12.07.2015 Views

Private Academies of Chinese Learning in Meiji Japan: The Decline ...

Private Academies of Chinese Learning in Meiji Japan: The Decline ...

Private Academies of Chinese Learning in Meiji Japan: The Decline ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

PRIVATE ACADEMIES OF CHINESE LEARNING IN MEIJI JAPAN 97Who were Sōan’s students? A total <strong>of</strong> 673 names are recorded<strong>in</strong> the student register from the time <strong>of</strong> Sōan’s return to Tajima tothe end <strong>of</strong> his life. 64 In the first five years, while he was teach<strong>in</strong>gat Risseisha, Sōan taught a total <strong>of</strong> 62 pupils, most <strong>of</strong> whom camefrom Tajima and many from the surround<strong>in</strong>g Yabu district. Localstudents cont<strong>in</strong>ued to be <strong>in</strong> the majority; 390 or 58 per cent fromthe register were from Tajima prov<strong>in</strong>ce. But the years 1865 to1872 saw an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the number <strong>of</strong> students from outsideTajima. <strong>The</strong> overall number <strong>of</strong> entrants varied from year to year,but rose significantly from the 1860s. <strong>The</strong> highest number <strong>of</strong> 46students is recorded for 1868 and after 1868 the number <strong>of</strong> entrantswas between twenty and forty, except for 1873 (10) and 1878, theyear <strong>of</strong> Sōan’s death (12). Apart from Tajima, many pupils camefrom neighbour<strong>in</strong>g prov<strong>in</strong>ces, such as Inaba, Harima, Tanba andTango, places where Sōan had personal connections. Asignificant number also came from Sanuki, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Tadotsudoma<strong>in</strong>, where Sōan had visited Hayashi. Some came from as farafield as Hizen and Shimotsuke, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Utsunomiya doma<strong>in</strong>,which had <strong>in</strong>vited Sōan to an <strong>of</strong>ficial post. <strong>The</strong> <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>of</strong>students from outside Tajima after 1868 contrasts with the juku <strong>of</strong>Seisō and Butsusan <strong>in</strong> northern Kyūshū (see follow<strong>in</strong>g section). It<strong>in</strong>cluded students from regions that had not been represented atSeikei sho<strong>in</strong> before, such as Hitachi, with two from Mito doma<strong>in</strong>enter<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> 1871, and Kaga, with two pupils from Kanazawadoma<strong>in</strong> enter<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> 1870 and one <strong>in</strong> 1871. Often several studentsfrom one prov<strong>in</strong>ce would come from the same district,suggest<strong>in</strong>g that Sōan’s name became known among a group <strong>of</strong>people, perhaps after one pupil had gone to Seikei sho<strong>in</strong>. Moststudents were commoners, but many, especially among those thatcame from other regions, were samurai. In the years 1868 and1869 the majority <strong>of</strong> entrants were samurai. Overall, out <strong>of</strong> the673 named <strong>in</strong> the registers, 174 were samurai, 445 commoners, 8physicians, 3 Sh<strong>in</strong>tō priests, 3 Buddhist priests and 2 members <strong>of</strong>the nobility.<strong>The</strong> registers only tells us when a pupil entered, not how longhe stayed, so it cannot be said precisely how many pupils werethere at any one time. Moreover, many students came from localfarm<strong>in</strong>g families and their attendance would have varied withthe seasons. In 1862 Sōan notes that he had 30 boarders and 8 to 9day pupils. In 1868 the number sank to around 10, but the sameyear saw a record number <strong>of</strong> entrants, and the build<strong>in</strong>gs had tobe extended. In 1869 he noted that he had about 50 <strong>in</strong> his juku. 65

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!