The Journey to Edo: A Young Samurai’s First Steps

In early 1854, a 28-year-old low-ranking samurai named Saigō Takamori first set foot in Edo as part of the retinue accompanying his domain lord, Shimazu Nariakira of Satsuma, during the mandatory sankin-kōtai alternate attendance. As a member of the koshōgumi—the second-lowest rank in Satsuma’s eight-tiered samurai hierarchy—this journey represented both a duty and an extraordinary opportunity for the young warrior. Little did he know that this experience would profoundly shape his political consciousness and future role in Japan’s transformation.

The timing of Saigō’s arrival coincided with one of the most turbulent periods in Japanese history. Just months earlier, Commodore Matthew Perry’s Black Ships had forced Japan to confront its technological and military inferiority, ending over two centuries of relative isolation. The nation stood at a crossroads, torn between tradition and modernization, between isolation and engagement with the global community.

The Intellectual Climate of 1854 Japan

The political landscape Saigō encountered in Edo was charged with vigorous debate about Japan’s proper response to Western pressure. The Mito domain, traditionally considered the birthplace of sonnō jōi . This approach advocated temporarily postponing military confrontation with Perry’s fleet to focus on reforming the bakuhan system—the political structure of shogunate and domain governments.

Guiding this policy was Tokugawa Nariaki, lord of Mito domain and holder of two key positions: coastal defense supervisor and military system supervisor. As the home of Mito learning, this domain wielded considerable intellectual influence despite being one of the shogun’s collateral houses. The procrastination theory represented a pragmatic shift from pure ideological opposition to Western powers toward a more strategic approach to national strengthening.

Cross-Domain Alliances and Reformist Thought

The political philosophy emerging in 1854 emphasized cooperation between powerful domains rather than immediate military action. Yokoi Shōnan, a practical studies scholar from Kumamoto domain with close ties to Mito, articulated this position clearly following the signing of the Convention of Kanagawa in March 1854. He argued that debates about opening or closing the country should be temporarily set aside in favor of strengthening cooperation between Mito, Echizen, and Owari domains while recruiting talented individuals and reforming shogunate politics.

This position, communicated to Mito scholar Fujita Tōko by Kumamoto elder Nagaoka Kannotsu, emphasized that the immediate priority was not jōi but kaikaku—reform of the bakuhan system through participation of powerful domain lords in shogunal politics and recruitment of capable personnel. This philosophical stance would later resonate strongly with Saigō Takamori’s own political development.

The Internal Contradictions of Mito Learning

Mito scholarship, rooted in maintaining imperial authority and emphasizing Japan’s unique kokutai , considered a foundational text of later Mito learning, contained fundamental contradictions between the abstraction of kokutai theory and the concrete requirements of military strengthening.

The work primarily aimed to protect Japan’s kokutai from Christian erosion—a concern dating back to the 1633 isolation policies. The kokutai centered on the unbroken imperial line, but Aizawa’s treatise also contained practical military arguments against Western approaches, using the term jōi rather than sakoku . This terminological shift reflected the active, military dimension of his exclusionism.

Pragmatism in Defense Doctrine

Aizawa displayed remarkable pragmatism in discussing specific defensive measures. He criticized Japanese complacency about military superiority, noting that the country’s legendary military prowess belonged to the pre-Sekigahara era , with two centuries of peace having eroded martial spirit. He particularly mocked discussions about lining Japan’s coasts with artillery batteries to repel Western ships.

With characteristic realism, Aizawa noted that Japan’s “island nation” status, once a defensive advantage, had become a vulnerability in the age of “great ships that run like lightning across tens of thousands of miles.” Even if Japan could theoretically fortify every coastline, it could never predict where or when an attack might come. The only viable defense, he concluded, was for Japan to itself “employ great ships and strengthen its military” to counter Western naval power.

The Knowledge Paradox

Aizawa’s reasoning created a fundamental paradox: he advocated banning rangaku —then the primary source of Western knowledge—to prevent Christian ideas from entering Japan attached to Western learning, yet simultaneously recognized that Japan needed Western technology to build the “great ships” required for defense. Without access to Western knowledge, Japan could not develop the military technology needed to resist Western powers.

This contradiction would later be resolved by scholar Sakuma Shōzan’s famous formulation “Eastern ethics, Western technology,” which proposed adopting Western practical knowledge while maintaining Japanese values. Despite its internal tensions, Aizawa’s Shinron rightly identified the central challenges Japan would face in the coming decades.

Saigō’s Political Awakening

Though Saigō Takamori would not emerge as a significant political figure until his involvement in the movement to install Tokugawa Yoshinobu as shogunal heir three years later, his 1854 exposure to Edo intellectual circles clearly influenced his development. Like the Kumamoto practical studies scholars, the young Satsuma samurai came to prioritize bakufu “great reform” over rigid adherence to either opening or closing the country.

The philosophical connections between the 1853-1854 responses to Perry from Mito, Echizen, Owari, and Kumamoto domains directly informed the political movement that would emerge around the 1857-1858 debates over the Harris Treaty. Saigō’s political awakening during this critical period positioned him to become a key figure in the coming transformation.

Legacy and Historical Assessment

Nearly a century after these events, former shogunal retainer Shibusawa Eiichi would publish a privately-printed biography of Tokugawa Yoshinobu that offered thoughtful assessment of this period. The continued relevance of these mid-nineteenth century debates demonstrates their profound impact on Japan’s modernization process.

The intellectual developments of 1854 established the framework for Japan’s transformation from feudal state to modern nation. The pragmatic approach advocated by Mito reformers and adopted by emerging leaders like Saigō Takamori enabled Japan to navigate the treacherous waters between tradition and modernization, between cultural preservation and technological adoption.

Modern Relevance

The questions confronted by Japanese thinkers in 1854 remain relevant today: how does a nation maintain cultural identity while engaging globally? How does it adopt foreign technology without sacrificing traditional values? How does it balance ideological purity with practical necessity? Japan’s successful navigation of these challenges during the Bakumatsu and Meiji periods offers enduring lessons for nations facing similar dilemmas in our increasingly interconnected world.

Saigō Takamori’s journey to Edo in 1854 thus represents more than personal biography—it symbolizes Japan’s broader engagement with modernity. From low-ranking samurai to revolutionary leader, his transformation mirrored his nation’s journey from isolation to emergence as a global power. The philosophical debates he encountered, the practical solutions proposed, and the political movements that followed all contributed to creating modern Japan while preserving essential aspects of its cultural heritage.

The story of Saigō’s first arrival in Edo reminds us that historical turning points often arrive quietly, through the experiences of individuals who will later shape great events. His exposure to the cutting-edge political thought of his time, his observation of domain politics, and his personal relationships forged during this period all contributed to forming one of the most important figures in Japan’s modernization. The lessons of 1854 continue to resonate, offering insights into how nations navigate periods of profound transformation while maintaining cultural continuity.