This era was characterized by a lot of transitions in Japan in terms of government and leadership. In Japan, there were several systems of government whereby emperors ruled people. However, as of 1185, Japan began experiencing transitions. This is where the Kamakura and Muromachi eras came from. The two systems were aimed at forming the government. However, they used different approaches. They also had a different structure. Thus, herein, the paper will major on the significant difference between the two eras.
Minamoto Yoritomo funded the Kamakura era for 150 years (1185- 1333). It was the first warrior government in Japan. It was the only form of government that succeeded in civil administration at that time. Warfare was responsible for the creation and destruction of the shogunate. It also came as a result of opposing the ruling aristocracy. Some rivalries emerged over the issue of succession to the imperial throne. By that time, Minamoto, who had been sent to exile, had a grudge with the previous emperor, Kiyomori. The animosity made him resist; thus, he organized a civil war where several actors pursued disparate goals. It was held in three phases, each with a different goal. By 1180, Minamoto had rebelled and established a defensible location that became the city of Kamakura.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
He put up an administrative apparatus and even recruited civil officials to run it. Any warrior who plotted against him was executed. There was also a contest between Taira and Yoshinaka over the city of Kyoto. However, Yoshinaka successfully established his authority east. Later he was killed by Yoritomo’s brother. This civil war was governed by Yoritomo’s desire to set up an independent eastern regime. This desire engulfed the country. Moreover, in 1185, Minamoto’s administration based in Kamakura received an imprimatur of legitimacy from the court. This enabled him to institutionalize authority in several different ways. The court gave him the power to appoint provincial military constables, and he was given the shogun title. Unfortunately, Minamoto died in 1199, leaving the shogunate with leadership issues. His wife, Masako, maintained this position.
Later on, Yotusoki and Shigetoki occupied the seats from 1183 to 1261. They produced landmark documents, mainly the ' Gosebai Shikimeu' by Yotusoki and 'Gokurakaji letter of circa' by Shigetoki. The documents were mainly a guide to how they were to live in the country. For example, some of the topics were respect for divine authority and inheritance rights. The council of state signed some oaths. At this time, the Shogun title was forwarded from temporary to a powerful permanent office. More warriors were also involved in governance, thus helped in sorting stability.
However, there were external threats that devastated the shogunate. We had Mongols who invaded Japanese islands and also famines that devastated farmers. The shogunate's greatest rival was the court in Kyoto. The Kamakura city retained the divine to choose an emperor. Unfortunately, the Kamakura shogunate was destroyed by Emperor Go-Daigo, a well-educated leader. He convinced the shogunate's warriors to turn against the government.
The Muromachi shogunate was quite different from Kamakura. It made its main headquarters in the capital of Kyoto. It came after the Kamakura, and Go- Daigo was the main ruler. His main principle was ruling from Kyoto. He did not tolerate alternative power centers. He believed that distinct power centers would not unite the shogunate (Friday, 2018, pg.214) . In his administration, jurisdictions were limited to the city of Kyoto and its environment. All cases were decided within this city only, unlike the Kamakura shogunate, where the court gave the emperor power to appoint military constables who instilled discipline.
This shogunate provided an effective city government. The central government worked effectively for the shogunate. However, it did not have a national reach. He was not able to unite everyone in the state. It only managed to control Japan's wealthy city-state. This was the opposite of the Kamakura shogunate since it did not dwell in the city.
At that time, the Shogun, who was Ashikaga, established a body known as the Ashikaga corps. This was the largest armed body in the capital city. It was to offer security and defend the city against enemies. It was different from the Kamakura shogunate, where the warriors played a role in defense. Besides, there was a position of deputy Shogun that was established. This helped stabilize the shogunate. Since this institution of the deputy Shogun had defined roles, many people participated in the exercise of authority. It did not restrict authority to the warriors like the Kamakura shogunate.
Moreover, unlike the Kamakura shogunate, its economy was increasingly monetized. They did not depend on revenue from the rural property. Since there was a lot of trade within the city of Kyoto, revenue was generated from commerce. Kyoto was a highly commercial city. Most people in the city had wealth, which promoted the stability of this shogunate. However, it later failed and was unable to be controlled. This led to the fall of the shogunate.
Conclusively, it can be said that these two eras were aimed at uniting the Japanese nation. They however, used different approaches in governance. At last, all of them were unable to control the situation. Thus, the two eras ended up in failure with no significant achievement for the people of Japan.
References
Friday, K. F. (2018). Japan Emerging Premodern History to 1850. New York: Routledge. Page 189 to 215
