The Significance of Makiguchi Tsunesaburo’s Jinsei
chirigaku (Geography of Human Life) in the IntellectualHistory of Geography in Japan:
Commemorating the Centenary of Its Publication

Keiichi TakeuchiT

HE recent focus of my research has been the intellectual history ofgeography in Japan. While the combination of the two Chinesecharacters (chi and ri) that are currently used to express the concept of“geography” can be found in Chinese classics that predate the Common
Era, it was only in the 1760s that this term was incorporated into theJapanese language by researchers in Western sciences (Tsujita 1971;
Takeuchi 2001). And it was not until the closing days of the Tokugawa
Era (1603–1867), that geography gained acceptance as a field of academic research. Furthermore, it was only in the late 1880s that universities
started offering lectures on geography or historical geography. However,every culture has developed ideas and ways of understanding such concepts as place, territory and the physical environment with or without aformal term such as geography, and Japan, too, had a stock of such ideas
before importing the discipline of geography established in the West.
The study of the intellectual history of geography includes the study ofthe development of such ideas within the larger context of the intellectual history of different societies.
In order to accurately determine the place of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi(1871–1944) within the intellectual history of geography (in particular
the teaching of geography) in Japan, we need to study not only his Jinsei chirigaku (Geography of Human Life) (1903) but also Kyoju no togo
chushin to shite no kyodoka kenkyu (Research in Community Studies as
the Integrating Focus of School Education) (1912) and Chirikyoju no
hoho oyobi naiyo no kenkyu (Research in the Method and Content in
the Teaching of Geography) (1916). Further, Soka kyoikugaku taikei(The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy) published in four volumes
from 1930 needs to be examined. Today, however, we commemorate thecentenary of the publication of the first edition of Jinsei chirigaku, so I
112

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

113

would like to limit my remarks to the significance of this book within
the intellectual history of geography in Japan. In this context it should
be noted that the final, 11th edition of Jinsei chirigaku was published in
1914, long before his reception of Nichiren Buddhism (Nichiren
Shoshu) in 1928. Thus, I believe it would be somewhat strained to try tofind direct links between Jinsei chirigaku and Makiguchi’s later philosophy of value, rooted in his (post-conversion) religious outlook anddescribed in the Pedagogy (1930–1934). Saito Shoji, who scrupulously
edited, footnoted and provided background notes and commentary forthe reprint of Jinsei chirigaku comprised in Makiguchi Tsunesaburo zenshu (The Complete Works of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi), has written as
follows in his “Prolegomenon to the Study of Jinsei Chirigaku” in theclosing pages of Volume 2: “When Makiguchi wrote the geography, hemight have still belonged to the Echigo Monto school of the True Pure
Land sect (Jodo Shinshu). Furthermore, based on his writings, we may
assume he had no affiliation with any particular sect, and only expressed
his interest in Saint Ren’nyo’s Gobunsho (Writings) out of a lyricalsympathy with ideas expressed there. In any case, it is best to refrain
unreasonable attempts to identify Makiguchi at the time he wrote Jinsei
chirigaku with a specific religious faith.”
ASSESSMENT OF MAKIGUCHI TSUNESABURO’S WORK BY
ACADEMIC GEOGRAPHERS AND IN JOURNALISM
The significance of Jinsei chirigaku was recognized immediately after
the publication of the first edition. For example, Ogawa Takuji of theGeological Research Institute of the Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce wrote a review in Chigaku zasshi (Journal of Geography) No. 181(1904) of the Tokyo Geographical Society. In this review, Ogawa was on
the one hand critical, questioning the appropriateness of the use of theterm jinsei chirigaku in light of already existing terms such anthropogeography (jinrui chirigaku), cultural geography (bunka chirigaku) andhuman geography (jinmon chirigaku). At the same time, he wrote, “I
could not help but amazed by the sincere diligence of the author,
Makiguchi Tsunesaburo, who has completed this voluminous work of
one thousand pages. As I read through it, [I was impressed with] thescope of his knowledge gained through extensive reading, the originalityof his ideas, the convincing nature of arguments...” Without making specific reference to the book’s content, Ogawa offered his generally positive appraisal. (As is generally known, when Ogawa was professor at
Kyoto University, he established the foundation for what has since

114

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

become the university’s enormous collection of maps.)
Despite the fact that Jinsei chirigaku was, at two yen, an expensive
book for its time, it was reprinted and reissued in new editions at a rapid
pace right up until the final edition of 1914. While none of the editions I
have been able to check list the number of copies printed for that edition, and it is thus impossible to ascertain the total number of copies
published, it is certain that a considerable number were sold and read.
Research undertaken in recent years by the Soka Education ResearchCenter at Soka University has determined that approximately forty
reviews of Jinsei chirigaku were carried in various newspapers and journals between 1903 and 1909, most of them offering favorable commentson its content (Shiobara 2003; Oki 2003). Among the newspapers carrying such reviews were the Yorozu choho, Jiji shimpo, Tokyo asahi shimbun and Miyako shimbun, all among the top seven newspapers in termsof circulation.
As mentioned, the term chiri (geography) first entered the Japanese
language in the 1760s, rapidly gaining acceptance and becoming a termof daily use. The leading pre-Meiji thinker and educator Yoshida Shoin
also used this term in the 1850s when he wrote the well-known maxim
in his Yushuroku: “Man does not exist apart from the land; no matter ofimportance is separate from man. If you wish to discuss human affairs,
you must first examine geography.” Thus, even before geography wasestablished as a course of study in institutions of higher learning andresearch, its importance had been recognized for its practical applicationin the fields of politics, administration, military matters and education.
While, among today’s government ministries, Kokudo Chiri In (Geographical Survey Institute) is the only agency that is retains the word
“geography” in its title, in the early years of the Meiji Era (1868–1912),
four departments within the Ministry of Military Affairs, Ministry of
Finance, Ministry of Civil Affairs and Ministry of Education had titles
that included this word. Against this background, it was only naturalthat Makiguchi’s voluminous and comprehensive study of geography
should attract the attention of many newspapers and journals.
Jinsei chirigaku was first published in 1903, shortly after the academic study of geography was established in universities and higher normal
schools in Japan. The academic geographers of the time were virtually
all graduates of Japanese or foreign universities and, with the exception
noted above of Ogawa Takuji, paid no attention and made no reference
to Makiguchi’s work. This is probably in part because of the prejudice,typical of the status-conscious society of the time, they held against an
author who had only completed a normal (teachers’ training) school

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

115

education. The more fundamental reason, however, for their failure toappreciate Makiguchi book was that, preoccupied by traditional conceptualizations of geography, they were unable understand Makiguchi’s
groundbreaking ideas and approach to the subject. In contrast, Ogawa,like the agronomist and internationalist Nitobe Inazo, the pioneer ofJapanese folklore studies Yanagita Kunio and other members of the
Kyodo-kai (a voluntary, interdisciplinary group studying local communities) warmly welcomed Makiguchi into their midst.
In 1943, Yamaguchi Sadao at Osaka Second Normal School wrote a
brief, not necessarily appropriate but still positive review of Jinsei chirigaku in which he commented that it was the first book of human geography that was based on the correlation between the land and its humaninhabitants. In my view, however, the first example of an academic geographer paying serious attention to or reassessing the significance of
Jinsei chirigaku was in 1971, when Ishida Ryujiro, then professor emeritus at Hitotsubashi University and former president of the Associationof Japanese Geographers, gave a public lecture at an academic event
commemorating the centenary of the birth of two of the first academic
geographers in Japan, Ogawa Takuji and Yamasaki Naomasa of, respectively, Kyoto and Tokyo Imperial Universities. Ishida spoke on “Intellectual Trends in Geography in Japan in the Meiji and Taisho Eras,” in thecourse of which he referred to Uchimura Kanzo’s Chijinron (On the
Relation Between the Land and Man) (originally published in 1894 as
Chirigaku-ko (Considerations on Geography)), and Makiguchi’s Jinsei
chirigaku as “two unique books of geography in Meiji Era.” Later in1972 and 1973, Kunimatsu Hisaya, then at the Department of Literature,
Senshu University, published two lengthy essays, which formed thebasis for his Jinsei chirigaku gairon (Overview of Jinsei Chirigaku) in
1978. Additionally, Ishida commented on his impression of Makiguchi
when he was introduced to him at a gathering of the reconstituted
Kyodo-kai held in late 1935 at the Nitobe residence: “[Mr. Makiguchi]
was indeed an earnest and taciturn man, with the air typical of an aged
elementary school principal.” While there is some difference in thenature of the Kyodo-kai meetings that started in 1910, lapsing into inactivity in 1920 when Nitobe moved to Geneva to take up his post as
under-secretary-general of the League of Nations, and the gatherings
that began again following Nitobe’s return to Japan in 1928, the only
geographers who consistently attended both rounds were Makiguchi andOdauchi Michitoshi, a graduate of a higher normal school. Odauchi,
nevertheless, made no reference to Makiguchi in his writings. In thissense, it was not until the 1970s that academic geographers began in

116

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

earnest to appreciate Jinsei chirigaku. Likewise, it was not until the
1960s that the book came to be widely read among the membership of
the Soka Gakkai, the postwar lay Buddhist group that grew out of theassociation of educators founded by Makiguchi around 1930.
The questions posed here are thus: who were the many readers of Jinsei chirigaku in the early years of the 20th century, how did they understand this book and what did they learn from it? In order to think about
these questions, we will need to examine the social context against
which Jinsei chirigaku was written, and particularly how geographicalknowledge was understood and applied in the Japan of the Meiji andTaisho Eras, as well as the nature of geography education in
Makiguchi’s day.
HISTORIC BACKGROUND OF JINSEI CHIRIGAKU
In the early years of the school system initiated in 1872, the study ofgeography was a requirement in the last two years of the four-year compulsory elementary education. In Japan, as in other countries, compulsory national education played a key role in the process of nation-building,with special emphasis being placed on the teaching of the national language, history and geography, each of which was seen as vital to fostering national identity and a sense of citizenship. A national language(“standard” Japanese) was of course necessary in providing the people,
many of whom only spoke and understood local dialects, with a commonly understood language in which legislation could be enacted andthrough which the will of the state on such matters as taxation and military service could be communicated and enforced. The study of history
served to foster a sense of shared identity based on a common past, andgeography, on a common land.
The new school system was initiated a mere four years after the Meiji
Restoration. Efforts to develop textbooks and other study materials
lagged behind and, with the start of the new system, the Ministry of
Education had no choice but to order the normal schools in Tokyo towrite textbooks. Schools also used commercially published books thatthey deemed appropriate. One extremely popular book for the teachingof geography was Fukuzawa Yukichi’s 1869 Sekai kunizukushi (Countries of the World), demand for which was met in part with a pirated edition printed in Osaka. In this book, Fukuzawa divided the world into its
civilized and uncivilized components and argued that Japan, being semicivilized, needed to strive to Westernize under the banner of “civilization and enlightenment” (bunmei kaika).

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

117

By the 1880s, however, reaction against this type of Westernization
was becoming more pronounced and when, in 1886, Minister of Education Mori Arinori enacted a series of ordinances on imperial universities,
normal schools, elementary schools and middle schools, he also initiateda textbook inspection system that included those used in the elementary
schools: “[The textbooks that can be used in elementary schools] areonly those that have passed the inspection by the Minister of Educationand ... have been inspected and passed by the governors of respective
prefectures.” Gaining the widest possible adoption of textbooks in theschools became a matter of economic survival for publishers, and in1902 the inspection system was at the heart of corruption scandal
regarding the selection of textbooks. In the wake of this scandal, theMinistry of Education began the state-approved textbook system, inwhich only textbooks whose copyrights were held by the Ministry of
Education could be used in the schools. This system continued until thereforms of the education system implemented after World War II.
Under the Meiji compulsory education system, elementary school
teachers were chosen from among the graduates of the normal schoolsfounded in each prefecture. These normal schools had dormitories for
all the students to live and even provided them with a living allowance.
In return, graduates were obliged to work as elementary school teachers
for a certain minimum of years. Licenses to teach at normal schools andother middle schools (roughly equivalent, in terms of the age of students, to today’s high schools) were granted to the graduates of universities and then later to those of the higher normal schools as these were
established. Until 1898, there was only one Imperial University, inTokyo, and the only other institution that conferred university graduate
degrees was the Sapporo College of Agriculture that had been established in 1876. Among the first graduates of this college was Nitobe
Inazo, the author of Nogyo honron (Treatise on Agronomy) who later
significantly impacted the development of Makiguchi’s ideas throughtheir interactions in the Kyodo-kai gatherings organized by Yanagita andheld at the Nitobe’s house. In the second graduating class was Uchimura
Kanzo, whose works are frequently cited by Makiguchi in Jinsei chirigaku. Further, Shiga Shigetaka, the well-known author of Nihon fukeiron (On the Japanese Landscape) (1894), entered this college in 1880.
In its early days the entire faculty of the college were Americans or
British and, although it offered no formal instruction in geography,
through the study of agriculture it fostered in the above figures, later
regarded by Makiguchi as his academic mentors in geography, a keenawareness of the interrelationship between nature and humans, as well

118

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

as an expansive international outlook.
As the enrollment in middle schools increased, the fact that teaching
licenses were conferred only on university and college graduates createda shortage of teachers. The response, from 1886, was a new system inwhich elementary school teachers who passed a Ministry of Education
examination could be qualified to teach in middle schools. This examination system, which continued up until the school system reform
immediately after World War II, was extremely competitive. For the
license to teach geography, for example, only a small fraction of theexaminees—perhaps 10 or 20 out of several hundred—passed. Many
elementary school teachers ended up taking the exam repeatedly, sometimes for 10 or more years.
Makiguchi entered Hokkaido Normal School in 1889, after a period
in which he worked as an errand boy in a police station while studying
on his own. This was a time when efforts to encourage nationalist sentiment and institution-building were gaining momentum. Although thenormal school was located in Sapporo, it did not have any particularaffiliation with the elite Sapporo College of Agriculture or its graduates.
More crucial is the fact that educational philosophies such as the developmental (kaihatsushugi) education movement and that of Johonot werestill alive in provincial schools such as Hokkaido Normal School and the
Fukushima and Nagano Normal Schools even after they had been repudiated at the Tokyo Normal School. The developmental education movement had grown out of Pestalozzi’s educational philosophy and created
new impetus to reform in the teaching of geography in Japan. Johonot’s
pedagogy sought to initiate learning from the child’s immediate surroundings, expanding the scope of experience from which the child can
extract principles as he or she grows; as a system it was principally
adopted and transmitted to Japan by the educator Takamine Hideo
through his studies at the teacher training college at Oswego, New York.
As is widely known, Makiguchi’s later writings on education rooted in
the local community and his pedagogy of value-creating education drew
importantly from the Japanese translation of the Johonot’s pedagogy.
In 1893, Makiguchi graduated from the Hokkaido Normal School andbecame a teacher at its affiliated elementary school. Just three years
later, he passed the Ministry of Education examination for the license toteach geography: in the following year he became an associate teacherat Hokkaido Normal School (presently the Faculty of Education at
Hokkaido University). Although it is not known when he started writing
the text of Jinsei chirigaku, it can be assumed that he started writing it
because, while engaged in the kind of intense study that enabled him toSIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

119

pass the Ministry of Education examination a mere three years after
graduation from normal school, he experienced firsthand the lack of abook giving an academic overview of geography. At the same time, hemust have experienced the reality that geography was treated as a collection of unrelated scraps of facts about place names and locations to
be memorized, rather than as a systematized academic discipline. He no
doubt became keenly aware of the need for a book that would offer asystematic approach to the study and teaching of geography.
In 1901, Makiguchi left his job at the Hokkaido Normal School andmoved to Tokyo where he dedicated his time and efforts to the writingof such a book. While a direct causal relation cannot be identified, it
seems plausible that the humanism that is a consistent feature of Jinsei
chirigaku as well as his critical stance toward the ultra-nationalistic andimperialistic expansionism that had become an increasingly salient feature of Japanese education policies after the Sino-Japanese War werefactors that undermined his will to continue to teach at the Normal
School. With the exception of a brief stint editing geography textbooks
for the Ministry of Education’s publications section, Makiguchi spent
most of the years from the 1903 publication of Jinsei chirigaku until
1932 working either as an elementary school teacher or principal. He
appears to have preferred, in other words, engagement at the front lines
of education, working with pupils and their teachers, to the training ofteachers, where he would have been directly responsible for implementing an ever more stridently nationalistic educational agenda.
Although Makiguchi’s life after moving to Tokyo in 1901 appears tohave been marked by financial difficulties, he managed to focus on writing Jinsei chirigaku. In the spring of 1902, he visited Shiga Shigetaka,
who was then teaching geography at Tokyo Senmon Gakko (now Waseda University) and was active as both a writer and a politician, showing
Shiga the 2000-page initial manuscript of his geography book. With
Shiga’s editorial input and comments, Makiguchi’s text was condensed
considerably and published as Jinsei chirigaku. At the time there were
only a few books available in Japan giving an overview of human geography, among them Uchimura Kanzo’s Chijinron (On the Relation
between Land and Man) and Shiga’s Chirigaku kogiroku (Lectures on
Geography), both of which depended more directly on already published foreign-language books and neither of which was as detailed orcomprehensive as Makiguchi’s. In three parts (“The Land as the Site of
Humanity’s Life Activities,” “Nature as the Medium Between Humans
and the Earth” and “The Phenomena of the Life of the Human Race on
the Stage of the Earth”) Makiguchi’s book was groundbreaking in that it

120

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

was among the first to explain to a general readership the actual content
of the discipline of geography. At the same time, this book, because it
offered a systematic explanation of geography, was an ideal reference
book for the hundreds of elementary school teachers who were preparing for the Ministry of Education examination to be licensed to teach in
middle schools. Together, these factors help explain the popularity ofbook, its repeated reprinting in revised editions. It is also clear that,without the name of Shiga as editor, this book by an unknown schoolteacher would never have been published.
Despite his busy schedule running in the House of Representatives
election of that year, Shiga attentively read and edited the text and added
a number of notes. Shiga, however, was heavily influenced by the mannature paradigm of his day and tended to impose his own environmental-deterministic interpretation on Makiguchi’s much more flexible
approach. Moreover, Makiguchi’s pioneering approach led him to deal
with such concerns as economics, sociology and political science in Part
3 of Jinsei chirigaku—fields at the time considered unrelated to theactual study of geography. Limited to the more conventional understanding of geography then prevailing, Shiga appears to have failed entirely
to understand the significance of this section—reflected in the fact that
he offers far less annotation to this section than to the previous two, andthat some of what he does provide conspicuously lack relevance. There
are also, of course, many places in which Shiga supplemented
Makiguchi’s writings with comments on conditions in different countries and new trends in science and technology, reflecting his access to
the latest English-language books from the Maruzen bookstore forwhom he also worked. Although Shiga is often considered a nationalist,
he was not the kind of extreme nationalist who would support Japan’s
imperialistic expansionist policy that came to prominence following theJapan-Russo War but was realistically conscious about the difficultinternational circumstance in which Japan was situated. He was athinker and writer with a rich international sensibility. The appeals madein Shiga’s Nihon fukeiron (On the Japanese Landscape) were not toultra-nationalism, but rather to foster love for the land of Japan byencouraging recognition of the unique beauty of the Japanese landscape.

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

121

FEATURES OF JINSEI CHIRIGAKU:PROGRESSIVE IDEAS ANTICIPATING CONTEMPORARY GEOGRAPHY
Works Cited by Makiguchi
As would be considered only natural given his educational background,
it seems likely that Makiguchi was not able to read specialist texts inlanguages other than Japanese. One can only be impressed by how
extensively and thoroughly he identified and read the available translations of books by foreign authors, reshaping the knowledge and concepts gleaned from these sources into his own language. Each chapter
includes a list of works referenced, but on careful examination it
becomes clear that his reading was not limited the works thus cited but
included virtually all the research available in Japanese. In 1936,
Ishabashi Goro, then professor at Kyoto Imperial University, wrote an
essay “Wagakuni chirigakkai no kaiko” (Reflections on the World of
Academic Geography in Japan). In it, he stated that Makiguchi’s Jinsei
chirigaku could not be recognized as an introductory book to humangeography because it only referred to books and papers written in ortranslated into Japanese. The attitude expressed in this essay reveals thesevere limitations of Japanese academics of the time who believed thatscholarship meant importing the work of foreign researchers.
The Title Jinsei chirigaku
This phrase, consisting of two Sino-Japanese characters meaning “life”
or “daily living” (jinsei) together with three characters meaning thestudy (gaku) of geography (chiri), is not included in the title of any subsequently published book on the subject. As mentioned above, Ogawa
Takuji criticized the use of this title rather than the more establishedalternatives of “human geography” (jinmon chirigaku) or “anthropogeography” (jinrui chirigaku). However, from the perspective of modern
geography, it is clear that the title Jinsei chirigaku is closely related tothe heading of Part 2 of the book, “Nature as the Medium Between
Humans and the Earth.” In other words, Makiguchi emphasized the significance and meaning that human beings discover in and confer onnature, which varies from place to place and era to era, rather than thephysical or material constraints and influence exerted by natural conditions on human activities. Makiguchi felt that this was the proper objectof study for the science of geography and in this he anticipated by several decades the new direction geographic in studies. So long as “humanlife” is understood in terms of the concrete life activities of human

122

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

beings, and not as abstract or philosophical concept, this title is entirely
appropriate.
Yi-Fu Tuan, a Chinese scholar who taught geography for many years
at universities in the U.S., published a book (in 1974) by the title ofTopophilia, a term derived from the Greek topos, place or location, andphilia, love for or attachment to. He pointed out that human beings not
only impart meaning to their surroundings—from their towns and villages to counties, prefectures and countries—but also develop love andattachment to these places, feelings that are intimately intertwined with
their sense of identity and belonging. The implied inverse of this senseof belonging and identity is a sense of “otherness,” difference and exclusion. The recently deceased Palestinian-born scholar Edward W. Saidfor many years taught English and comparative literature at Columbia
University in the U.S. His 1978 work Orientalism importantly influenced geography and other academic disciplines by demonstrating themanner in which Western/European society has historically ascribedsuch qualities as backwardness, indolence, despotism and irrationality to
the “the Orient”—using this as a negative backdrop against which todevelop a self-image of superiority that justified political and military
domination.
A consistent theme running through Makiguchi’s Jinsei chirigaku is
the way in which humans confer meaning on place, a process that takes
places in a variety of proximities and scales—from the local community,
to cities, countries and, eventually, Earth itself. While Makiguchi does
not use the term “otherness,” he explores ideas of central importance tomodern geography in first edition Chapter 30, “On the Land and Competition for Survival” where he describes changes in the spatial units, or
scale, and modalities of competition. Over the past one hundred years,
human awareness of otherness (and the identification of “other” with“enemy”) has been generated in many different ways, providing the conceptual basis for much war and slaughter. And since the terrorist attacks
of September 11, 2001, a new sense of otherness has been generated
around the idea of a “clash of civilizations”—giving rise to forms ofhuman slaughter unimagined even a few years ago.
In this sense, Makiguchi’s choice of title, the geography of human
life, is deeply relevant to our contemporary world. This is because helooks beyond the material and physical influence of place on humans; ina way that anticipates Said’s analysis of “Orientalism,” he describes themeaning that humans ascribe to place—the act of geographic imagination by which we develop a sense of identity attached to place, alongwith the converse generation of a sense of otherness (those places toSIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

123

which we do not belong and those humans who do not belong to theplace we have identified as “ours”).
Makiguchi’s Progressiveness in Incorporating Location Theory into the
System of Geographic Studies
Part 3 of Jinsei chirigaku, “The Phenomena of the Life of the Human
Race on the Stage of the Earth,” deals with subject matter corresponding
to such contemporary disciplines as social geography, cultural geography, economic geography and political geography. Here Makiguchi’s
concerns are no longer limited to traditional geography and the mannature paradigm of his day. As various scholars have already pointed
out, in writing this section of his book, Makiguchi does not reference
any works on geography in the narrow sense of the word. Rather, hedevelops his own unique approach to geography based on his readings
in sociology, economics and political science. The subject matter treatedby Makiguchi in this section was considered entirely outside the realmof what was understood as “geography” in late 19th-century Europe andthe United States (and thus Japan). From the 1930s, a very limited number of geographers (joined by many more from after the 1960s) began to
discuss a new geography, one completely different from conventional
geography, incorporating the insights of economics, sociology, politicalscience, social theory and cultural studies. In this sense, Part 3 of Jinsei
chirigaku was completely estranged from the approach to geography
prevailing at the time it was when it was published. It only began to gain
recognition in the 1970s when academic geographers such as Ishida
Ryujiro and Kunimatsu Hisaya voiced the view that the essence ofMakiguchi’s work is found in Part 3.
As already mentioned, it is indeed remarkable that Makiguchi could
develop an economic geography of such sophistication based solely on
the study of materials then available in Japanese, without direct reference to foreign language materials. For Makiguchi the discovery andclarification of underlying explanatory principles was the crucial thing
and this is revealed in his frequent reference to such terms as fundamental laws and rules, guiding or governing principles. In his pursuit of suchprinciples, Makiguchi was attracted to and influenced by the work of
J.H. von Thünen (1783–1850), who developed a location theory of agriculture in the 1820s while managing an estate in a region that would
later be part of East Germany. In Jinsei chirigaku Makiguchi not only
referred to and introduced the ideas of von Thünen’s Der Isolierte Staat(The Isolated State), but also applied its principles to the work of
explaining various phenomena—not only agriculture but also such dis-124

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

parate industries as fisheries and transportation. Going further, heapplied von Thünen’s principles to the realm of political geography inorder to explain the difference between primitive industrial societies andcommercial-industrial societies. Kunimatsu Hisaya, however, points out(with some apparent hesitancy) the inaccuracy of Makiguchi’s receptionof von Thünen’s theories.
This discrepancy, however, actually provides a window into thesources from which Makiguchi drew. Among the works listed as reference sources in Jinsei chirigaku, only three, including Nitobe’s Nogyohonron (Treatise on Agronomy), make mention of von Thünen and his
theories. Careful examination of Makiguchi’s text, however, reveals that
Makiguchi’s analysis is not based on the books of Nitobe or other Sapporo College of Agriculture scholars—whose transmission of vonThünen’s ideas was accurate and faithful to the original. Rather, it was
based on the work of scholars at the College of Agriculture of the Imperial University (now University of Tokyo) in Komaba who had alreadyintroduced von Thünen’s The Isolated State to Japanese readers in 1881
(Ohji 1980; 1982; 1983). For example, while von Thünen described theforestry industry as located immediately outside the agriculture zones
nearest to urban areas, Makiguchi describes this as located in the zone
most remote from the urban center. While this is based on Makiguchi’s
own view of forestry as the least intensive use of land, it is also clearlybased on the misinterpretation of von Thünen’s ideas by the Imperial
University scholars. While the idea of forestry industry being locatedimmediately outside the suburban agriculture zone may seem inapplicable to Japan, it should be remembered that for several centuries there
was, in fact, an active forestry industry on the outskirts of Edo/Tokyo(presently the area from Tama New Town to Ome), which supplied thecity with wood and charcoal.
Although we can only guess why Makiguchi failed to cite the actual
Japanese sources from which his understanding of von Thünen wasderived, this offers further evidence that his extensive reading covered
the available translations of foreign authors’ work, including those notexplicitly cited. In addition, in the first edition version of Chapter 28,“The Land and the State,” Makiguchi points out that, with the development of transportation systems, von Thünen’s location theory can also
be applied to the international division of labor. Whatever the substantive merits of this way of thinking, the fact is that it was not until 1950s
that similar concepts found their way into the discipline of geography,
indicating again the pioneering nature of Makiguchi’s approach.
Another progressive aspect of Makiguchi’s thought is found in the

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

125

field of economic geography. Well before Alfred Weber first presented
in systematic form his theory of industrial location, Makiguchi demonstrated his excellent grasp of the relationship between the location of
raw materials, centers of production and consumption, as these relate to
the cost of transportation. He recognized that manufacturers that use
localized sources of raw materials establish themselves in the areas
where the materials are found, and that they are encouraged in this by
the fact that raw materials tend to lose weight (reducing transportation
costs) in the process of manufacturing. While Makiguchi did not develop his theory completely unaided, he in fact came to essentially thesame understanding as Weber based solely on his extensive reading ofJapanese translations of economic texts—sources that only dealt withspatial relations in a fragmentary manner. While Makiguchi never studied economics systemically, I believe he demonstrated a good grasp of
the concept of marginal utility.
A Unique Approach to Political Geography
A significant portion of Jinsei chirigaku is devoted to the discussion ofwhat would now be categorized as political geography or geopolitics.
Political geography had long been considered to fall within the purview
of geography and for much of the 19th century, questions such as thenature of national borders—whether they should be natural features,such as watersheds or rivers, or are simply artificial lines drawn onmaps—dominated the field. Makiguchi himself devotes a considerable
number of pages to the discussion of such matters. As the 19th century
drew to a close, however, and competition among the Western Powers
for territories and colonies intensified, political geography was looked toas a source of theory to explain conflicts among the Powers. One such
explanation was offered in Friedrich Ratzel’s Politische Geographie(Political Geography), in which he compares states to living organisms.
He argued that, just as actual organisms require space in which to live,
states naturally compete to expand their “living space” (Lebensraum) or
territory. This organic theory of the state later formed the basis for Nazi
geopolitics and its justification of aggressive, expansionist policies.
Another argument was put forward by Halford Mackinder, who madevarious policy proposals to the British government and played an important role in determining the national borders and territorial lines of division in the Balkan Peninsula and Middle and Near East after World War
I based on his belief that foreign policy should take geographical conditions into consideration. Makiguchi, rooted in a cogent, realpolitik
analysis of interstate competition, arrived at conclusions that accorded

126

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

with the emerging trends of political geography-ideas that had not yet
been formally introduced in Japan. And while Makiguchi recognized thecompetition-driven reality of society, as a careful reading of Chapter 30,“On the Land and Competition for Survival,” demonstrates, he was critical of the idea that competition was or should be the sole principle guiding society; he described a shift from the logic of competition to one ofa cooperation as the ultimate stage toward which progress was tending.
In a passage that may be read as an expression of his humanistic ideals,
Makiguchi wrote: “Although humanitarian competition is not yet visible
in the international arena, persons who have gained some level of insightare beginning to realize that the ultimate winners in the competition forsurvival are not necessarily the winners of the economic race. It is notdifficult, then, to imagine that the next form of competition will behumanitarian in nature.” The reality of the 20th century, regrettably, did
not develop in accord with Makiguchi’s vision: this is attested to by thebloodshed of two world war, numerous regional conflicts, and, in the
post-Cold War world, increasingly violent competition and slaughter
conducted in the name of democracy and humanitarianism.
A Multi-layered Conceptualization of the Local Community
As pointed out in relation to the title of Jinsei chirigaku, the aspect ofMakiguchi’s work that draws the most attention from contemporary students of geography is the degree to which he was ahead of his time inunderstanding that it is humans who confer meaning on place. In thisconnection, Makiguchi frequently uses the word kyodo (alternatelytranslated as local community or homeland) in his book, starting with
Chapter 2, “The Local Community as a Basis for Observation andUnderstanding.” As Makiguchi writes in this chapter, “What is one’s
community or hometown? Its scope will vary depending on vantage
point of the observer.” He clearly recognized that what we consider ourcommunity, the human identity attached to place will expand with theprocess of individual growth; the concept for him is thus inherently
diverse and multi-layered.
Indeed, when asked the simple question, “Where are you from?” ouranswer will vary depending on the circumstances in which the question
is posed. We might answer with the name of a town, or the train station
nearest our home. In another situation we might give the name of a stateor province. If asked in an international context, most of us would
answer with the name of our country of origin. In this way, Makiguchi’sidea of education rooted in the local community as the basis for observation and understanding was clearly distinct from the Ministry of Educa-

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

127

tion-sponsored “homeland education” program, implemented from thelatter half of the decade of the 1920s, which sought to engender ultranationalist sentiment by linking local tutelary deity worship to the emperor
system—a nexus that later came to be referred to as state Shinto.
Yanagita Kunio clearly voiced his objection to the “homeland” policyof the Ministry of Education. In a 1932 public lecture in Yamagata, hestated that it is a mistake to “consider knowledge of divided and isolated
homelands as of some value.” Rather, he emphasized that community
studies should not be limited to research into local realities but shouldseek a larger understanding of Japanese culture, in particular folk culture. It is in this sense that Yanagita’s research into localities carried
within it the seeds for the later systematic study of Japanese folklore. It
should be noted here that Makiguchi’s concept of the local community,
which shares some commonalities with Yanagita’s understanding, wasalready largely developed when he wrote Jinsei chirigaku years before
he began attending the monthly study meetings held at Nitobe’s residence or engaged in research in local villages with Yanagita and othermembers of the Kyodo-kai group. While there were a number of academic geographers who maintained an interest in Japanese folklore and as
a result ended up wearing two “hats”—one as a geographer, the other asan folklorist—Makiguchi’s concept of the local community bore within
it the possibility of integrating these two fields. Because, however, his
professional interest was always in geography education rather than infurthering geographic research per se, he never had the opportunity toconcretely tackle the challenges of such an integration.
SOME LIMITATIONS SURROUNDING JINSEI CHIRIGAKU
I have so far described a number of aspects of Jinsei chirigaku, published one hundred years ago, that demonstrate a great foresightedness
made clear by subsequent advances in the study of geography. At thesame time, it is only natural that Makiguchi’s work should be limited by
the historical conditions of the time. It is likely that future historians will
describe the 20th century as a century of wars and revolutions, and in
this sense the past hundred years have been witness to developments,
both in Japan and the world, that could have not been imagined when
Makiguchi was writing. Even the most brilliant minds can only grapple
with those facts and issues that have already come into existence. For
example, the development of transportation and communications technology has utterly transformed—and in certain cases eliminated—theimportance of physical distance, so central to 19th-century geography,

128

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

and has done so in ways that Makiguchi could not have envisaged. In histime, energy sources could generally only be obtained by transporting
such physically weighty resources as firewood or coal, and this reality
shaped his ideas on the location of industries. (At the same time, heoffered a visionary prospect of the possibilities of hydroelectric power.)
In contrast, the novelist Natsume Soseki was at this period living in
London, enduring the smoke-filled air that tarred his phlegm black andthe earsplitting screech of the underground railways. Soseki was dismayed by prevailing Japanese attitudes—which saw the 1902 alliancewith Britain as proof of having joined the “civilized” countries, andwhich supported the rush to war to stop Russia’s southward expansion
as Britain’s proxy. Soseki’s relatively privileged position (specifically,
his knowledge of foreign languages and overseas travel) afforded him abetter perspective from which to observe the negative aspects of industrial civilization, on the surface so alluring, and to perceive the essential
nature of international relations. Unlike Soseki, Makiguchi was fully
and inextricably immersed in the realities of Japan, then struggling tocatch-up in the effort to industrialize. While we may be fated, as humanbeings, to be able to think only about those problems and issues thatexist in reality, the mark of an outstanding intellect is the ability to grasp
the essence and structure of reality, thus offering a framework for thinking about those issues that may emerge in the future. Makiguchi’s Jinsei
chirigaku is a product of such robust intellect and thus continues to
speak to us to this day.
There is one other limiting factor surrounding Jinsei chirigaku thatmust be addressed. While contemporary readers of Jinsei chirigaku
could understand and absorb the geographical knowledge it contained, I
do not believe that they were able to appreciate its pioneering perspectives that often anticipate the views of contemporary geography, or
grasp its innovative analytical framework and structure. The mostimportant factor here, in my view, is the increasingly tight state control
over education and research in Makguchi’s time—symbolized by thegovernment-edited elementary school textbooks published in the same
year as Jinsei chirigaku. In the early Meiji era, geography had played an
important practical role in national administration—that is, in making
land registers and maps, and in determining the optimal location of suchinfrastructure developments as roads and harbors. In the beginning of
the 20th century, however, geography was pressed into the service of thepolitical, economic and military elite as a means of fostering loyal subjects of the state—rather than good citizens. It is my regretful conclusion that readers of the time—those seeking to understand geographic

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

129

realities as well as elementary school teachers preparing for the Ministryof Education examination—were largely unable to grasp Makiguchi’s
most innovative ideas. The truly revolutionary content of Jinsei chirigaku was simply too distant from the prevailing realities of the time.
There is, I believe, one final lesson to be learned here: when an entire
society is rushing heedlessly in a particular direction, statements of critical warning that run contrary to that direction are misunderstood or
ignored. In this sense, I believe it is crucial to learn not only from
Makiguchi’s wisdom and pioneering observations, but also to extend ourthoughts to the life and fate of the author who died in prison in 1944 forhis opposition to the religious policies of the wartime regime. In thisway, we can fundamentally take stock of the direction in which we ourselves, and society as a whole, may be heedlessly careening. I believe
this is another important lesson that we should learn from Jinsei chirigaku on the centenary of its publication.
Annotated Bibliography
The text of Jinsei chirigaku (Geography of Human Life) used as the primary reference
for this paper is contained in Vols. 1 and 2 of Makiguchi Tsunesaburo zenshu (Complete
Works of Makiguchi Tsunesaburo) published by Daisanbunmei-sha in 1981 and 1996.
Based on the first edition, it has been painstakingly edited and copiously annotated by
Saito Shoji, and thus provides the most reliable and complete source (and making it all
the more regrettable that the Prof. Saito’s supplementary notes end in the middle ofChapter 19). I have also consulted as many different editions and versions of the book as
could be found in various libraries. Further, I have made reference to the Seikyo paperback version, which is based on the fifth edition of 1905. There are important differences between the first and fifth editions of the book, especially in Part 3.
Recently published research on Jinsei chirigaku include:
Shiohara Masayuki (2003): “Makiguchi Tsunesaburo-cho Jinseichirigaku: 41 no
shohyo (Forty-one Book Reviews of Makiguchi Tsunesaburo’s Jinsei Chirigaku),” Soka
kyoiku kenkyu (Journal of Soka Education Research), 2.
Oki Keiko (2003): “Makiguchi Tsunesaburo-cho Jinsei chirigaku no dojidaihyo(Evaluations from Contemporaries of Makiguchi Tsunesaburo’s Jinsei Chirigaku),”
Chiri kagaku (Geographical Sciences), 58.
Reviews by academic geographers quoted or referred to in this article are as follows:
Ogawa Takuji (1904): “Jinsei ni oyobosu chirigakuteki eikyo: Makiguchi
Tsunesaburo-cho Jinsei chirigaku hihyo (Geographical Influences on Human Life: a
Review of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi’s Jinsei Chirigaku),” Chigaku zasshi (Journal of
Geography), 181.
Ishibashi Goro (1936): “Wagakuni chirigakkai no kaiko (Reflections on the World of
Academic Geography in Japan),” Chirironso (Geographical Debates), 8
Yamaguchi Sadao (1943): Nihon o chushin to suru bankin chirigaku hattatsushi (History of the Development of Modern Geography, mainly in Japan), Seibido.

130

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

Ishida Ryujiro (1971): “Meiji-Taishoki no Nihon no chirigakkai no shisoteki doko
(Intellectual Trends in Geography in Japan in the Meiji and Taisho Eras),” Chirigaku
Hyoron (Geographical Review of Japan) 44.
Kunimatsu Hisaya (1972 and 1973): “Makiguchi chirigaku to kindai chirigaku(Makiguchi’s Geography and Modern Geography) (1) and (2),” Senshu Jinbunronshu(Specialized Essays on Humanities of Senshu University), 10 and 11.
——— (1978) Jinsei chirigaku gairon (Overview of Jinsei Chirigaku) Daisanbunmei-sha.
The following article and book by geographers refer to Jinsei chirigaku:
Takeuchi Keiichi (1974): “The Origin of Human Geography in Japan,” Hitotsubashi
Journal of Social Studies, 15. This is my earliest article that makes reference to
Makiguchi’s Jinsei chirigaku. At the time, however, I had not yet developed a fullunderstanding or appreciation of the originality of Makiguchi’s geographic theories,
especially as demonstrated in Part 3.
Kuryu Ichiro (ed.) (1976): Fukkoku Jinsei chirigaku kaidai (Facsimile Reprint of Jinsei Chirigaku with Bibliographical Introduction), Daisanbunmei-sha. In addition to thecontributions by several geographers there is a useful record of a discussion among four
academic geographers including Hisaya Kunimatsu; contains what is probably the mostaccurate chronology of Makiguchi’s life and work.
The following three works of Ohji Toshiaki represent important research on
Makiguchi’s acceptance of von Thünen’s ideas:
Ohji Toshiaki (1980): “The Adoption of H. von Thünen’s Location Theory in Japanese Geography,” Geography Institute, Kyoto University (ed.), Geographical Languages
in Different Times and Spaces.
——— (1982): “Wagakuni chirigakkai eno Chunen Koritsukoku no shokai—
Makiguchi Tsunesaburo-cho Jinsei chirigaku niokeru shokai o megutte (Introduction of
von Thünen’s Der Isolierte Staat into the World of Japanese Geographic Studies—with
a focus on references in Makiguchi Tsunesaburo’s Jinsei Chirigaku),” Department ofGeography, Faculty of Letters, Kyoto University (ed.), Chiri no shiso (Geographic Theory), Chijin Shobo.
——— (1983): “Wagakuni chirigaku eno Chunen Koritsukoku no juyo katei: sono
gakusetsushi kenkyu (Reception of von Thünen’s Der Isolierte Staat in Japanese Geographic Studies—a Study of the History of the Theory),” Department of Geography,
Faculty of Letters, Kyoto University (ed.), Kukan, Keikan, Imeji (Space, Landscape andImage), Chijin Shobo.
Other works by academic geographers on Makiguchi include:
Takeuchi Keiichi (1984/85): “Strategies of Heterodox Researchers in the National
School of Geography and Their Roles in Shifting Paradigms in Geography, Organon
20/21.
——— (1998): “Geography and Buddhism in Makiguchi Tsunesaburo,” in Wardenga, Ute and Wilczynski, Witold J. (eds.) Religion, Ideology and Geographical Thought(WPS Kielce Studies in Geography 3).
——— (2000) “Makiguchi Tsunesaburo 1871–1944,” Geographers: Biobibliographical Studies 20.
Okada Toshihiro (1994): “Makiguchi Tsunesaburo Jinsei chirigaku no chirigakushijo

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

131

no saihyoka (A Reappraisal of Makiguchi Tsunesaburo’s Jinsei Chirigaku in the Historyof Geography in Japan),” Chiri kagaku (Geographical Sciences) 49.
The following are some of the books or papers on Makiguchi’s ideas by scholars
active in fields other than geography that focus on the contemporary significance of Jinsei chirigaku in relation, for example, to environmental issues and other global issues:
Murao Koichi (1997): “Jindoteki kyoso no susume: Makiguchi Tsunesaburo to Jinsei
chirigaku no heiwa shiso (An Encouragement of Humanitarian Competition: The Peace
Philosophy of Makiguchi Tsunesaburo Expressed in Jinsei Chirigaku),” Ushio 456.
——— (1993): “Kyosei ni taisuru Jinsei chirigaku no shiza (The Perspective of Jinsei
Chirigaku on Coexistence),” Toyo Gakujutsu Kenkyu (The Journal of Oriental Studies),
32.
Miyata Koichi (1995): Makiguchi Tsunesaburo no sekai bijon: Jinsei chirigaku no
messeiji (Makiguchi Tsunesaburo’s World Vision: The Message of Jinsei Chirigaku),
Daisanbunmei-sha.
Yamamoto Shuichi (1994): “Jinsei chirigaku to kankyo mondai: ningen seitaigaku noshiten kara (Jinsei Chirigaku and Environmental Issues: from the Perspective of Human
Ecology), Toyo Gakujutsu Kenkyu (The Journal of Oriental Studies),” 33.
The following is probably the most comprehensive English-language collection of
papers giving an overview of Makiguchi’s thought. It should be noted, however, thatreferences to Jinsei chirigaku are limited and the emphasis is more on Makiguchi later
career as educator and philosopher of value.
Miyata Koichi (ed.) (2002) “Ideas and Influence of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi” Special
Issue The Journal of Oriental Studies, 10. Articles include: Miyata: “Tsunesaburo
Makiguchi’s Theory of the State”; Kumagai Kazunori: “Value-Creating Pedagogy andJapanese Education”; Sato Hiroo: “Nichiren Thought in Modern Japan: Two Perspectives” as well as a case study by Dilma de Melo Silva on the implementation of
Makiguchi’s educational ideas in Brazil.
The following are two of the many Japanese translations of the works of Yi Fu Tuan
who I referenced in this paper.
Yi Fu Tuan, translation by Ono Yugo and Abe Hajime (1992): Topophilia: Ningen to
kankyo, Serika Shobo. (Originally published as Topophilia: A Study of Environmental
Perception, Attitudes, and Values, in 1974 from Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.)———, translation by Yamamoto Hiroshi (1988): Kukan no keiken: shintai kara
toshi e, Chikuma Shobo. (Originally published as Space and Place: the Perspective ofExperience, in 1977 from University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.)
The role of location theory in geography is discussed in detail in:Johnston, R. J., translation by Takeuchi Keiichi (2002): Basho o meguru mondai: jinmon chirigaku no saikochiku no tameni, Kokon Shoin. (Originally published as A Question of Place: Exploring the Practice of Human Geography, in 1991 from Blackwell
Publishers, Oxford)
Lloyd, Peter E. and Dicken, Peter, translation by Ito Yoshie (Revised edition 2001):
Ricchi to kukan: keizai chirigaku no kiso riron, Kokin Shoin. (Originally published as
Location in Space: Theoretical Perspectives in Economic Geography, in 1990 from
Harper & Row, New York.)

132

SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKIGUCHI IN THE HISTORY OF GEOGRAPHY

Books and articles by Edward Said are good references for understanding the phenomenon of Orientalism as well as for gaining a cultural studies perspective.
Said, Edward W., translation by Imazawa Noriko et al. (1986): Orientarism, Heibonsha. (Originally published as Orientalism, in 1978 from Vintage Books, New York.)
For understanding the concepts and terminology of modern geography, the following
two books are good references:
Yamamoto Shozo et al (eds.) (1997): Jinmon chirigaku jiten (Dictionary of Human
Geography), Asakura Shoten.
Ukita Tsuneyoshi (Revised edition 2003): Saisin chirigaku yogo jiten (Updated Dictionary of Geographical Terms), Daimeido.
Johnston, R.J., Gregory, Derek, Pratt, Garaldine and Watt, Michel (eds.) (2000) The
Dictionary of Human Geography, 4th edition Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
The following two works represent excellent research into geography education as it
was conducted in Japan prior introduction of the government-approved textbook system
in 1902 as well as communities studies:
Nakagawa Koichi (1978): Kindai chiri kyoiku no genryu (The Origins of Modern
Geography Education), Kokin Shoin.
Ito Junro (1998): Kyodo kyoiku undo no kenkyu (A Study of Homeland Education
Movement), Shibunkaku Shuppan.
On indigenous philosophies of geography in early modern Japan, the following books
are useful:
Tsujita Usao. (1971): Nihon kinsei no chirigaku (Japanese Geography in the Early
Modern Period), Yanagihara Shoten, Kyoto.
Takeuchi (2001): “Reappraisal of the Indigenous Tradition of Geography by Academic Geographers in Modern Japan,” Annual Report of Research Center for Regional
Geography 10.