Introduction

This chapter discusses the emergence of Matsumoto Nobuhiro as an ethnologist in the

period 1919-1923 when Matsumoto was a student at Keio Gijuku (1910-1920) and worked as a

teacher at Keio Futsūbu School (1920-1924). It is important to study the beginnings of

Matsumoto’s ethnological career because Matsumoto’s Southeast Asian studies emerged from his

ethnological study on Southeast Asia. Therefore, this chapter will inquire why Matsumoto

became an ethnologist under the influence of his teachers and how he discussed Southeast Asia

in his ethnological writings in the period 1919-1923.

In general, the early 1920s was the age of evolutionism. The Japanese adopted Western

civilization which was thought to occupy the top tier of civilization from the viewpoint of

cultural evolution theory.⁹⁴ The aim of this adoption was to reach an equal footing with the

Western powers. In addition, the Japanese considered territorial expansion indispensable to their

progress and to their national power which was in accordance with Social Darwinism, a theory

that argued only the fittest could persevere in the struggle for survival.⁹⁵ Thus, the Japanese

94 Cultural evolutionism was a theory based on a hypothesis that culture evolves through stages, beginning from a primitive stage and then advancing to a civilized stage. Therefore, culture evolutionists tended to hypothesize on the stage of certain cultures that they discussed.

95 Social Darwinism was a theory developed from Darwin’s argument that natural selection determines the outcome of competition. It was applied to human society arguing that competition or the struggle for survival is inevitable and is necessary for human progress.

adopted cultural evolutionism and Social Darwinism as basic theories for the formation of their

relations with nations and regions abroad.

Evolutionism formed the basis of Matsumoto’s thinking also because Matsumoto

received westernized education at Keio Gijuku. He studied at Keio Gijuku from junior high

school to university, a period covering a span of 10 years. The framing philosophy of Keio

Gijuku was based on the ideas of Fukuzawa Yukichi (1835-1901) who preached the adoption of

Western civilization and Democracy. Although on one hand, Fukuzawa argued for the equality of

all people, on the other hand, he also emphasized that Japan had to become westernized in order

to be treated equally with Western countries. Thus, Matsumoto was raised in an environment

where westernization was considered a decisive factor for achieving equal treatment.

Consequently, despite being taught Democracy, Matsumoto still considered Western peoples

superior because they were more westernized than the Japanese. In other words, he believed the

degree of westernization determined a peoples’ superiority. Therefore, he considered the

Japanese to be more superior than non-Western peoples because they absorbed western

civilization. His bias will be demonstrated through an analysis of Matsumoto’s writings on

Southeast Asia in this thesis.

Based on the evolutionist belief, the Japanese started constructing their relations towards

the Asia-Pacific region. After the First World War, Japan received the League of Nations mandate

over the islands in the Southern Pacific,⁹⁶ in addition to the Ryukyu Islands (1879) and Taiwan

(1895). In this period, Japanese called all the regions lying South of Japan as the South Seas

(Nanyō, 南洋) and indicated them as “southward” (Nampō, 南方). After acquiring this former

German territory, the Japanese government founded the South Seas Development Company

(1921) and the South Seas Bureau (1922) for the administration over the region.⁹⁷ However, in

these early stages of the Japanese exploration of the South, priority was put on the economic

exploitation of the newly acquired territories. Yet interestingly enough, Japan paid much more

political attention to the Asian continent (mainly countries like China and Korea) and

consequently, the region of the South Seas was perceived to be far less important. Therefore, in

the early 1920s, Japanese knowledge on the South Seas remained limited and thereby the region

of Southeast Asia, also, remained completely unknown to the Japanese people.

Considering the lack of Japanese people’s interest in Southeast Asia, Matsumoto was

afforded a rare opportunity to study about Southeast Asia from Western ethnology which

compared the culture of various ethnic groups including Southeast Asian peoples. Under the

influence of evolutionism, ethnology was emerging in significance in connection with cultural

history, physical anthropology and folklore studies. Especially from the late 1870s, Japanese

scholars were faced with the task in clarifying Japanese origins since they were confronted with

96 Japan expanded its control to the South of the Marshall Islands, the Carolinas, the Marianas, and the Palau Islands in 1919.

97 Shimizu, Akitoshi,Anthropology and Colonialism in Asia and Oceania, Richmond, Survey, Curzon 1999, p.

144.

various biased theories on Japanese people produced by Western scholars.⁹⁸ Therefore, it

became an issue of national importance to interpret Japanese origins from the Japanese

perspective, and within the context of mankind’s early history.

Since the discourse on Japanese origins was regarded essential, it was joined by modern

educated young men from wealthy families, such as Matsumoto Nobuhiro. These young

intellectuals did not need to worry about their future and could spend their time pursuing their

interests. Thus, by their participation in the discussion of Japanese origins, they contributed to

the development of ethnology even though ethnology had yet to be established as an independent

academic discipline in the 1920s.

Matsumoto began studying ethnology and folklore studies during his studies at Keio

University in the late 1910s. He majored in history at Keio University,⁹⁹ but he met excellent

teachers of ethnology and folklore studies such as Kawai Teiichi and Yanagita Kunio. Among

previous researches, Matsumoto’s disciples, Ito Seiji¹⁰⁰Chikamori Masashi,¹⁰¹ etc., and

mythologists, Obayashi Taryo¹⁰² and Hirafuji Kikuko¹⁰³ claimed Yanagita Kunio’s importance

98 In 1879, American zoologist and orientalist Edward Sylvester Morse presented a hypothesis based on the evidences from his excavation in Ōmori shell mound that the Japanese ancestors were cannibals.

99 Ine-fune-matsuri: Matsumoto Nobuhiro sensei tsuitō ronbunshū, Rokkōshuppan, 1982, p. 693.

100 Itō, Seiji, “Hito to gakumon, Matsumoto Nobuhiro,” Shakai jinruigaku nenpō, Tōkyō toritsu daigaku shakai jinrui gakkai, dai 12 kan, 1986, p. 119. Itō, Seiji, “Matsumoto Nobuhiro – ‘Nampōsetsu’ no kaitakusha,”Bunka jinruigaku gunzō, Nihonhen (3), Akademia shuppankai, Kyōto, 1988, p. 231. “Matsumoto Nobuhiro to gakumon,” Keiō gijuku daigaku gengo kenkyūjo hōkokushū, Keiō gijuku daigaku, dai 24 kan, 1992, p. 13.

101 Interview with Chikamori Masashi, 23 August 2012, Keio University, Tokyo.

102 Ōbayashi, Taryō, “Kaisetsu,” Nihon minzokugaku no kigen I: shinwa-densetsu, Kōdansha, 1978, p. 406.

103 Hirafuji, Kikuko, “Shakaigakuteki kenkyū – Matsumoto Nobuhiro no shinwa kenkyū ni okeru Furansu shakaigakuha no eikyō,” Shinwagaku to Nihon no kamigami, Kōbunkan, 2004, p. 38.

in Matsumoto’s research in general. However, this research will show that also other teachers,

especially Kawai Teiichi, played a significant role in the formation of Matsumoto Nobuhiro’s

ideas on Southeast Asia.

The following sections will examine the beginnings of Matsumoto’s research on

Southeast Asia. First, this chapter will clarify the influence of Japanese scholars on Matsumoto’s

study of ethnology including Matsumoto’s methodology. Second, this chapter will examine

Matsumoto’s ideas on Southeast Asia.