterwards, particularly around Keio 4?

It must have been huge. For Fukuzawa in his late 20s, it was a tremendous learning experience, along with his round trip to America on the Kanrin Maru two years prior. It was as if he had suddenly embraced an entire encyclopedia in his head, and he even remembered which page had which entry and what was written there.

As he wrote in "Fukuo Jiden" (The Autobiography of Yukichi Fukuzawa), the keyword for Fukuzawa's actions was, so to speak, "sassatsu" (briskly/refreshingly). That "sassatsu" is an expression of being intelligent. He didn't dwell on things that weren't worth dwelling on. He immediately turned his eyes toward more important matters.

Throughout his life, "sassatsu" was a favorite word of Fukuzawa's, wasn't it?

That was likely his lifelong keyword. It's quite cool, isn't it?

Fukuzawa had three overseas experiences at the end of the Edo period, and the last one was the year before Keio 4. So, for Fukuzawa at the point of Keio 4, his mind must have been in a period of being quite heavily influenced by those overseas experiences.

Fukuzawa was the only person who went to the West three times during the end of the Edo period. There were others like Genichiro Fukuchi, Taichi Tanabe, and Yumogoro Ono who went twice, but his is a rare case. Moreover, Fukuzawa wasn't just chosen to go by chance; he seized those opportunities himself to carve out his own destiny. He was under a constant intellectual drive.

Keio 4 was the period when Saigo Takamori, whom Mr. Sakizaki featured in his book, was fighting the Boshin War. Regarding Yukichi Fukuzawa, what points do you focus on?

In Keio 4, when an official letter arrived from the Shogunate, Fukuzawa declined it claiming illness and ceased being a shogunal retainer. At the same time, immediately after that, he also declined an order from the new government to come to Kyoto, citing illness. In the end, at this time, Fukuzawa declined all his family stipends and chose to become a commoner. Since the abolition of stipends for general samurai occurred in Meiji 9, he did this of his own will quite far in advance, while simultaneously refusing to serve in the government. Then, the following year, he embarked on the self-management of his publishing business under the trade name "Fukuzawaya Yukichi."

What this means is that, in short, he became someone who was truly "nobody." What was important for Fukuzawa—politics included—was that he was a person who placed great emphasis on economic independence, on earning his own keep. His intention to live through his publishing business and other ventures can be seen in his actual actions.

We read the keyword "When the individual is independent, the nation is independent" from Gakumon no susume (An Encouragement of Learning) to understand Fukuzawa's thoughts on "independence," but I feel it is significant that the vividness and real-life experience of the "independence" he was actually practicing lies in this year of Keio 4. It is powerful to think that Fukuzawa's concrete actions during this period were verbalized into Gakumon no susume (An Encouragement of Learning) and An Outline of a Theory of Civilization.

Furthermore, there is the famous story of how he continued his lectures while the Shogitai were fighting the Battle of Ueno. What I want to focus on there is that, in the end, whether it be the imperial army or the anti-government forces, he demonstrated that a third position—doing scholarship without daring to intervene directly while political struggles are occurring—is important.

Even in times like today, when people tend to act impulsively on the right or left regarding political matters, I believe that showing an attitude of calmly pursuing scholarship at the very beginning of modernization is something very important even in the modern era.

Fukuzawa always kept a step's distance from real-world politics and had something else he was passionate about. Since this period was likely when he was passionate about scholarship, education, and a new way of life, he probably felt he couldn't be bothered with things like wars or political struggles.

That seems to be the case. One can see a strong will saying, "I have other things to do."

Looking back now, the fact that Fukuzawa was studying alone with his students was more important for the overall history of Japan than the Shogitai at Ueno or the Boshin War.

It is said that the roots of Keio University lie in Fukuzawa's Juku, which began in Ansei 5 (1858), but it was from around Bunkyu 3 (1863), after his return from the mission to Europe, that Fukuzawa began to tackle education there in earnest.

What I find amazing about that time is that he foresaw the limits of teaching by himself and sought to educate those who would take charge of education in the future. To that end, he brought six brilliant young men from Nakatsu, including Tokujirō Obata, to educate them. Since Keio 4 was likely when such new policies of Fukuzawa's began to get on track, I think it was a time when he was incredibly fired up.

As Mr. Senzaki mentioned earlier, in this year he resigned as a shogunal retainer and aimed to be a "commoner making a living through reading," but what were his thoughts regarding the Nakatsu Domain? Mr. Nishizawa, what is your view on this point?

Right now, I am wondering at exactly what point Fukuzawa began to think that the Baku-han system was no longer viable. I believe that even after the Restoration of Imperial Rule (Keio 3), Fukuzawa did not yet have a clear opinion on what kind of political system would be best for Japan, and that his views began to change around the time the Return of Lands and People to the Emperor became concrete.

Regarding the Nakatsu Domain, in a letter sent from Europe in Bunkyu 2, he advocated for human resource development through Western studies. However, that was a proposal to the Nakatsu Domain, phrased in a way that they must not lose to other domains and that Nakatsu must not let other domains take the lead; his awareness of the domain still seems strong.

Within Fukuzawa, I think he believed until a certain point that the premise of a solid nation under the Baku-han system was necessary for Japan to proceed with civilization and enlightenment. That is perhaps why he spoke of the "Monarchy of the Taikun" (letter to Hidenosuke Fukuzawa, Keio 2). Precisely because he had seen countries of various origins in Europe, he considered the establishment of the nation's diplomatic rights to be important and likely thought it better not to change the foundation.

However, by Meiji 3, he was preaching to the Nakatsu Domain about "When the individual is independent, the nation is independent" and the "True Great Empire of Japan," so I think there was a major shift there. I suspect that around Keio 4 was the turning point.

Fukuzawa also placed "independence of the family" at the foundation of "independence of the nation." In that respect, what was the relationship between the vision of the nation and the vision of the family during this period?

Fukuzawa's eldest son was born in Bunkyu 3 (1863), his second son was born during the Keio era, and his third child, the eldest daughter, was born on the 10th day of the intercalary 4th month of Keio 4, when they moved to Shinsenzaza. In the same year, Appendix to Things Western (Seiyō Jijō Gaihen) was published, and it describes how humans and families should be constituted. There, Fukuzawa states for the first time—albeit as a translation—a vision of the family where a couple bound by emotion becomes the basis from which human social interaction begins.

As he had his own family and children were born one after another, he considered how a home should be. I believe the idea that the family must be significantly changed as the foundation of society had begun from the time he returned from seeing foreign countries. At the same time, it was likely a period when his previous way of thinking about what kind of national vision to create changed significantly, and he began to advocate for the creation of a new nation with the independence of the individual at its core.

On the way back from Europe in Bunkyu 2, he was frequently discussing with Koan Matsuki and Shuhei Mitsukuri on the ship about what Japan should do from then on. In the end, they settled on something like a federal system like Germany's, where the various daimyo take responsibility for their own subjects, but the political sovereignty as a nation is concentrated in the Taikun. In other words, they concluded there was no choice but to move toward a "Monarchy of the Taikun."

An intellectual of Fukuzawa's caliber must have been strongly aware that if the various domains continued to act independently under the current Baku-han system, the country would be fragmented and unable to respond to the coming national crises. I suspect he already knew in Bunkyu 2 that the Shogunate would not last. The alternatives to that system were gradually being narrowed down.

That's right. He thought that an alliance of domains would not work and that it had to be a "Monarchy of the Taikun." However, that also gradually changed.

But the idea of a Monarchy of the Taikun was being considered by both the Imperial Court side and the Shogunate side. Placing the Taikun in the center and ruling with influential figures among the daimyo as ministers. That was a discussion that frequently came up within the Imperial Court even during the era of Emperor Komei.

The radical argument of people like Tomomi Iwakura, Toshimichi Okubo, and Takayoshi Kido was that such a system wouldn't work and the Shogun had to be cut off, and the result ended up moving in that direction.

Fukuzawa himself was likely in a situation where he was thinking through various things in real-time. Regarding the domains, as Mr. Nishizawa mentioned, until a certain point there was still an expectation of utilizing the domain organizations.

But it's very cool that when he left Nakatsu for the first time at age 19 to go to Nagasaki, he looked back, spat toward the domain, and said he would never return to such a place (laughs). Leaving by his own feet and throwing sand at the place where he was born. This was the same for people like Lessing during the European Enlightenment.

As Mr. Nishizawa also pointed out, Appendix to Things Western (Seiyō Jijō Gaihen) was released in Keio 4. This is a translated work, and the original is said to be a general textbook on liberal economics. However, that doesn't necessarily mean Fukuzawa was a devotee of liberal economics at this time. The reality is that he was absorbed in reading new economics; it wasn't about whether liberal economic theory was good or bad, but rather that he was fascinated by its analytical methods and new ways of thinking.

The reason the early Keio University produced so many great talents is that the teacher himself was absorbed in studying in real-time. That drew in the young people around him. I feel that Keio 4 was exactly that kind of period.

One question for Mr. Komuro: when you say Things Western (Seiyō Jijō) was a book on liberal economics, what was the state of economic thought in the West at that time and how was it taught?

Broadly speaking, liberal economics, known as the classical school, was the basis, but it was an era led by figures like J.S. Mill, who showed an understanding of social policy while maintaining the classical framework. Also, in Germany, the historical school, which emphasized the historical realities of each country and society in opposition to the classical school, was rising and influencing Britain and America.

However, in Britain and America, the classical framework had not collapsed for general texts. Both John Hill Burton's book, which was the basis for Appendix to Things Western (Seiyō Jijō Gaihen), and William Ellis's textbook, which Takahira Kanda translated under the title "Keizai Shogaku," were of the classical school based on liberal economics. The same goes for Wayland's economics book that Fukuzawa and others were reading during the battle with the Shogitai.

I see. The reason I asked that question is that in Japan, even in literature, there is a tendency for histories that are connected vertically in the West—like the classical school and romanticism—to come rushing in all at once. For example, about ten years later, in the case of Chomin Nakae, he would criticize liberal economics at every opportunity, saying "the Manchester school of economics is...," and after returning from France, he studied Confucianism and pointed out the importance of morality. Given that flow, I wonder what Fukuzawa's stance was.

Regarding economics, I think he was still in the process of learning. He was learning with great sympathy, but he didn't have the conviction of a prominent economic theorist.

In Meiji 10, Tokujirō Obata, who could be called a comrade, published a full translation of Wayland's economics ("Eishi Keizairon"), and in the preface, Obata expressed doubts about Wayland-style liberal economic theory.

By that time, Obata and Fukuzawa had come to the view that in a late-developing country like Japan, the role of the government was also important. However, at the Keio 4 stage, I think they were still in the middle of their studies.

To a mind like Fukuzawa's, economics was probably more interesting than politics. Because you can go with mathematical formulas. From the time he went to Europe, while his fellow shogunal retainers were talking about how many centimeters high the train rails were or how many meters in diameter the wheels were, Fukuzawa was thinking about how the enormous amount of money to build this was raised. He had an economic mind to begin with. His father was, after all, a manager of a rice warehouse in Osaka.

He came to Shinsenzaza in Keio 4, named it Keio University, and became independent from the Nakatsu Domain, but was there ever a time when Keio fell into a large deficit?

Keio had management crises many times, but the first management difficulty was from around Meiji 10.

At the time, many students were from the samurai class, but with the abolition of stipends, the samurai became impoverished, and due to the government's policy of favoring government schools, the number of enrollees decreased and tuition income fell; moreover, expenses increased due to rising prices. Also, the increase in dropouts among samurai from Kyushu during the Satsuma Rebellion had an impact.

It wasn't this specific period, but as the power of the "official" (government) grew stronger, I suspect there were cases where coming to Keio as a private school conflicted with obtaining a good post within the new government, leading to a decrease in students. Doshisha and others must have suffered greatly because of that.

After Meiji 12, privileges regarding conscription became limited to government schools only, and as a result, the number of students decreased. Or, when the economy worsened from around Meiji 14, the samurai, who were the core, found it difficult to continue their studies.

Competition with government schools likely became full-scale in the Meiji 10s. During the first decade of Meiji, the government schools were not yet well-established, so Keio was in a position to appeal its pioneering significance.

When he moved to Shiba Shinsenzaza, he wrote Keio Gijuku no Ki (Notes on Keio Gijuku) and other works to show what kind of school it was. In those, he clearly wrote that it was a school centered on Western studies. Even if he didn't go as far as a confrontation with the "official," I think he was quite strongly conscious of the independence of the individual from the official and the state from around this time. I read it as having the idea that Keio University is different from the official and will do things more freely.

At this time, even if they weren't called government schools yet, places like Daigaku Nanko and the Heigakuryo (later the Imperial Japanese Army Academy, established in Osaka in Meiji 2) were created one after another, right? Both the Shogunate at the end of the Edo period and the new Meiji government built government schools at a tremendous pace. Keio existed among them, aiming to be independent from the state and central government and to teach freely according to its own ideas. I suspect such an ambition existed from quite early on.

In Keio Gijuku no Ki (Notes on Keio Gijuku), he says he will create Keio University taking public schools as an example. Also, rather than a relationship where there is a teacher and students who are taught, there seems to have been a very strong sense of a Keio Gijuku Shachu, or comrades learning together, and I believe that is reflected in the name "Gijuku."

I think Fukuzawa's sense of rivalry with the official became stronger a bit later, around Meiji 14 or 15, after government education began to put forward a new Confucianism. Until then, I suspect Fukuzawa didn't have the official much in his sights and wanted to enhance the Gijuku while working hard together among themselves.

But when Fukuzawa started working at the translation bureau of the Shogunate's foreign affairs office at the end of the Edo period, even in a place like that, there were plenty of officials with a sluggish attitude, and I imagine he was already fed up. He probably couldn't stand the thought of Western education being dominated by such people.

Certainly, his negative view of officials existed since the time of the domain and the Shogunate. However, regarding the rivalry with government schools, I think he was still optimistic during the first decade of Meiji. It could be said that the period when he truly began to feel a sense of crisis was from around Meiji 14 or 15, when, along with the development of public education, the official revived Confucianist education, as Mr. Nishizawa pointed out.

Looking at the previous discussion in terms of how Confucianism was viewed, Rai Sanyo appears in Chapter 9 of An Outline of a Theory of Civilization, but Fukuzawa dislikes Rai Sanyo. There lies a certain image Fukuzawa had of Confucianism. Simply put, he brings up Rai Sanyo as a typical example of the image of the doctrine of cause and effect—in short, a fixed hierarchical society.

However, Fukuzawa evaluates Saigo Takamori very highly. The keyword when he wrote "Teichu Koron" in Meiji 10 was the "spirit of resistance," but what permeated Saigo Takamori's thought was the concept of "Heaven" in Confucianism rather than the doctrine of cause and effect. It is the Heaven, the Way of Heaven, and the Mandate of Heaven of Confucianism. People who were very strongly conscious of that generated a strong will to complete their social destiny, the Meiji Restoration.

People like Masao Maruyama say that we must also look at that aspect of Confucianism. If so, I feel that it might be interesting to read Fukuzawa's perception of Confucianism in more detail, rather than just through An Outline of a Theory of Civilization.

Professor Maruyama said that Fukuzawa was a thinker who developed his arguments by considering what needed to be refuted within the context of the times.

Fukuzawa actually has aspects where he evaluates Confucianism, but when he judges that he must deny this Confucianism now, he refutes it thoroughly. I feel he might be that kind of thinker.

In works like Gakumon no susume (An Encouragement of Learning), he is quite harsh, calling Confucian scholars walking dictionaries or empty-headed. However, even in Confucianism, a ruler must take responsibility for the lives of the people as a kind of intellectual elite. This is the fundamental ethics of the samurai, and Fukuzawa had firmly acquired that as well.

Throughout the late 18th to 19th centuries, Japan's excellent samurai—whether Watanabe Kazan or Abe Masahiro—had a consistently unwavering sense of mission toward the society they were responsible for. They did not hesitate to sacrifice themselves for it. I believe it was because of that that modern Japan endured.

It is written that An Outline of a Theory of Civilization itself was written for Confucian scholars. Probably because Confucian scholars were, in modern terms, a typical kind of intellectual middle class, he likely thought that if he could get them to properly understand Western civilization, they would flip over and become a force for advancing important modernization.

How much did Saigo study about the West?

He recommended his disciples to read "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization." Other than that, there were many political works, such as translations related to Napoleon.

Since Saigo passed away in the 10th year of Meiji, it means he read "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization" almost immediately after it was published.

That's right. Although they never met in person, it seems he held it in high regard. There is a theory that the end of the Edo period in intellectual history should be considered to have started around 1790, when the Kansei Prohibition of Heterodox Studies was implemented. This is because it created the possibility for people outside the samurai class to enter domain politics through scholarship. Above all, the number of domain schools increased, providing more opportunities for lower-ranking samurai to access learning.

Among them, lower-ranking samurai like Saigo Takamori received an education from a young age.

Society gradually entered a period of upheaval, and mobility increased. Mobility gave lower-ranking individuals the chance to participate in society; in other words, people who at first glance seemed steeped in feudal ideology ended up becoming a force that changed society and pushed modernization forward. Fukuzawa was a man more well-versed in Confucianism than most, which is why he likely had the self-confidence to overturn the thinking of traditional intellectuals educated in Confucianism through works like "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization." In that sense, I believe Fukuzawa was indeed one of the thinkers of the Bakumatsu period.

Fukuzawa was a man more well-versed in Confucianism than most, which is why he likely had the self-confidence to overturn the thinking of traditional intellectuals educated in Confucianism through works like "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization." In that sense, I believe Fukuzawa was indeed one of the thinkers of the Bakumatsu period.

As you say, Fukuzawa had considerable confidence in his own Chinese studies, which is why he believed he was a powerful critic of Confucianism. In "Fukuo Jiden" (The Autobiography of Fukuzawa Yukichi), he says that to Chinese studies, he is a "traitor from within."

Nishi Amane also did extensive Confucian studies, only to toss them aside and convert to Western studies. In the same year Fukuzawa kicked Nakatsu aside and went to Nagasaki, Nishi Amane slipped out of the Tsuwano domain residence in Edo at dawn and headed toward Tezuka Ritsuzo's school of Dutch studies while loudly reciting Chinese poetry. Kanda Takahira was likely the same. Furthermore, Nishimura Shigeki, who served the Sakura domain under Hotta Masayoshi, requested to study abroad around the same time. That development was significant.

Shiba Ryotaro calls that Perry's shockwave. Young people around the age of 20 in both the East and West simultaneously abandoned Confucianism and converted to Western studies. I believe it was precisely because they had a sense of mission given by heaven, and a sense of responsibility as samurai toward the country and society, that they were able to respond to the Western powers at the end of the Edo period and achieve the great transformation of the Meiji era. Supporting this were things like "Heaven" and the "Gi" (righteousness) in Gijuku.

In a sense, for the samurai who received an education during the old Shogunate era, those moral aspects already existed in reality. Therefore, one could say Fukuzawa thought that from now on, the ability to see things objectively and the ability to measure things were what was needed instead.

That also hits the mark perfectly. For example, at the end of the Edo period, an oil painter named Takahashi Yuichi appeared. He would stare intently at the weave of clothing, its texture, and even where it reflected light, and try to reproduce it. Observation, then reasoning based on those results, and then synthesis. That is likely the most important issue within Fukuzawa's "Gakumon no susume (An Encouragement of Learning)."

Abstract things, such as the sense of morality or responsibility toward Heaven within one's own heart, will naturally be conveyed to students, so what should actually be taught are foreign languages and the abilities of observation, reasoning, and synthesis. It's very pragmatic and good, isn't it?

But I find it very interesting that Fukuzawa was attracted to Saigo.

What he says in "Teichu Koron" is that one must have a perspective that properly criticizes the government, and he saw that very much in Saigo since the Seikanron (debate on invading Korea).

Also, after Saigo's death, Fukuzawa came to evaluate Itagaki Taisuke. What is interesting about looking at Fukuzawa during this period is the intellectual history surrounding the word "feudalism." Normally, we think the opposite concept of "feudal" is "modern." We think of it as a chronological relationship. However, in Fukuzawa's time, the opposite concept of "feudal" (hoken) was "prefectural" (gunken). Of course, the former symbolized the Shogunate-domain system, and the latter symbolized the political system of the new Meiji government. In other words, it was an institutional issue of local autonomy versus centralization, not a concept of a time axis.

And during the Satsuma Rebellion, Fukuzawa was likely desperately groping for something like decentralization or local autonomy in a form different from military force. He sought a way to vent the frustrations of the disgruntled samurai by training them in local autonomy. Fukuzawa himself developed his thoughts while wavering between "feudal" and "prefectural."

So, as a kind of model, there is something like a Saigo who does not use military force.

Around the 4th year of Keio, Fukuzawa published true enlightenment books. Things like "Guide to travel in the western world" and "Research Bulletin Kyurizukai." I love that kind of writing. In "Guide to travel in the western world," he even writes things like, "Be careful in Panama because there are giant snakes and lions," or "It's not good to gulp down strange things just because they are cold." It's very specific, and I think it's magnificent how he writes his own experiences vividly as they were. Wasn't that the first direct travel guide to the West written by a Japanese person?

Even if "Research Bulletin Kyurizukai" was based on Chambers or something similar, he is as good a storyteller as a rakugo performer or a kodan storyteller. He writes it so that even a 10-year-old child would find it interesting. He takes up very familiar things and preaches observation and reasoning. His skill in providing scientific wisdom by citing mundane examples right in front of him. It's natural that he would dislike someone like Rai Sanyo. I was impressed when I read that. I want to evaluate this more highly.

It seems Fukuzawa himself also thought "Research Bulletin Kyurizukai" was important. In the "Foreword to the Collected Works of Fukuzawa," he states that he wrote it believing that having the general public, young and old, come into contact with physics was the key to accepting Western civilization.

In a letter addressed to a high-ranking official of the Nakatsu domain in the 2nd year of Keio, he attached something called "Wakuun Suihitsu" (Essays of Someone). In it, Fukuzawa writes that the study of physical laws (kyurigaku) is extremely important and must be studied, and that if Japanese people are made to travel to Europe, they will become conscious of Japan, and a sense of pride and self-confidence in Japan will be born. I believe the fruits of these essays were "Guide to travel in the western world" and "Research Bulletin Kyurizukai."

What impressed me about "Guide to travel in the western world" was that in the first line, he says that while Confucius proclaimed, "Is it not a pleasure to have friends come from afar?", why don't we try going out from here once in a while? No one had said such a thing in the 2,500 years since Confucius. Fukuzawa performed a truly Copernican revolution.

The 1876 piece "Memorial for the 50th Anniversary of the Late Master Otsuki Bansui," which showed a complete grasp of the context of thought from the Tokugawa 18th century to Meiji through a single-minded focus on Western studies, is also magnificent. Just reading this makes me think Fukuzawa is greater than Saigo. He has ambition and a deep understanding of the history of civilization. He has insight. This is truly the pinnacle of all of Fukuzawa Yukichi's writings.

I believe Fukuzawa in the 4th year of Keio was a person who never stood still and was constantly moving. To summarize what constituted Fukuzawa in that year: one was his experience of the West, another was based on his education in Confucianism, and another was likely the baptism of Western natural science he absorbed through Dutch studies.

How did Fukuzawa of the 4th year of Keio change after that, or did he not change? I would like to move the conversation to that area. After this, "Gakumon no susume (An Encouragement of Learning)" and "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization" were published, and various developments occurred.

After the founding of "Jiji Shinpo," political criticism and such became more frequent.

I think the flow from Fukuzawa the educator to Fukuzawa the journalist also emerges after this.

The period around the first decade of Meiji was likely right between being an educator and a journalist. In 1875, he suddenly realized that enlightenment had ended, shut himself away for a year to study, and wrote "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization," but even after that, he published relatively thick, theoretical books.

Rather, around the 20th year of Meiji, he wrote quite short and realistic things regarding treaty issues and so on. So, I feel that this period was a time for creating substantial works.

So, after going through a certain amount of accumulation of enlightening works, he theorized them as a culmination.

That's right. With his reading and experience of traveling abroad accumulated, as he approached his 40s, I feel it was a time when he stood up as a so-called thinker, aiming what he had studied at future generations.

Journalism first appears toward the end of the first decade of Meiji. The search for journalism began in the form of "Minkan Zasshi" and "Katei Sodan," but before that, there was a period of intense learning, and "Gakumon no susume (An Encouragement of Learning)" was likely somewhere in the middle.

Before Fukuzawa started writing "Gakumon no susume (An Encouragement of Learning)," he read Wayland's "Elements of Moral Science" and found it so interesting that he almost forgot to eat or sleep.

Regarding "Elements of Moral Science," was such a thing really that interesting?

Certainly, it might be called tedious if we read it now, but for Fukuzawa, who was raised on Confucianism, it contained a clear antithesis to Confucianism, and it was likely a work that excited him as he read it.

When "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization" was published in 1875, I think he still saw Western civilization as something to catch up to. However, when he wrote "Transition of People's Way of Thinking" in 1879, one can read a kind of pride, as if he had already completely read the cutting edge of that era.

I believe the transition from the first decade of Meiji to the 10th year is a very important period for Fukuzawa as a thinker. From the consciousness of trying to catch up because Japan was in a sense still lacking, to—to put it a bit grandiosely—perhaps thinking that his own thoughts had reached the most advanced level in the world; I think there is that much self-confidence in "Transition of People's Way of Thinking."

He takes pride in having seen through the Russian situation of the time and the emergence of nihilists through English texts. I think there was a change from the era of looking up at Europe from below to looking at it from the same perspective as the most advanced people in Europe.

Up until around "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization," his gaze was directed more toward the domestic situation in Japan. That became considerably more open.

Since "Transition of People's Way of Thinking" is likely based on the idea that the ressentiment of those with knowledge moves society, it was a quite cutting-edge way of thinking for that period in the 19th century. Fukuzawa himself had great confidence in "Transition of People's Way of Thinking."

That's right. He has a strong sense of having followed the 20 years or so from the 1850s to the 70s as an era. Since he had already seen through the fact that modernization leads to turmoil, it is quite amazing that he, who had been promoting modernization, saw even the dangers it held by around the 10th year of Meiji.

He had placed his hopes on the transmission of information, but that transmission of information brings about another crisis, doesn't it?

Yes. Since the end of the Edo period, in terms of abstract concepts, he had always favored fluidization. Moving oneself within society.

Not being a "mental slave."

Exactly. That's why he strongly criticizes obsession. But then he realized that fluidization, in turn, causes problems.

What surprised me was that Fukuzawa said regarding the Satsuma Rebellion that, to put it simply, Saigo lost the information war. The young people who later rose up in Kagoshima only read newspapers. There, it only said that Okubo Toshimichi's government in Tokyo wore very flashy clothes or was obsessed with Western things. Reading that, they confirmed their anger that those guys were indeed bad.

Fukuzawa says that while people in Tokyo can confirm the facts, people in the provinces imagine them only through images and let their anger swell. He says that became the cause that incited the war.

Another thing is that after the war started, the government army used the telegraph for the first time to grasp the movements of the Satsuma army, but Saigo's army was unable to do any of that, and he left a short piece of writing saying that was why they lost.

It seems that around "Transition of People's Way of Thinking," he grasped the key points for observing the state of the times. Looking back a bit, even the Satsuma Rebellion was like that. He seems to have a sense of pride in having grasped a powerful weapon to cut through the times. The fact that he commented on Saigo in that way shows that Fukuzawa was quite sharp, and the fact that he had such self-confidence feels very much like Fukuzawa.

If "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization" was one culmination of Fukuzawa's learning in the 4th year of Keio, then "Transition of People's Way of Thinking" showed a new perspective.

I believe he had an interest in journalism from the time he became interested in education. When he went to Europe in the 2nd year of Bunkyu, he was asked by a Frenchman named Rosny if it was true that the Russian army had taken Tsushima from Japan, and he said no, that was just a rumor. Then the next day, Rosny brought a newspaper and said that a newspaper article had proclaimed it to be a complete falsehood. After that, Fukuzawa asked Rosny to include him among his newspaper colleagues.

Therefore, he fully understood that information is very important in society and that events are influenced by information, and he became interested in journalism. However, it likely took until "Minkan Zasshi" (later "Katei Sodan") in 1874 before he was able to do it with his own strength.

I see. So the interest in journalism existed since the Bunkyu era, but it was much later that it was actually put into practice. The issue of information, which is also the leitmotif of "Transition of People's Way of Thinking," has been a matter of concern since the 2nd year of Bunkyu.

The advanced nature of "Transition of People's Way of Thinking" was pointed out, but when it comes to Fukuzawa's advanced nature, there is also the issue of women. What was the situation at the stage of the 4th year of Keio?

When he saw the West in the 2nd year of Bunkyu, he wrote in his "Seiko Techo" (Western Voyage Notebook), for example, that in England, when the economy gets bad, the number of prostitutes increases greatly, and what measures are said to be taken for those prostitutes, and he also wrote that many women work in factories, so I think he was thinking about the problems of the women in the samurai families around him.

However, Fukuzawa himself says he had been interested in women's issues since he came to Edo, but he tends to exaggerate a bit (laughs). I wonder if he really was interested in women's issues in his 20s when he came to Edo. But after he got married and had children, he likely thought that to change society, the way the family exists must be changed. That's why I think "Appendix to Things Western (Seiyō Jijō Gaihen)" starts with "Humans" and the next is "Family."

As for why he depicted a family image that was not familiar to people at the time, I believe it was because he wanted to introduce the fact that there is a family image in the West that is different from Japan in order to change society.

In order for Japan to become a civilized nation, was it a matter of presenting a Western image of the family right at hand to enlighten people? Furthermore, at the root, there must have been the idea of individual independence, and he likely thought that for people to joyfully and actively see and think about things, gender and age do not matter, and it starts from having an interest in social matters or starting to use an abacus.

I am not yet certain whether Fukuzawa was already aiming for a new social and national system when he published "Appendix to Things Western (Seiyō Jijō Gaihen)."

For example, if you read the letters addressed to Fukuzawa Enosuke, he says things like, since one was born in the country of Japan, one must protect its system. Also, I believe the "Memorial Concerning the Second Choshu Expedition" (2nd year of Keio) can be read as a memorial to clarify that the Shogunate is the sovereign, because the Choshu domain's direct contact with foreign countries ignores the country's diplomatic rights.

I find Fukuzawa's view of Tokugawa civilization very interesting. Whether it's "Gakumon no susume (An Encouragement of Learning)," "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization," or "Things Western (Seiyō Jijō)," they are very skillfully written. He rubs people's feelings the wrong way and then does something like the "Nanko Gonsuke Theory." He says things like scholars who look grumpy and act important are like hanging a corpse at their own entrance, using that kind of phrasing to rub people's common sense the wrong way, deliberately irritating them, and eventually drawing them into his camp.

That is the method of Edo literature, the gesaku (satirical fiction) of Hiraga Gennai. Even in "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization," Fukuzawa says that Edo gesaku writers, whether Jippensha Ikku, Hiraga Gennai, or Ota Nanpo, were unable to freely develop their opinions and thoughts within the feudal system and muttered while feeling resentful.

While saying that, he learned plenty from Edo and Tokugawa things. While calling the Nakatsu domain such a stingy and suffocating world, in the end, Fukuzawa gradually came to understand that the "chishoku anbun" (knowing contentment and being satisfied with one's lot) that existed in Tokugawa feudal society was the most important wisdom that Confucianism taught the masses.

In "An Outline of a Theory of Civilization," he attacks "chishoku anbun" head-on as a typical way of thinking of a mental slave, but he gradually realizes its importance, and instead of going in a single line of modernization, civilization, and Westernization, a breadth emerges.

Modernization was about forgetting one's lot as a human being and forgetting contentment. Constantly being busy and moving while wishing for higher and higher things is what we still call the modern mind that drives us today. Fukuzawa also did that single-mindedly in the first half.

However, he eventually realizes that humans are a bit more complex, that the people of Edo had great wisdom, and that they did not separate morality from natural science, and he comes to realize that those aspects should be re-evaluated. Including all of that, I think Fukuzawa's caliber was indeed large.

Speaking of "chishoku anbun," Fukuzawa likely harbored something very radical in principle, but when recommending something to people, he avoided saying unrealistic things that would make that person unhappy. That's why he gave realistic advice to students, not to master learning, but to finish their studies and get a job quickly if there is one. It can be called a recommendation of "chishoku anbun."

A typical example is his theory on women; in principle, he thought the ideal for male-female relationships was free love, but he said that if you actually did such a thing, you would be socially ruined and only become unhappy. He used both that principled radicalism and lessons for realistic people.

Rather than using them separately, they weren't necessarily contradictory within him.

One thing I found very interesting is that when Fukuzawa Yukichi spoke with people from the new government about creating the "Jiji Shinpo," they remarked that he was not as radical as they had expected and was actually someone they could reason with. In older research, this was often interpreted as Fukuzawa becoming more conservative or moving closer to the government side, but I think that perspective is mistaken.

In "Transition of People's Way of Thinking," he says that civilization is like a vast ocean; even if it absorbs all the flows of small rivers, its own essence does not change. Therefore, he argues that civilization is precisely about incorporating everything, whether it be an aristocracy or a republic. I feel this scale reflects the essence of Fukuzawa's humanity, and I think he was a very free-spirited and energetic man.

So, it wasn't that he became conservative or aligned himself with the government. What Fukuzawa is saying there is that the most important thing is to manage the country of Japan well so that it does not become a colony. From that perspective, even if he seems to be saying something different from five years prior, his attitude of striking down anything unnecessary for the successful rise of the nation at any given time is always consistent.

The times he wrote "it is not good to be constantly obsessed with the Imperial Family" and "the Imperial Family is indeed necessary for spiritual stability" may look different if you only look at the words. However, they are consistent in the sense that he was aiming to prevent a Japan thrown into chaos by events like the Satsuma Rebellion from being taken over.

Finally, I would like to ask each of you to say a few words about how you view the year Keio 4 in the life of Fukuzawa.

Keio 4 was likely the "hinge" year in which he leaped from being a mere scholar employed by the Tokugawa Shogunate's foreign affairs department to becoming an opinion leader for the Japanese people. He opened Keio University in Shiba Shinsenza and engaged in various orthodox educational activities. I believe it was a crucial period that overlapped with those events.

It was likely the emergence of a new Fukuzawa, corresponding to the transition from the Tokugawa Japan of the late Edo period to the Japan of the Charter Oath of Five Articles, which stated that "all matters shall be decided by public discussion" in the Meiji era.

Usually, people enter the world of Fukuzawa through "Gakumon no susume (An Encouragement of Learning)" published in Meiji 5, but what I felt again today is that, in a sense, the starting point for everything lies around Keio 4. While the Shogitai were fighting in Ueno, he cast off his titles amidst the chaos of not knowing which way things would go. This determination to take neither side is something that could not have been done without a significant inner resolve, and it was precisely because of that resolve that his enlightenment activities progressed, including the need to earn a living.

I felt once again that Keio 4 was truly the beginning of everything we know about Fukuzawa thereafter.

The fact that Keio University moved to Shiba Shinsenza was very decisive for the history of Keio University as well. When it was in Teppozu, it was in rented quarters and still felt like a private Juku. That fact is also significant.

Why did he think to give a name to his Juku—which until then had been called the Rangaku Juku or the Fukuzawa Juku—during the period of April, Keio 4?

In the "Keio Gijuku no Ki (Notes on Keio Gijuku)," which describes the naming, he recalls the history of Western studies in chronological order and says that it is precisely because of the various stages established by predecessors that we are where we are today. Until then, he had understood that society had to change and that the current system was no good, but it was then that what he himself could do about it became clear. First, he would build a school and focus on developing human resources. I believe he made a great resolution here, paying the large sum of 355 ryo to buy land and naming it Keio University.

Although he wrote "tentatively," the fact that he used the era name "Keio" shows his determination that they, too, would create a new era, taking what their predecessors had built up one step higher and passing it on to the next generation.

Indeed, as we heard today, Keio 4 was a year like a "hinge" for the 20 years before and after it, the "starting point for everything" that followed, and a time of "great resolution" toward a new direction.

Moreover, he shared that time with his students. There were no distinctions between teachers and students; both were teachers and both were disciples.

Fukuzawa himself was reading new English books one after another, learning and feeling excited himself. He involved the students in that and shared the excitement of knowledge with them. In that respect, I think it was a period when a very happy form of education took place.

Thank you very much for today.