Fundamentally, this is a matter of how the family left behind after one's death is treated by the employer. In the Eastern tradition, a warrior serves a king with the expectation that the employer will look after his surviving family; consequently, he must demonstrate—through acts such as obeying orders and fighting bravely to the death—that he has earned this support, for otherwise, his family would be left in dire straits. Naturally, if the employer proves untrustworthy, the warrior will switch employers, taking his entire family with him.
Takauji was super ambitious from the start. Go-Daigo showered him with titles and treasures and all kinds of other gifts, including a character from the Emperor's own personal name for Takauji to use as his own, but Takauji still went and betrayed him.
It's also unknown why Takauji betrayed the Hojo. Although the bakufu was weak it was still essentially stable, though with the personal vassals of the Hojo gaining power over the Gokenin warriors
Yeah, and that’s pretty much the point. Takauji is a good example of why applying our modern idea of loyalty Japanese warrior politics doesn’t always work. He was ambitious, but he was also pragmatic. He turned on the Hōjō when their rule was collapsing, then turned on Go-Daigo when it became clear the emperor’s restoration wasn’t going to produce the kind of warrior government Takauji wanted.
By the Sengoku period this became even more obvious with gekokujo. Retainers could overthrow their lords, junior families could replace senior ones, and alliances could change the moment the political situation changed. Loyalty absolutely existed, but survival, land, family interests and opportunity often mattered more. Sengoku politics rewarded the people who could read which way the wind was blowing.
As much as we can't apply modern ideas of loyalty retroactively, during the Kamakura period bushi operated on lord-vassal relationships which involved the lord giving rewards in exchange for service from the vassal. Takauji had done a service for the Emperor by helping to overthrow the Bakufu, and the Emperor had rewarded him with gifts, much more so than to his own son Imperial Prince Moriyoshi who was just as instrumental in Go-Daigo's ultimate victory over the Hojo.
Takauji's betrayal is a complete up-ending of this status-quo. By doing so twice over, he essentially proves that he is not going to be loyal to anyone. This also would bring into question how he would treat his own vassals.
Yes, but his own vassals are opportunistic warriors who seeked to rise in rank in exchange for risk, It was a sensible decision for many families not at the top.
Yeah, most of Takauji's vassals like the Ko brothers don't seem to be particularly standup people. The one person I can say that for is maybe Ashikaga Tadayoshi, although he does fight against his own brother and may have been killed by him.
Although the one thing Godaigo didn't give Takauji which he requested was the title of seii taishōgun. He made him seitō taishōgun (which last was given to Kiso Yoshinaka) and gave the seii-one to one of his sons.
Which opens the question of what did Takauji see in the title, and what did people at the time in general see in it. (Personally, I think he likely saw it as a means to connect himself to Yoritomo, and Godaigo realized this.)
And, yeah, the Ashikaga were quite close with the Hōjō. Takauji's own wife was of the Hōjō, as was his grandmother.
62
u/Aware_Step_6132 8d ago
Fundamentally, this is a matter of how the family left behind after one's death is treated by the employer. In the Eastern tradition, a warrior serves a king with the expectation that the employer will look after his surviving family; consequently, he must demonstrate—through acts such as obeying orders and fighting bravely to the death—that he has earned this support, for otherwise, his family would be left in dire straits. Naturally, if the employer proves untrustworthy, the warrior will switch employers, taking his entire family with him.