The Evolution of Imperial Japan’s War Medals (1875-1945)
Article about: The Evolution of Japan’s War Medals (1875-1945) Prolog; Modernization of Japan, 200 years to catch up on As the era of the Shogun and the Samurai drew to a close, and sovereignty returned to
3rd February 1906, Counter Proposal from the Decorations Bureau
Yuzuru Ogyu, the father of Japan’s medals and orders was still the head of the Decorations Bureau at this time. This was probably his last major undertaking in that office before his death in 1910. So the counterproposal to the art school’s design seemed to strongly represent Ogyu’s philosophy about medal designs.
He had always looked westward, studying the traditions of the Western nations in Europe, as medals and orders were a tradition borrowed from them, and it was his belief that anything Japan designed for itself must be an extension of this European practice and must make sense to European eyes as well.
So the counterproposal submitted to the Prime Minister by Ogyu’s office on 3rd February 1906 started out by summarizing European design practices for medals by claiming-----
“In the vast majority of cases, European practice has always been to adorn a small disc with the portrait bust of the monarch, his crown or his initials, combined with sprigs of laurel which have long been symbols of honor in Europe. In rare cases, victory over a minor opponent may be celebrated by a metaphoric motif, but such caricatures are never employed in medals of triumph over an opponent worthy of respect. It is also extremely rare to see representations of the army and navy in European medals, as the practice is to attribute such successes solely to the monarch, instead of the army and navy boasting major credit. Indeed the medal for the 1894-95 War did carry the army and navy banners crossed beneath the imperial chrysanthemum, but this was an isolated case and no war medal before or after (1874 War Medal and Boxer Rebellion Medal) have seen any representation of arms as motif. Although we have not set any official guidelines on this matter, we feel it only appropriate that, on this point, our nation should follow the same principles as the Europeans do, which is to refrain from adopting military motifs and instead to feature the imperial emblem and the rising sun as our symbol of worship as designs for the war medal. The ribbon is inspired by the radiating beams from the sun.” (original Japanese version attached below)
Thus the Decorations Bureau was against the Army and Navy reaping all credit for the victory by repeatedly slapping on military symbols. Not only did the army design bring back the crossed military banners, but they compounded the military symbolism by throwing in the army star and navy anchor on top of it all. Also the Decorations Bureau wanted the rear design to follow precedent by keeping it plain with just the writing simply saying “Meiji 37-8 War Medal”. They also hoped to keep the bar blank like the 1894-5 War Medal and unlike the Boxer Medal, which had the word “Qing Empire Incident” there.
Their rising sun design had 8 chrysanthemum emblems in the compass points, signifying the Emperor’s grace radiating towards all corners of the globe. These were connected by arabesque of intricate design.
Besides the sun design, their preferred choice, they showed some alternatives they had studied, but rejected.
Option 1 ---- modified version of the art school’s proposal
-The ground pine entwined around the anchor was dropped to clean up the front.
-The bar was turned blank and the words were carried in the plain back instead, where the shield was deleted
-The elaborate support frame shaped like the golden kite was simplified and went back to the style used for all the previous medals
Option 2-----Legendary Monarchs version
The option featured 3 historical figures representing the imperial family. From the right, I assume Emperor Jinmu (神武天皇), because of the bow (the first emperor upon whose bow landed the magical golden kite of legend). The center figure must be Yamato Takeru (日本武尊). The figure holding the long staff on the left might be Emperor Kanmu (桓武天皇), but I’m not sure. According to Ogyu’s logic, a bust of Emperor Meiji would have been the ideal motif for the medal, but His Majesty had a notorious aversion to being photographed or even being drawn; so much so that for a long time the government only had a photo of him from when he was 20 years old, which they were forced to keep using until the Emperor was almost 40. When they eventually could update his likeness, it was a painting made from a quick sketch an Italian had done of Emperor Meiji posing behind a reed screen. A more accommodating Emperor would have made Japanese War Medals boringly European in appearance, but that was clearly not an option available to Ogyu at that time.
Last edited by Nick Komiya; 03-21-2017 at 06:43 PM.
For a month after the counter proposal from the Decorations Bureau, Ogyu continued to spar with the army. The army must have found it difficult to counter Ogyu’s insinuation that the Art School’s design was not showing due respect to the Emperor, so they agreed to take away the army star and navy anchor as well as the cluttering ground pine. Instead they added the crest of Paulownia leaves and flowers, which had also been an imperial crest earlier, but having increasingly gained status in the meanwhile as the emblem representing the government of Japan. Symbols were now there for the Emperor, Army, Navy and the Government of Japan, a super hand that Ogyu’s set of cards could not match. The Army, however, was not ready to yield even an inch to Ogyu on the medal’s rear side and clung onto the design from the Tokyo School of Arts.
By this time, the only feature the Army and the Bureau seemed to be able to agree on, the white and red coloring for the ribbon had also mysteriously disappeared and became the blue, green and white of the final design. Records do not show how this came about, but it is easy to imagine that the confusing similarity to the ribbons of the Rising Sun orders played a part in the agreement to change. Also why blue and green? Did the army cheekily substitute the star and anchor with green for the army and blue for the navy?
This was the state of affairs on 7th March 1906, when all cabinet members signed off on the draft proposal of the edict to be taken to the Emperor, but acknowledging in a notation that the Decorations Bureau was still not happy with the design. The cabinet ministers were showing their respect to old man Ogyu, but normally the signatures of all the Cabinet Ministers sealed the deal and meant that any objection by the Decorations Bureau was overruled.
In the end, the Bureau could not come up with any better ideas and the design from 7th March was signed by Emperor Meiji as Edict 51 on 30th March 1906.
Last edited by Nick Komiya; 03-21-2017 at 04:39 PM.
7th April 1906, Nominal Award Date set by Prime Minister
Cabinet Ordinance 2 released by the Prime Minister on 7th April 1906 designated 1st April 1906 as the nominal award date for the Russo-Japanese War Medal. Thus the recipient’s full title as of that date was to be entered into the award log and citations.
This ordinance also decreed that the detailed awarding procedures laid down on the occasion of the Sino-Japanese War Medal would be adapted and applied also to this Russo-Japanese War Medal. Those adapted rules were duly released on 28th April 1906.
Clause 1 of this regulation defined actions subject to the award of the medal to be those that took place within the timeframe of between 6th February 1904 (Sailing date of the Japanese Combined Fleet from Sasebo) and 16th October 1905 (Promulgation date for the Russo-Japanese Peace Treaty).
3rd May 1906, Medal Production Statistics for the Russo-Japanese War Medal
On 3rd May 1906, Ogyu reported to the Minister of the Army, Masaki Terauchi a detailed breakdown of overall costs for issuing of the Russo-Japanese War Medals to Army members. The breakdown indicated that the plan was to strike a total of 1, 320 thousand medals (1.4 million when including the Navy) and allowed for an equal number of boxes and citation paper blanks. Three other figures are of special interest in this list.
1. Special boxes for royal family members (Japanese and foreign)-----50 pieces (Unfortunately there is no further information on what these special cases looked like.)
2. Receipt forms for awarding to foreigners-------------------------------500 sheets
3. Ribbons with fixing eyelet-----------------------------------------------1,100 thousand pieces were foreseen for the 1906 fiscal year and the remaining 220 thousand pieces were allocated to the 1907 fiscal budget.
7th June 1906, Planned Awarding of Manufacturing Contracts for Medal Boxes through Bidding
Ogyu reported to the Minister of the Army that the total of 1,400 thousand (1,320 thous. for the Army, 80 thous. for the Navy) boxes needed to be made for the medal, the contract for which will be awarded through bidding. However, he further explained that this time they planned to avoid a fully open bidding process based on the bitter experience they had with the medal for the Sino-Japanese War.
That previous bidding for 30 thousand boxes was open to all and the process was plagued with contractors trying to collude with each other to drive up the price and even after the awarding of the contract, deadlines were not observed, as manufacturers claimed difficulty in securing materials, etc. So this time the Decorations Bureau planned to pre-select only those who were reliable and with enough capital backing and have them bid against each other.
4th August 1906, Compilation of List of Recipient Candidates
A notice issued by the Under Secretary of the Army requested troops to compile a listing of those who should receive the medal by end of November 1906.
Based on this cut-off date, actual awarding of orders and war medals for the Russo-Japanese War seemed to commence in middle of December 1906 as evidenced by receipt notices sent back from the troops.
Awarding Criteria
Military observers and war correspondents
The Russo-Japanese War was a highly publicized conflict. One reason for that was, as mentioned earlier, the government lacked funds to conduct a proper war, the artillery constantly running out of shells, etc. So they had to get foreign sponsorship in the form of war bonds issued abroad, but no foreigner believed Japan could win against the Russian giant, so trying to sell bonds was a hopeless endeavor at first. But soon the government learned that when there were encouraging developments in the field they had to exploit such news to the hilt in propaganda for the sake of raising money.
So the war eventually gained many spectators as war correspondents and military observers from various nations. At first, the press was brushed aside as a nuisance, but the army soon learned that the bad publicity that resulted was also bad for sponsorship. As a result of this policy to welcome visitors to combat zones, the Russo-Japanese War Medal also was awarded to as many as 500 foreigners as the cost estimate discussed earlier revealed.
Before the initial draft was made, the Army obviously consulted its Embassy in Berlin to inquire about European practices regarding honoring the press with awards, as a telegram was received on 21st November 1905 from Colonel Ohi in Berlin, which said “Here in Germany, two Iron Cross second classes and three non-combatant versions of war medals were awarded to press members for the Franco-Prussian War, but those were more of an exception, and there are no existing guidelines on that point. Otherwise there is no such practice neither in Austria nor France of awarding reporters.”
Despite the above, the Army’s initial draft of the awarding criteria attached to the Art School’s medal design specifically acknowledged such people by saying, “The medal may also be awarded to foreign military observers as well as Japanese or foreign personnel who had accompanied troops with permission from the imperial government, as well as foreigners, who had served in saving the wounded and sick.” This clause was greatly simplified in the final edict, which simply stated “The war medal may also be specially awarded to those who accompanied the troops under permission”, but that did not affect the intent.
Accessory to Acts of War
Another category of candidates to be awarded the medal, according to the December 1905 Army draft, which is worth some additional comment were “Those in Japan or in the conflict zone, who were meritorious in assisting (幇助) troops in carrying out their duty.” The key here was that you could be a civilian in Japan, not directly involved in military duties, but in an assisting role. That civilians may also be awarded a medal for assisting, already applied since the 1894-95 War Medal, but then it was understood to be for work in the war zone, not the Home Front. Thus Ogyu’s draft of 3rd Feb. 1906 spelled this point out as, “Those serving in a special task within the war zone and had assisted in the carrying out of military duty”.
Although Ogyu earlier had tried hard to get the army to accept a noncombatant’s version of the Boxer Medal and failed, curiously the army appeared more progressive and democratic in this case. Acknowledging the contributions of the home front may not even have had much to do with Ogyu’s personal conviction, but was merely about matching what the Europeans were doing at that time.
In the end, this clause also ended up simple and broad, reading “Those who showed merit in assisting with military duty”. By the way, the Japanese word used in these clauses for “assisting” is a legal term, which in law is used to mean “aiding and abetting”, meaning in this case that you were not performing any act that could be construed as military action, but merely playing a supporting role (or shall we say “accessory to acts of war”?). But still one is supporting someone carrying out military duty, so activities like selling war bonds in the Home Front were not acknowledged, which later became the point for the China Incident Commemorative Medal.
Last edited by Nick Komiya; 03-22-2017 at 08:47 AM.
Yuzuru Ogyu must have long been a thorn in the side for the Army, who wanted to have full ownership and control of war medals. Sadly, Ogyu’s last two challenges against Army opinion, the Boxer Rebellion Medal and this Russo-Japanese War Medal, seemed to have sputtered and had little impact on the final outcome. I do not know how much of a disappointment this was to him nor how much consolation he got from being promoted to a Count in 1907, but it is sure that the death of the 72-year old Ogyu on 26th January 1910 was an end of an epoch and there would no longer be anyone with credentials like Ogyu’s to challenge the Army.
Last edited by Nick Komiya; 03-21-2017 at 06:47 PM.
[B][SIZE=5]...He also assumed that some botanically challenged designer was responsible for this misnomer of calling a palm tree a weenie plant, but that was not so, as the Art School’s document clearly called it a tree. It was the officials that jumbled it like in a game of “Chinese Whispers”.
Nick,
FYI, the images at the bottom of this post (#50) will not expand to full size. I keep getting the following message:
vBulletin Message
Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator
Don't know how that can be, as it fully works when I check. I reloaded a larger version of the bottom photo, so that may have something to do with it. Can always mail you the original.
Don't know how that can be, as it fully works when I check. I reloaded a larger version of the bottom photo, so that may have something to do with it. Can always mail you the original.
Hi Nick,
Yeah, it's weird, and it might be only my computer; and it might be because today is Tuesday (grin). Can you please email those three images? I downloaded them and they then seem to fully expand ... but I'm not 100% certain.
In post 16 regarding the Boxer Rebellion Medal, I mentioned that there were no documents to tell what happened between 1st October 1901, when the army rejected Ogyu’s design featuring the Japanese flag over the Beijing Wall and 19th April 1902 when the emperor signed the edict.
Now, I have located a letter Ogyu wrote to the Prime Minister on the matter on 13th March 1902, a month before the Emperor signed.
He wrote “Although carrying over the design of the 1874 War Medal was considered, that particular design carried the 1874 dates in the back as well as a bar saying Taiwan, so a new strike is anyway unavoidable. Additionally the medal only measured 24mm in diameter, which is a size smaller than any European medal, which is normally 30 to 36 mm in diameter. Our 1894-95 War Medal also had a diameter of 30 mm. Therefore we propose increasing the diameter of the new medal to 30 mm and to produce it in copper. “
The drawing attached to the letter above by Ogyu already showed a design which became the final design. From the letter, one would think that the Army’s rejection of his Oct. 1901 design made him humbly go back to the default design and merely replicate the Taiwan medal in a larger size in copper, but Ogyu must have been a tricky and stubborn man, he totally changed the design without saying a word. I haven’t found any response from the Army on this new design, but judging by the fairly intense dialogue that already existed between Ogyu and the Army prior to this date, I would guess that the two parties were able to shake hands on this design before taking it to the Prime Minister with this letter.
The letter also gave a detailed cost estimate based on the final design and the number of medals to be struck was stated as 54,000 pieces.
A notice was issued on 9th May 1902 that the nominal award date for the medal should be 10th May 1902.
Further details for awarding were defined in the regulation issued on 14th May 1902. This stipulated that service in the war zone between 11th June 1900 (Member of the Japanese Embassy in Beijing was murdered on that day) and 1st June 1901 ( HQ for the allied forces was dissolved on this date) was acknowledged with the medal. In case of trips back and forth to the war zone, only trips made before 31st November 1900 were acknowledged.
Last edited by Nick Komiya; 03-24-2017 at 10:09 AM.
Documents dated 9th February 1939 provided an extremely thorough explanation on the symbolism of the various motifs featured in the China Incident War Medal, so I will summarize the points below.
The Medal Obverse
It explained first that the China Incident War Medal was conceived as the second of a two-part series along with the Manchurian Incident War Medal, because both events were closely related. As such, because the Manchurian medal featured the Golden Kite that appeared during Emperor Jinmu’s expedition of conquest to the East, this medal featured from the story of the same expedition, the Yatagarasu ( 8-hand Crow) a mythical huge crow having the size of 8 hand widths (8 times the distance between thumb and middle finger when spread out, roughly 8 x 18cm), which like the Golden Kite guided the Emperor and his troops. It represented divine righteousness leading the imperial troops.
This bird was normally depicted as a three-legged bird, but here it was shown with normal two talons. The reason for this reinterpretation was discussed at great length, but in short, it claimed that the bird’s 3-legged appearance was mentioned neither in the “Chronicles of Japan” nor the “Records of Ancient Matters” which were the sources of the myths and only appeared from the later retelling of the stories, at which time exchanges with China were thought to have brought into Japan the myth of the Chinese 3-legged bird and that story was assumed to have gotten fused into the Japanese myth.
An Imperial Chrysanthemum emblem was above the crow and from it radiated beams of light, representing the Emperor's grace enlightening the world.
The crossed army regimental banner and navy ensign represented the fabulous feats of the army and navy as well as carrying on a tradition established by the medals for the Sino-Japanese and Russo-Japanese Wars.
Rear of Medal
The Mountains and Clouds were taken from an ancient mirror and the design of waves came from a sword scabbard of the Nara era. Together they symbolized the teamwork between troops on land, sea and in the sky and at the same time stood for the underlying spirit of the Japanese armed forces since its inception, which echoed the legendary motto of the Ohtomo Clan, which said “Out to sea, I shall be a drifting corpse. Out on the peaks, I shall then be a corpse feeding the grass. As long as I may give my life for the sake of our Emperor, I shall know no regret.”
Bar
The bar followed established tradition by carrying the words 従軍記章 Jyugun-Kishyo (War Medal).
Support Frame
The supporting frame featured the same ground pine as appeared on the Manchurian Incident Medal, a sacred plant appearing in the Kojiki (Records of Ancient Matters, a book of Myths)
Ribbon
The Red at center stood for Loyalty, and it was surrounded by a band of Rouge, signifying Fighting. The wider band of dark yellow stood for the Chinese Landscape of Great Rivers and Mountains which had become the Battlefield. The Blue was the Sky and the Air Supremacy won by the Army and Navy. The outer rim of Purple was the Sea and the formidable Blockade of the Chinese Coastline achieved by the Navy, which characterized the campaign. Those vertical elements meshed with White as the lateral element, which stood for the Hope for Peace.
By the way, I noticed that I had not distinguished between the Phoenix, Golden Kite and the Yatagarasu and had lumped them together as Phoenix in my post 21. Actually there are theories that claim the Yatagarasu and Golden Kites were the same birds, but that is another story and I should acknowledge that the medals were actually meant to depict 3 different birds before someone accuses me of being an ornithological ignoramus.
The 1931-1934 Incident War Medal (Manchurian Incident War Medal)
Let's now make the coverage the first 4 and last 4 medals by adding the Manchurian War Medal to our collection
The 1931-1934 Incident War Medal (Manchurian Incident War Medal)
The Manchurian Incident took place between 18th September 1931 and 18th February 1932.
The War Medal for this incident was introduced by Edict Number 225 (not 255 as stated in the Peterson book) signed by Emperor Hirohito on 21 July 1934 and was officially called the War Medal for the 1931-1934 Incident (Incident of the 6th Year to 9th Year of Showa).
.
by nick komiya
Bookmarks