biography' so strikingly confirms, explain what a critic so fair and temperate as Henry Sidgwick was fain to call 'the mazy inconsistency of his metaphysical results.' Dominated by an exclusively physical imagination, he accepted as dogmas the practical assumptions of common sense. Hence, when attacked by thinkers like Green and Professor Ward, although sensitive in points of detail, he completely failed to appreciate the fundamental defects or inconsistencies against which their criticisms were directed. But it was impossible for a mind so active as Spencer's, so fertile in hypotheses, and so full of apt illustration, to marshal the sciences of life and man under the guidance of a great idea without enriching them by a wealth of luminous suggestion. In the very context of the stricture quoted above, Sidgwick speaks of 'the originality of his treatment and leading generalisations, the sustained vigour of his scientific imagination, the patient, precise ingenuity with which he developes definite hypotheses where other thinkers offer loose suggestions.'

What is here said of the 'Psychology' is no less true of the 'Biology' and of his important contributions to sociological theory. But, besides such departmental work, it was much to hold aloft in an age of specialism the banner of completely unified knowledge; and this is, perhaps, after all, Spencer's chief claim to gratitude and remembrance. He brought home the idea of philosophic synthesis to a greater number of the Anglo-Saxon race than had ever conceived the idea before. His own synthesis, in the particular form he gave it, will necessarily crumble away. He speaks of it himself, indeed, at the close of 'First Principles' (ed. 1), modestly enough as a more or less rude attempt to accomplish a task which can be achieved only in the remote future and by the combined efforts of many, which cannot be completely achieved even then. But the idea of knowledge as a coherent whole, worked out on purely natural (though not, therefore, naturalistic) principles-a whole in which all the facts of human experience should be includedwas a great idea with which to familiarise the minds of his contemporaries. It is the living germ of philosophy itself.

A. S. PRINGLE-PATTISON,

Art. XII. THE JAPANESE REVOLUTION.

1. Japan nach Reisen und Studien. Im Auftrage der Königl. Preuss. Regierung dargestellt, von J. J. Rein. Two vols. Leipzig: Engelmann, 1881-6. (English translation of vol. i. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1884.) 2. Japans Volkswirtschaft und Staatsaushalt. By Karl Rathgen. In Schmoller's Staats- und social-wissenschaftliche Forschungen, Bd. x. Leipzig: Duncker and Humblot, 1891.

3. The Constitutional Development of Japan, 1853-1881. By Toyokichi Iyenaga, Ph.D. (Johns Hopkins University Studies). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1891. 4. History of the Empire of Japan. Compiled for the Japanese Commission of the Exhibition of Chicago, 1893, and published by order of the Department of Education. Translated by Captain Brinkley. Tokio: n.d. 5. Correspondence respecting the revision of the Treaty arrangements between Great Britain and Japan. London: Spottiswoode, 1894. (C. 7548.)

6. Der Eintritt Japans in das Europäische Völkerrecht. By Alexander Freiherr von Siebold. Berlin: Kisak Tamai, 1900. (English translation. Kegan Paul, 1901). 7. Things Japanese. By Basil Hall Chamberlain. Fourth edition. London: Murray, 1902.

8. Okoubo. By Maurice Courant. Paris: F. Alcan, 1904. 9. Japan and China. Their History, Arts, and Literature. By Captain F. Brinkley. London and Edinburgh: Jack, 1903-4.

And other works.

MUCH as has been written about the art, the commerce and industry, the habits and social life of Japan, hardly sufficient attention has hitherto been bestowed, at least in this country, upon its political development. Even Captain Brinkley's great work, admirable as it is in many respects, is distinctly defective on this side. Yet it is on the political changes, which, in the short space of little more than one generation, transformed Japan from an oriental despotism to a constitutional state-on the Japanese Revolution, in short-that the present commanding position of Japan depends. In the following pages an attempt will be made to present this instructive

episode of modern history in an intelligible and connected form.*

Several efforts had been made to penetrate the barriers erected against foreign intercourse by the Shoguns of the Tokugawa family since their elevation to power early in the seventeenth century; but until just fifty years ago these attempts had all been made in vain. During the century which witnessed the Reformation in Europe, Japan was neither exclusive nor intolerant; and Western religion, hand in hand with Western trade, had obtained what seemed to be a firm footing in these islands of the Far East. But religion, in those days, was too often used as the wedge of empire; and the restless ambitions of the Jesuit missionaries alarmed the rulers, who had but recently built up their power on the basis of internal unity and domestic peace. To close the way to conquests like those of Mexico and Peru, they resolved to shut their doors on all foreigners alike. Traders and teachers were driven out; Christianity was violently suppressed, and, for upwards of two centuries, the little Dutch factory, imprisoned in the islet of Deshima, was all that reminded Japan of the existence of the Western world.

With the visits of the American Commodore Perry, in 1853-4, and the commercial treaties which followed, this state of things came to an end. We need not trace the steps by which, during the comparatively short space of fifteen years, the admission of foreigners to the Japanese Empire was brought about, beyond noting the fact-a most important one, as will appear-that the treaties which admitted them were made, not by or with the legitimate sovereign of Japan, the Mikado or Emperor, but by and with the actual ruler, the Shogun. But the opening of Japanese ports to foreign trade was not the most important result which ensued from the visits of Commodore Perry and his successors. The whole social

* It should be stated at the outset that this article makes no pretence to draw on works in the Japanese language; but it is believed that such few Japanese works of authority as have not yet been translated have been practically exhausted by one European writer or another. So far, there is an almost entire lack of memoirs or other records by the principal actors in the Revolution. Unless such works are in existence, and some day see the light, it is to be feared that a history of the Revolution, at once complete and trustworthy, will never be written.

and political system of the island Empire was profoundly modified; and the Japanese nation entered upon an astounding course of development, as radical as it has been rapid, the far-reaching effects of which the world at large is only now beginning to comprehend. The Japanese Revolution, of which the first act was accomplished in 1868, may be regarded as unique in history, perhaps in its results, certainly in its nature; for it was, in the main, by a voluntary act of abdication, inspired by an enlightened feeling of patriotism, that the ancient feudal system of Japan was abolished; and the ruling classes, which for centuries had held undisputed sway, resigned their powers into the hands of the sovereign in order that the country, by becoming united and centralised, might be enabled to hold its own in the face of the world.

For some time previously the ideas of thoughtful men in Japan had been tending in this direction. Several causes contributed to this change. The first of these was the revival of learning. The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries witnessed in Japan a great growth of intellectual activity. Learning was encouraged by the Tokugawa Shoguns, unconscious of its future results. Iyeyasu himself, the founder of the line, and his grandson, Mitsukuni, were great patrons of literature. The study of national history was actively pursued. In 1715 Komon, Prince of Mito, had completed, with the help of a band of scholars, the famous Dai-Nihon-Shi,' or History of Japan. This work was not printed till 1751; but many copies of it passed from hand to hand, and gradually permeated the thought of the country. Its chief result was to bring to light the true nature of the Shogunate, to show that the Mikado was the legitimate sovereign, and to prove the power of the Shogun to be an usurpation. Its influence was such that its composer has been styled by Sir Ernest Satow, the real author of the movement which culminated in the Revolution of 1868.' Half a century later the great scholar, Rai Sanyo, in his 'Nihon-quai-shi,' developed and drove home these lessons; and in his 'Sei-ki,' or political history, attacked the Shogunate and deplored the decadence of Imperial power.

The growth of learning was accompanied by a revival of the ancient Shinto religion, which, as involving the

worship or at least the veneration of ancestors, was closely connected with respect for the divinely descended Imperial family. Buddhism, introduced into Japan in the sixth century of our era, had gradually pushed aside the earlier faith, and, favoured by the Shoguns of the Tokugawa race, had become a sort of State religion. The establishment of the Shogunate, in alliance with the Buddhist priesthood, was accompanied by the forcible extinction of Christianity and the decay of Confucianism; and, since the early part of the seventeenth century, Buddhism had reigned supreme. Now, however, with the revival of learning and the growing attachment to the Imperial family, Buddhism rapidly lost ground; men reverted to the creed of their ancestors; and the restoration of the Mikado to power was signalised by the complete dethronement of the Buddhistic religion.

Personal and family ambition added force to these more general and popular motives. Several of the greater noble families, originally of equal rank with that of the Tokugawa Shoguns, resented, more and more, the concentration of power in the hands of their former rivals. The only chance of recovering their lost influence in the State was to set up another power against that of the Shogun; and this power could only be that of the Mikado. The feudal system had resulted in the elevation of a subordinate to independent control; the mere overthrow of that subordinate, without the provision of an efficient substitute, would have meant disunion, anarchy, and consequent national weakness. The revival of Imperialism offered the only satisfactory solution of these difficulties.

Meanwhile the Shogunate itself was experiencing a natural decay similar to that which had undermined the power of the Mikado. The theory established by Iyeyasu was that the Mikado, being of divine descent and therefore unable to do wrong, could do nothing at all. He was shorn of all executive authority, which fell entirely into the hands of the Shoguns. But after the lapse of some two centuries the Shoguns, like the Emperors whom they had displaced, withdrew more and more from the active exercise of authority, and gave up the control to their subordinates. As they had become practically independent of the sovereign, so the great Daimios gradually became