Pearson Edexcel International GCSE in History · 4HI1 · Free · no account needed

The fall of the Tokugawa and the Choshu and Satsuma domains

Why did the men who wanted to expel the foreigners end up importing everything the foreigners had?

Option B3 · Japan in transformation, 1853–1945 › Key topic 1 · Japan opening up to China and the West, 1853–67 — one of 2 lessons in this key topic. Paper 2 Section B — breadth study in change: Japan in transformation, 1853–1945, key topic 1 (30 marks: 6 · 8 · 16).

Learn the fall of the Tokugawa and the Choshu and Satsuma domains, teach it to an AI pupil, then defend it in a marked debate — this lesson carries all three.

What the specification asks for

“Causes of the fall of the Tokugawa – corruption and incompetence within the government; the 'other' Japanese – Choshu and Satsuma.” — examined through causation. Incandio is aligned to specification 4HI1; it is not published by, endorsed by or affiliated with Pearson.

1 · Understand it

A government that could not govern

The Tokugawa system had been designed to prevent challenge rather than to act. Domains were governed by hereditary lords under obligations to the shogunate; the imperial court at Kyoto held prestige and no power; and the shogunate's own finances had been deteriorating for decades, met by currency debasement and forced loans from merchants.

The concessions of the 1850s exposed all of this. The shogunate consulted the domains and the court about the treaties, which was an admission that it could not decide alone, and then signed after the court refused approval. Having invited opinions it could not satisfy, it converted a foreign policy problem into a question about who had the right to rule.

The slogan that emerged — revere the Emperor, expel the barbarian — allowed opponents to attack the shogunate without appearing disloyal to Japan. That is why the movement grew so quickly among samurai of the outer domains, who had been excluded from the shogunate's inner circle for two and a half centuries.

Choshu, Satsuma and the lesson of being shelled

Choshu and Satsuma were the two largest of those outer domains, and both acted on the anti-foreign slogan. Satsuma men killed a British merchant in 1862, and a British squadron bombarded Kagoshima in 1863 in reprisal. Choshu fired on foreign shipping in the Shimonoseki Strait, and in 1864 a combined British, French, Dutch and American force bombarded its batteries and landed.

The consequence was not what the slogan predicted. Both domains concluded from their own defeats that expelling the foreigner was impossible with the means available, and that the only route to that end was to acquire Western military technology and organisation first. Both began buying ships and rifles, in Satsuma's case from the power that had just bombarded it.

That reversal is the strand's central fact, and it should be stated as continuity of aim with a change of method. The men who led the anti-foreign movement became the leaders of Westernisation, and the objective — that Japan should not be dictated to — never altered. Expel the barbarian became become strong enough not to have to.

The Restoration

Choshu and Satsuma had been rivals, and a secret alliance between them in 1866 was the decisive political development. The shogunate mounted an expedition against Choshu and failed, which demonstrated its military weakness as publicly as Perry had demonstrated its diplomatic weakness.

In late 1867 the shogun Tokugawa Yoshinobu resigned his powers, apparently expecting to retain a leading position in a new arrangement. In January 1868 the allied domains proclaimed the restoration of direct imperial rule, and the brief Boshin War that followed ended in their favour.

The event is called a Restoration and functioned as a revolution, and both halves of that sentence are examinable. It was justified as returning power to an emperor who had held none for centuries, which made a radical change of government look like the correction of an old error — and it brought to power a group of young samurai from two domains who proceeded to abolish the system that had produced them.

2 · Learn it — the notes

The dates that earn marks

1858
The shogunate signs the Harris Treaty after the imperial court refuses approval. Why this date: It converts a foreign policy decision into a question about the right to rule.
1863–64
Western squadrons bombard Kagoshima and the Shimonoseki batteries. Why this date: The domains leading the anti-foreign movement learn from their own defeats that Western technology must be acquired.
1866
Choshu and Satsuma form a secret alliance; a shogunate expedition against Choshu fails. Why this date: It demonstrates military weakness and creates the coalition that overthrows the regime.
1868
The Meiji Restoration proclaims direct imperial rule. Why this date: A revolution is carried out in the name of restoring an ancient authority, which is the paradox the option turns on.

The figures, and how far to trust them

  • 1863 and 1864 — The bombardments of Kagoshima and Shimonoseki that changed both domains' policy.
  • About 250 years — The period of Tokugawa rule ended by the Restoration of 1868.
  • Two domains — Choshu and Satsuma supplied most of the leadership of the new government. (Tosa and Hizen also contributed, and later factional politics reflected these origins.)

The people to place

  • Saigo Takamori — Satsuma leader in the Restoration who later led the rebellion of 1877.
  • Okubo Toshimichi — Satsuma statesman and one of the principal architects of the Meiji state.
  • Tokugawa Yoshinobu — The last shogun; resigned his powers in 1867.

How historians disagree

Attributed interpretations, never voiced — the AO4 seam.

  • The 'learned from defeat' reading: Choshu and Satsuma were bombarded, concluded that expulsion was impossible without Western capability, and changed method while keeping their aim — which is why the anti-foreign movement produced a Westernising government. Contested by The reading that the anti-foreign slogan was always partly a political instrument for attacking the shogunate, so the leaders had less to reverse than the story suggests..

What students say — and what is actually the case

Not this: The Meiji Restoration was a popular revolution.

This: It was carried out by samurai from two outer domains in the name of restoring imperial authority. The population at large was not consulted and the change was justified as a return rather than a break.

Not this: The men who overthrew the shogunate wanted to keep Japan closed.

This: They had used that slogan, and after being bombarded in 1863 and 1864 they concluded the opposite. The aim — that Japan should not be dictated to — stayed the same and the method reversed.

Two things students merge

Blurred: The aim and the method.

The distinction: Expelling foreigners was a method; not being dictated to was the aim. Once the method was shown to fail, the same men adopted the opposite method for the same reason, which is continuity rather than hypocrisy.

Blurred: Restoration and revolution.

The distinction: The event restored an emperor who had held no power for centuries and transferred government to a new group who then abolished the old order. The name describes the justification and not the content.

What a Grade 9 answer holds here

A Grade 9 answer treats the reversal as consistency. Choshu and Satsuma wanted Japan free of foreign dictation, tried to achieve it by firing on foreigners, were shelled, and concluded that the only way to reach the aim was to build what had shelled them — so the men who shouted expel the barbarian and the men who imported rifles are the same men pursuing the same objective.

3 · How it is examined

This strand is genuinely set through: Paper 2 Section B (a) (6 marks — “Explain TWO ways in which … was different from ….”); Paper 2 Section B (b) (8 marks — “Explain TWO causes of ….”); Paper 2 Section B (c)(i) or (c)(ii) (16 marks — “How significant was … in …, in the years …? / How far were … responsible for …, in the years …? You may use the following in your answer: • [prompt] • [prompt]. You must also use information of your own.”).

What earns marks: The bombardments used as a cause of Westernisation. It turns two punitive raids into the explanation of a policy reversal.

4 · Prove it — the questions

Answered inside Incandio, where a marker checks what a correct answer must contain and tells you which half was missing. The marking stays in the app; the questions are here.

  1. Explain TWO ways in which the position of Choshu and Satsuma in 1866 was different from their position in 1862. [6 marks · Paper 2 Section B (a)]
  2. Explain TWO causes of the fall of the Tokugawa shogunate. [8 marks · Paper 2 Section B (b)]
  3. Explain TWO causes of the change in Choshu and Satsuma policy towards the West. [8 marks · Paper 2 Section B (b)]
  4. How significant were the outer domains in the fall of the Tokugawa, in the years 1853–68? [16 marks · Paper 2 Section B (c)(i) or (c)(ii)]
  5. How far was the Meiji Restoration caused by foreign pressure, in the years 1853–68? [16 marks · Paper 2 Section B (c)(i) or (c)(ii)]

Think you understand it?

Reading is the start. On Incandio a topic counts as mastered only once you have taught it and defended it — the two things a revision guide cannot ask of you.

Incandio this topic → Prove it. Teach it. Defend it. What does “Incandio it” mean?

  1. Prove it — five questions on the fall of the Tokugawa and the Choshu and Satsuma domains, marked on the spot, that tell you what was missing rather than just what was wrong.
  2. Teach it — Explain the fall of the Tokugawa and the Choshu and Satsuma domains — what happened, why, and what it made possible — to Ember, an AI pupil who asks the awkward question. Understanding is credited; wording is not required.
  3. Defend it — Argue the fall of the Tokugawa and the Choshu and Satsuma domains against the historical mind with the strongest claim on it — three rounds, marked against descriptors you can read before you begin.
  4. Then the exam — 15 authored exam-style questions on this option, marked on Incandio with the mistake you actually made named.

Completely free. No subscriptions, no paywalls, no account needed to start.

The debate is against The Charge of the Old Order — the case itself, argued at its strongest, because on this strand there is no single person whose position the learner has to defeat.

Carry on through the option