SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • N65;
  • N70;
  • O14;
  • R11
  • cotton spinning;
  • Garabō;
  • late industrialisation;
  • Meiji Japan;
  • technological change;
  • regional economics

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES

Through the importation of the state-of-the-art British spinning technology of the late nineteenth century, a new cotton spinning sector began to emerge in Meiji Japan during the 1870s and 1880s. This hectic technology transfer was accompanied by a remarkable domestic technological breakthrough that enabled the local spinners to significantly increase productivity to meet the unprecedented pace of the soaring market demand. This paper examines a relatively neglected case of the rattling spindle, Garabō, which was a product of Japanese native industrial endowments in parallel with the development of the British-style mills.


THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES

The native sources of traditional manufacturing techniques have received relatively little attention from western scholars in their discussion of the process of Japanese industrialisation.1 Cotton spinning has been a typical instance. Despite early studies of indigenous spinning technologies,2 with few exceptions little effort has been made to introduce these to non-Japanese readers.3 This study presents an introductory examination of a unique case in the Meiji cotton spinning sector that allows us to reconsider the significance of the native sources in late industrialisation.

The public debut of the rattling spindle, the Garabō, came nearly a decade after the first British-style cotton mill was erected by the Satsuma in 1867. Some authors have considered this indigenous technology as a transitional innovation between pre-modern primitive cotton-spinning and British-style spinning.4 In their views, the ‘inferior’ local technology merely represented a transitory phase. Indeed, the Garabō itself could not have out-classed the imported British textile machinery, due to its mechanically less sophisticated structure, closed spinning mechanism, and unrefined materials.5 Although some scholars have acknowledged the importance of the technical breakthrough, the Garabō has attracted little international scholarly interest.6

Besides arguing the case for the Garabō's historical significance, this study also intends to contribute to other research perspectives. A better understanding of the Garabō would enrich our knowledge of the problems of adapting imported technologies to the host economy, the role of intermediate technologies in development, the public response to new technologies in the early phase of the Meiji industrialisation, and the importance of state as well as private initiatives in late industrialisation. These insights should awaken more interest in researching this unique spinning innovation in Japanese economic development.

THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES

The Jenny and the Water Frame were the initial (and only) frames, which allowed the technical leap from hand to mechanised spinning. They were invented in the 1760s in Britain and symbolised the technical breakthroughs in textile spinning. This paper presents a new perspective that there was another breakthrough that more remarkably appeared at the opposite end of Eurasia, in Japan, a century later. Known as the Garabō Frame, it was conceived in the first half of the 1870s and developed during the second half. The name Garabō in Japanese means ‘Rattling Spindle’ (making a rattling noise of ‘Gara Gara . . .’ during its operation). The spinning mechanism of the Garabō was different from those of the British frames. Its most original technical feature was the mechanism that integrated the pre-spinning procedures such as opening, carding, and roving into the main spinning.7 By comparison with the technical sophistications of the Mules or the Rings, the Garabō was still plain and closer to a hand-spinning wheel. While the technical context of its invention could be compared with the Jenny and the Water Frame, it was the mechanical simplicity of the Garabō that resulted in rapid diffusion. The Garabō was the only textile machine that facilitated mechanisation in the Japanese cotton spinning that did not owe its origins to western technical developments.

THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES

The first model of the native machine was made in 1873 and the first prototype was developed in 1876 after three years of tests and developments.8 The initial public release was made in the summer of 1877, at the First National Exhibition for Promoting Industries in Ueno, Tokyo. A variety of minor adjustments to improve performance were made up until the end of the Second World War, but neither the basic spinning mechanism nor the core structure was changed. The technical breakthrough for the design was attributed to the engineering genius of a single inventor, Tokimune Gaun (Fig. 1).

image

Figure 1. Tokimune Gaun, a Buddhist Monk and Inventor (1842–1900).Source: Sakakibara, Gaun Tokimune.

Download figure to PowerPoint

The context of the birth of the Garabō, the prototype of which is shown in Figure 2, was the dynamic social and economic change occurring in Japan. An influx of exotic foreign garments from the mid-nineteenth century enriched public fashion, which spurred soaring local demand for cotton products. Traditional cotton spinning could not meet the unprecedented increase in demand. This induced escalating pressure for better productivity in yarn manufacture and technical innovations in spinning. Gaun's invention was a combination of personal ingenuity and the pressure of market demand that impelled the drive for a mechanical breakthrough.

image

Figure 2. Garabō, the first prototype, in the First National Exhibition for Promoting Industries in 1877.Source: Nakamura, Garabō Shiwa.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Socioeconomic demand and soaring market pressure

The seclusion policy of Tokugawa Japan for two centuries until the mid-nineteenth century had three distinct consequences. First, Japan experienced institutional evolution of its role-based society with its four different classes of samurai, peasant, artisan, and merchant.9 This social stability over two centuries facilitated a wide variety of technical innovations in agricultural production, which sustained the gradual growth of the national economy.10 The second consequence was the slow change in the distribution of national wealth among the four classes. State policy encouraged cross-regional specialisations in manufacture and trade developed an array of local economic systems that linked every corner of the closed nation.11 Furthermore, the enduring fixed tax regime for land and agricultural production allowed peasants more ‘breathing space’ to be involved in non-farm by-employment.12 The Tokugawa socioeconomic regime increased economic incentives for the majority of the population.

The third consequence was a change in public clothing. This derived from a simple logic; once the food supply was settled, people began to pay attention to their clothing.13 The Tokugawa government enforced a policy promoting frugality. Its effects included the use of cotton instead of silk (and hemp for peasants) and such clothing became more popular due to its plain appearance, comfort, and affordability. Finishing techniques such as dyeing advanced constantly, which facilitated both technical innovations in weaving and sophistication in public fashion. Late Tokugawa fashion was further stimulated through the importation of exotic foreign cloths and yarns in the mid-nineteenth century. Foreign cotton and wool cloth accounted for more than 92 per cent of the gross national imports for 1860. Until the end of the 1860s, textile goods, including yarns, totalled between 80 and 60 per cent of imports.14 This unleashed a chain reaction. The sophistication of the finishing and marketing sectors pressed the weavers hard to produce cloth more efficiently, while the weaving sector began to search for better yarns. The domestic spinning sector was still dependent on hand-spinning, lagging far behind the weaving sector. Furthermore, there was little specialisation; both domestic spinning and the weaving were mostly a ‘by-product’ (i.e. a by-employment) of peasant families.15

The soaring importation of British and Indian cotton goods demonstrated not only the high market demand for cloth but also the backwardness of the spinning sector. Throughout the 1870s, cotton goods continued to account for nearly 40 per cent of the value of imports.16 The traditional system of hand spinning could neither meet the local demand nor stem the flood of foreign goods. Nevertheless, the last resort for the traditional system was found in the dying procedure. Imported yarns could not be dyed properly by traditional dyestuffs, which became a significant technical problem in the domestic finishing sector and this kept the local cloth producers from relying fully on foreign yarns (Table 1).17

Table 1. The structure of the main importations in the 1860s
YearCotton cloth %Woollen cloth %Cotton yarn %Ships %Iron and steel %Total price in US thousands $
  1. Source: Ando, Kindai Nippon Keizaishi Yōran, p. 37.

186052.8039.511.21945
186146.0326.714.911.078.601,494
186219.3617.854.1816.1838.743,074
186315.8628.2812.3321.523,701
186430.8729.2013.611.989.555,553
186537.7943.786.551.823.0713,153
1866No recordNo recordNo recordNo recordNo recordNo record
186725.3022.429.002.680.9014,908

Another factor was cultural; distinct local tastes for certain textures that foreign textiles lacked. These cultural preferences could not be changed easily in a short period. The system of hand-spun yarn production used them to survive and even grow in specialised market niches. Soon, the hand-spun sector had few outlets other than the limited market segment for specialised goods.18

The Garabō spinning frame arrived during the upheaval of the early Meiji textile market in the 1870–80s. In the first half of the 1880s, a triangular competition emerged between the British (and Indian) yarns, the traditional hand-spun yarns, and the Garabō yarns.

The impact of the Garabō technology is best understood through the evolving composition of the supply of cotton fabrics for the domestic market. The Aichi prefecture was the most prominent area of the Garabō-based cotton manufacture, including the regions of Mikawa, Owari, Nukata, Hazu, Aomi, and Chita. Nukatain particular produced more than a half of all Garabō yarn in the Aichi.19Tables 2 and 3 summarise comparatively the respective growth of the Western sector and the Garabō sector, though there is considerable difficulty in distinguishing between the hand-spun and the Garabō sectors. After its public debut in 1877, the Garabō rapidly diffused through what might be called ‘illegal’ replication and conversion in the hand-spun sector with neither registration nor official record.20Garabō operation was tied to regional by-employment among the agricultural populations.21 Reliable statistical data for diffusion of the Garabō frames on a nationwide scale do not exist. Besides, the characteristics of Garabō yarns were virtually identical to the traditional hand-spun yarns and were distributed and sold in the same market sectors (coarse yarn below a count of 10 s).

Table 2. The composition of supply of the cotton fabrics
YearImported fabrics %Imported yarn %Hand-spun and Garabō yarn %Domestic machine-spun yarn %Index of total supply
  1. Source: Otsuka, Ranis, and Saxonhouse, Comparative Technology Choice in Development, p. 27, table 3.5; Takamura, Nippon Bōseki Jyosetsu, Volme 1, p. 30, table 6.

187440.326.931.1 hand-spun only1.7100
188023.440.534.91.2181
188318.949.125.66.4128
188815.049.725.89.5245
189111.418.610.350.7239
189712.310.49.867.5397
Table 3. The production of cotton yarns in the Aichi prefecture (1885–91)
YearWestern sectorGARABŌ sector
Production (lbs)Production (Yen)Production (lbs)Production (Yen)
  1. Note: The measure for weight in the original records was ‘kan’. 1 KAN = 3.75 kg or, 8.28 ilbs.

  2. Source: Aichi Ken Tōkeisho Menshi Seisan (1885–91), YDM 45743. See Ishikawa, Gaun Tokimune, p. 184, table 4, for more details.

1885190,90039,500829,519159,280
1886293,00761,4112,226,873301,183
1887451,894104,3002,763,933531,147
1888No recordNo recordNo recordNo record
18891,954,957369,1751,751,939343,945
18904,343,191825,3412,115,421241,978
18913,963,914691,9991,445,636216,577

DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES

The key technical revolution in the arrivals of the Jenny (1767), the Water Frame (1769) and the Garabō (1876) was their replacement of human hands (fingers) by a drafting procedure in spinning. With the spinning wheel, the spinners had to use their left hand to draft yarns (and the distance between the left hand and the right was called, the ‘drafting zone’). Purely instinctive skills and learning-by-doing experiences such as timing and delicate control of strength were everything in the procedure.22 Until the appearance of the three frames, spinning had always been entirely manual and ‘a rather tedious business’.23

Both the Jenny and the Water Frame soon converged into the Crompton's Mule in 1779.24 The Garabō did not follow a similar course of evolution. One may distinguish two reasons. First, the spinning system of the Garabō was a technically ‘closed’ and a procedurally inseparable mechanism in its practice. The unique feature of the Garabō is the direct spinning from raw cotton (stuffed in bamboo cylinders). Gravity (the weight of the cylinders) was the power source of the drafting and the revolving of the cylinders was the method of twisting. Due to the combination of these two ‘primitive’ and ‘extremely simple’ elements, there was little potential for technical improvements unless each process was divided. Rather than being ‘completed’, this mechanism became a cul-de-sac, which stymied development. The subsequent innovations of the Garabō were concentrated on the power supply system or the increase (and arrangement) of the spindles. Despite the latter increasing the complexity in frame structure, the core spinning mechanism was not altered.

The second reason was Japan's rapid absorption of British-style spinning. Early modern mills, which had come to rely on advanced British technologies, were not about to consider the potential of the Garabō scheme. This technical reliance had dated from the second half of the 1860s whereas the Garabō as a new system of manufacture began around 1880. Timing was against the Garabō, unlike the Jenny and the Water Frame, which were breakthroughs that paved the way for the first industrial nation. The invention of the Garabō followed Japan's first steps towards industrialisation. For the newly developing local technology, the state-of-the-art British technologies were nothing but a massive obstacle.

A Garabō frame was entirely made of local wood. From the main chassis to the gears, steers, levers, and power transmissions and shafts, all the parts were made of wood pieces.25 The two advantages of wood was that the frame was far cheaper than any metal-based frames and its production did not require skilled machinists for the iron or steel parts. However, the wooden structure had its drawbacks; it could not tolerate too much mechanical (or physical) pressure, which limited spinning speed and frame size.

The spinning mechanism was the most original element the Garabō. The British spinning technology entailed a complex array of pre-spinning procedures, whereas the Garabō skipped all the preparatory phases; it spun cotton yarn directly from raw cotton.26 This unique factor had several consequences. First, the quality of the yarn was coarse because of the lack of pre-spinning drafts; and the ultra-tight but uneven twist in drafting resulted in a lack of strength. Very low-count rough yarns with a hirsute towel-like texture were produced, unlike the fineness and sheen of British goods. But this distinctive texture suited local preferences. The weavers and the final users did not favour the fineness of British yarns, because of technical problems in the handling and dying as well as cultural preferences.27 Only a few quality weavers in Nishijin, Ashikaga, Kiryuu, appreciated the fineness of British yarns and they became the pioneers of actively importing British dyestuffs to develop more varieties of colours. Garabō yarns were too weak to be used for the warp, which led to a combination in the weaving of imported British yarn for a strong warp and Garabō yarn for a soft weft.

In the drawing procedure, the spinning mechanism was more or less identical to that of the Jenny (of spindle drafting; intermittent spinning), but the operation was continuous, which was in the character of the Water Frame (flyer drafting; continuous spinning).28 However, whilst the British mechanisms used rotating spindles to draw yarn, the Garabō had a reversed mechanism: by revolving the cylinders, which were densely stuffed with raw cotton, and using gravity for the drafting of yarns – and adjusting both spinning speed and twist level – the yarn was drawn and spun simultaneously. The wooden chassis and operating parts limited spinning speed, but this unique mechanism of spinning actually prevented the frame from over-acceleration in operation. Tamagawa argued that this self-adjusting system was the most original and the unique engineering core of Gaun's brainchild, but he also noted that it was the reason further mechanical evolution stalled.29 The subsequent minor modifications of Garabō were dependent on every individual spinners' handicraft and carpentering skills, and even its remarkable resurgence throughout the Second World War entailed no significant change in the spinning mechanism from the original prototype of the 1870s.

Many years later, in the 1960s, the spinning concept of the Garabō was revived in the development of new spinning technologies known as open end spinning.30 Moreover, the unique mechanism was the focus of research by Japanese academics in mechatronics during the 1980–90s. The application of these theories induced a new system of Twist Draft Spinning (Controlled by Yarn Tension).31 A century after its birth, Gaun's art was resurrected in a different form that remains alive today.

A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES

The unambiguous cost advantage of the Garabō was the key factor to its success. Another noticeable appeal was that the machine was easily (and cheaply) copied by village carpenters. After its debut in 1877, the initial prototype with 40 spindles (20 in each side of a frame) was priced at 50 Yen.32 A year later, Gaun launched the most popular model with 100 spindles, priced at between 70 and 75 Yen per frame. At the same time, the Meiji government had paid 224,000 Yen to purchase 20,000 spindles from William Higgins of Salford, England.33 The British technology cost 11.2 Yen per spindle compared with the Garabō of just 0.75 Yen or less a spindle; or about 1/16th the price of a British spindle. The price competitiveness of the local spindle was unbeatable. None of the small-scale domestic spinners, interested in the Garabō, would dare to contemplate the ‘astronomical’ cost of establishing a British-style mill (vast in scale and alien in technology) with a couple of thousand spindles. Every local Garabō spinner was extremely cost-conscious; on average, a spinner procured 400 spindles at the most.34 None of them were yet likely to aspire to fully mechanised mass production. Moreover, the information cost of adopting imported technologies from the West was massive, regardless of the inevitable financial constraint for an individual spinner. Whether or not we class the Garabō as an intermediate technology between hand-spinning and the British-style machine it was, in practical terms, an ‘affordable and accessible’ technological breakthrough for the dominant majority of domestic spinners. The lack of legal protection of the invention via patent systems also allowed individual spinners to copy, alter, and diffuse the adaptation of the original frame. Doubtless, this benefited individual profit seekers, but these adaptations were also responding to domestic requirements of the industry.

The best examples were made by Takisaburō Kōmura and Shigeheiji Nomura (Fig. 3). Kōmura was the most active adopter, who made Gaun's prototype more efficient and manageable for local spinning. Nomura was also committed to improving the productivity of Gaun's model, especially for the mills powered by water turbines. A remarkable application of the original frame was made for the ‘Garabō of the Plain’ by Rokusaburō Suzuki whose innovation allowed the number of spindles to be easily adjusted according to the power source, either a waterfall in mountainous areas or river streams.35 The cost of the operation and maintenance was another factor in its popularity. The wood-based frame was easily repaired and altered. Their operation did not require new power sources; both brawn and traditional water wheels could be used to power the frame and there was no additional pre-spinning stage except for the carding of raw cotton.

image

Figure 3. The key entrepreneurs of the Garabō industry: Shigeheiji Nomura (Right Above), Rokusaburō Suzuki (Left Above), Takisaburō Kōmura (Centre), Nobugorō Ohno (Right Below), and Genshiro Nakata (Left Below).Source: Sakakibara, Gaun Tokimune.

Download figure to PowerPoint

For the domestic cotton manufacturers, the most exotic and difficult features of the British-style cotton spinning were the multiple pre-spinning procedures. Before they could deal with the mechanical sophistications of the mules, the developing British-style mills had to manage the inexperienced arrays of pre-spinning techniques such as slubbing and roving. The mule itself was a technically burdensome and expensive piece of machinery and the operation of the British-style spinning demanded more pieces of machines for the pre-spinning stages. This resulted in incomplete purchases of British spinning machinery. The common feature of early modern mills was either a technical imbalance or a lack of machines for intermediary spinning36; and this was due not only to a lack of knowledge about the British-style pre-spinning procedure but also to additional costs.37 Furthermore, once the mills attempted to install steam engines to supply power another set of skills and technical knowledge was required for their operation and maintenance.38

Again, the cost was a key matter, but before calculating the costs of adopting the new system of manufacture, no producer would merely attempt to increase his production without any market demand and practical benefits. One may distinguish two more perspectives. First, the manufacture of yarn was inevitably influenced by any changes in the weaving sector, since yarn was an intermediate product. Abe's study of the specialised weaving clusters show the significant link between the growth patterns of the two sectors.39 The question is why the weavingsector pressurised the spinning sector for better productivity during the period around the Meiji Restoration? The answer is twofold: first, the increasing specialisation of the local weavers required the weaving sector to focus more on techniques and innovations; and second, this led to the gradual separation of weaving from spinning, which traditionally was mostly carried out in peasant households, which both spun cotton yarns and wove cloths. The growth of the separate weaving sector thus brought about huge changes in the traditional mode of cotton production.

The blurring of boundaries between the different occupations of the pre-Meiji period derived not only from the primitive methods of cotton manufacture but also from the unique structure of the Tokugawa household-based economy.40 Saito's study of the occupational patterns in Yamanashi Prefecture in 1879 show the local peasant's tradition of having multiple jobs across different sectors: rice farming, handcraft works, and sales of their produce.41 The multiple occupations of peasants in this distinctive socioeconomic structure, Saito argues, makes it difficult to examine precisely the occupational arrangements of regional economies not only during the Tokugawa but also the early phase of the Meiji era.

The separation of the weaving and the spinning procedures in the Meiji period thus implies a significant change in the local system of textile manufactures, since it was directly concerned with the sudden and severe jolt to the socioeconomic heritage of the Tokugawa period.42 Once independent weaving clusters emerged, the traditional system of cotton manufacture began to crumble; as the weaving techniques became more sophisticated and efficient, more pressure was put on the household-based spinning industry. The growth in nation-wide demand for cotton cloths during the 1860s and the 1870s increased the demand for yarns.43

Consumption matters for technological development. Although there was no direct connexion between the rattling spindles and the new vogues in Meiji era clothing, the impact of the new trends was to increase the demand for cotton textiles. These used relatively high counts of cotton yarn (30–40 s in Japan), which were mostly imported from Britain.44 The Japanese weavers previously had hardly any experience with cotton yarn above a count of 20 s.45 The adoption of the British fine yarn increased the variety of novel and fashionable textile products, and fuelled increased public demand for new clothing and cloths, which was the impetus for innovation among the local manufacturers.

Tamura argued that the most significant textile goods were a variety of cloths with exotic textures and colours. The popularity of the British products in the 1860s and the 1870s encouraged the domestic weavers to develop new offerings to compete with the foreign goods.46 Combinations of silk, cotton, and woollen yarns were attempted; an innovation was the interweaving of British cotton yarn with local silk or cotton yarns. New demand for both traditional coarse cotton yarn (with relatively lower counts) and a range of medium counts emerged side-by-side with the new approaches of weavers, however, the technical issue in the 1870s for the Meiji spinning sector was to develop a system of mass production of coarse yarns.47 Two means were developed. The Meiji government promoted the British-style mills though involving many technical difficulties. Second, a native response, in the form of the Garabō-based scheme was made. Whilst the former entailed knowledge diffusion in many forms of both governmental and industrial publications throughout the Meiji period, the latter's dissemination could gain no systematic support.

Adoption of the British-style spinning was limited to a few selected entrepreneurs, but the Garabō system was open to anybody; the impact of the technical breakthrough was immediate. The diffusion of the rattling spindles amongst traditional spinners was rapid following its appearance at the First National Exhibition for Promoting Industries (at Ueno in Tokyo). Within less than 3 years, more than 150 Garabō mills were established in Tokyo, 25 in Aichi Prefecture and more than two dozen Garabō managers were active in the Kansai area. The Tokyo branch office of the Renmensha,48 which was the official manufacturer of the Garabō spinning frame, recorded sales of 585 frames after the exhibition.49 But this understates the actual frames in operation during the 1880s. We are unable to observe statistically the impact of the Garabō technology on the production of domestic yarn because its output was subsumed into the traditional hand-spun yarn in the records.50 However, the spinning frame's technical distinctiveness – its cheapness, simple materials and ease of use – allowed it to be acquired by rural households without the need for learning about alien technologies or socioeconomic reorganisation. The key to its rapid diffusion was therefore its psychological familiarity. This understanding reflects the common difficulty of adapting imported alien technologies to the developing host economy under late industrialisation.

PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES

Two types of the Garabō-based domestic systems of cotton manufacture began to emerge soon after its appearance in the late 1870s. The first was in mountainous areas, taking advantage of waterpower from steep valleys. The other system was developed along fast-flowing rivers. Clusters of anchored boats with waterwheels were arrayed on the rivers, which transformed them into tiny spinning mills. The former was called the Garabō of the Mountain, the latter the Garabō of the Plain (or of the Boat).51 Although the two systems operated identical Garabō spinning frames, the different power sources were linked to different systems of industrial organisation. More complex and sophisticated putting-out and contract systems were developed in the mountainous regions, whereas those on the plain did not involve organisational sophistication. Instead, their spinners were committed to good use of changing river streams.

The manufacturers in the mountains adopted a type of putting-out typical of those used before industrialisation; a group of Garabō spinners teamed up with a traditional mill for grinding rice or extracting vegetable oil.52 The spinners concluded a temporary contract with a mill owner, who was able to offer work space and the power source. In most cases, the mill owners also placed spinning frames beside those of the tenant' spinners and they spun cotton yarns together.53 Depending on the size of the mill, the number of the spinners varied, but the scale was constrained by the power supply. The appeal of the Garabō system was its advantage of exploiting existing local waterwheels, but the mill owners were uninterested in enlarging their waterwheels. The key benefit of the system, the ability to access cheap water power therefore became the main restraint on growth. The other constraint was the organisation of the farmer-spinners; Nakamura noted that they merely collaborated to approach the local mill owners and the power supply from their waterwheels.54 There was no effort to develop more sophisticated collective contracts to improve organisational efficiency.55 This shows that, in general, the Garabō spinning remained a by-employment or secondary job alongside their usual farming work. Some changes occurred nonetheless in regions such as Mikawa (present-day Aichi Prefecture). Initially, the cotton spinning was only during the agricultural off-season, but the Garabō system quickly spread because of the relatively poor agricultural performance of this mountainous region to become the main form of work. Domestic weavers in some areas, such as Chita, began to develop networks with the Garabō spinners.56 The putting out system saw increased specialisation – the separation of spinning and weaving – and the breakdown of the traditional household cotton-goods manufacture.

The theory of proto-industrialisation might be recalled from this developing pattern, but two perspectives remain distinctive.57 First, the Garabō-based manufacture emerged a decade after the advent of the British-style Meiji cotton mills. The British-style sector in its infant phase could not yet meet the market demand, and this called for another domestic conduit to supply yarn. Specifically, there was no neat linear context of industrial development, as depicted in the theory of proto-industrialisation. Second, although the Garabō system took on a variety of organisational forms, these could hardly be defined as a ‘factory-based’ system in western terms. For instance, the Nukata-Bōsekigumi (The Nukata Association of Cotton Spinning) was one of the largest Garabō-spinning complexes, which achieved remarkable productivity and cost efficiency throughout the 1880s. This association was established in 1884 by waterwheel-based cotton spinners in the Mikawa region. There were 264 members (cotton masters) in Nukata County alone operating a total of 44,320spindles, an average of 168 spindles per spinner who would be using between two and four Garabō frames. The spinners were thus running very small and basic units. The total annual yarn production of the association was 62,317 kan, equivalent to about 885 kg per spinner. Compared with the annual output of the traditional hand-spinning of about 62 kg per spinner, the Nukata spinners use of the Garabō frames had increased their productivity at least 14 times.58 The increase of the productivity among this association of individual small-scale spinners shows the impact of the Garabō technology on local cotton manufacture (Table 4).59

Table 4. The production of the Nukata Cotton Spinning Association
YearNumber of membersNumber of spinnersNumber of spindlesProduction in weight (Pound)Production in value (Yen)
  1. Source: Mikawa Bōseki Dōgyō Kumiai Hen, Mikawa Bōsekishi, cited in Ishikawa, Gaun Tokimune –Garabō No Hatsumei, p. 176.

188426424244,320517,231
188531640560,080742,369142,408
188645258098,7601,789,679187,064
1887483615131,5302,561,687492,850
1888481612112,2902,376,572455,800
1889376508107,2812,243,822433,364
189020820370,1721,681,995298,585
189119616167,025883,411104,360
189220624174,6181,548,199237,050
1893239378103,8712,484,522346,618

However, the Garabō mills did not progress from water to steam-powered factories. Instead, they were displaced from domestic spinning in 1890 and their position was not restored until small-scale petrol engines and electric motors became their main source of power in the 1930s. Management was rudimentary. Leading figures like Takisaburō Kōmura coordinated many spinning works, but the individual spinners ran their business independently.60

The Garabō of the Plain developed differently. Rokusaburō Suzuki in the autumn of 1878 pioneered the use of the Garabō frame mounted on boats in rivers; originally on the Yahagi-Hurukawa, a tributary of Yahagi River. He made a visit to Gaun to receive tutorials. Suzuki's system was a leading model for the Garabō of the Plain, with mills on Yahagi River numbering about 100 in 1897.61 The plain system was less affected by competition with the British-style mills compared with the Garabō of the Mountain. The plain system responded only to limited local demands and there is no record of any putting-out structure. Garabō frames with about 100 spindles were installed on each boat. Except for the main spinning procedure, the other phases of manufacture were operated at the riverside. In contrast to a fixed factory, clusters emerged; huts for pre-spinning preparations on the riverside and boats for the main spinning emerged like tiny mobile villages.

A spinner, who was also the owner of his boat, played the role of a spinner as well as of a ‘captain’.62 He controlled the boat. The size of boats varied, but it usually reached a length of 10 ma (1 ma equals 1.82 m or 6 feet) and a width of one ‘ma’ (Fig. 4). The manufactured Garabō yarns were prepared for sales on the riverside by the captain's family. After 1885, bigger boats appeared and in 1904, the average size had increased to a length of 13 ma and a width of 3 ma. The typical scene would have been remarkable to observe: a party of boats with wheels and ceilings were grouped together and were ferried by small boats carrying carded raw cotton in (from the riverside) and manufactured yarns out (to the riverside). Neither fumes nor steam would be seen from this assembly of mills on the river. But, the visitor would have heard rattling sounds from the waterwheels beside the boat mills, meaning that spinning was in progress. The power supply from the stream could not generate as much torque as the waterwheels of the mountain system. Until 1885, a boat waterwheel could only power 30–90 spindle. From the turn of the century, however, technical improvements in both the waterwheel and the power transmission enabled a boat to operate from 240, to as many as 320 spindles.63 The bands of clattering boats also raised their anchors from time to time and shifted their locations to take advantage of changes of the river stream. As in the mountain system, the key concern in the plain system was the power supply.

image

Figure 4. Garabō Mills on Yahagi River in the 1880s.Source: Nakamura, Garabō Shiwa.

Download figure to PowerPoint

The end of the Garabō of the Plain came with the replacement of its power source; the substitution of petrol engines and electric motors for the river. The spinners had at last ‘disembarked’, and the Garabō mills began to be built in urban areas or wherever there was demand from local weavers for Garabō yarns. As with the British-style mills, the early twentieth century Garabō mills' change over from waterpower enabled their strategic relocation closer to weavers and raw cotton suppliers.

The Garabō in the local textile dynamics

The development of the Garabō technology had several significant implication. The first was an improvement of productivity. A spinning frame with 100 spindles produced 13 times more yarn production than the average traditional hand-spinner.64 A skilful spinner could operate the basic unit, so the increase in productivity indicates the Garabō spinning frame was a labour-saving technological breakthrough. Unlike the western labour-saving technologies such as the mules and steam engines – that entailed capital- and resource-intensiveness – the Garabō was strikingly cheap to make and operate. The native technology was not only labour-saving but also resource-saving, including using waste and low-quality raw cotton discarded by the British-style mills. From these materials the Garabō frames could spin coarse yarns for traditional hosiery and coarse cotton cloths.65

Traditional cotton manufactures were transformed during the Meiji, evidenced especially in the rise of the independent spinning sector. Both the western-style mills and Garabō mills facilitated the structural change. The former, however, represented a technical discontinuity based on alien technologies and manufacturing formats, whereas the latter retained a technical continuity with native endowments. We can see that the Meiji industrialisation was more than the mere adoption and transfer of western technologies to enable productivity growth western style. The rise of the Garabō spinning system was an important indigenous response to the evolving dynamics of local textile markets.

NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES

Several elements were involved with the sudden death of the Garabō technology around 1890. First, the decline of domestic cotton farming became noticeable after the importation of cheaper, raw cotton (mostly Chinese) soared, which made cotton growing unprofitable for peasants. The Garabō spinners began to use the imported raw cotton, with the loss of the local advantage of close links between the raw cotton supply and the spinning. Second, in the 5 years after 1885, the British-style spinning sector overcame its earlier technological difficulties; something which led not only to a significant increase of production but also to a rapid fall in prices. The western sector's primary production was concentrated on either similar or even lower (for example, 14 s) counts to those of Garabō products (average 16 s), which was both price competitive with Garabō yarns and which suited the buying public's taste.66 Furthermore, the number of the western mills increase dramatically and adopted British ring-spinning that improved productivity in low counts and raised production. In the first half of 1885, there were 47,220 spindles in operation with an output of 235,110 kan (about 881 tons); 5 years later, the number spindles had increased five-fold to just over a quarter of a million spindles and output 22-times to 5.2 million kan. By 1895, there were more than half a million spindles (more than 11 times that of 1885) and output had soared to over 18 million (more than 78 times that of 1885). The production of the British ring-spun yarn had surpassed that of the Mule-spun by 1890 and become the dominant spinning technology by 1900.67 In the context of these rapid technical and market changes, the decline of the rattling spindles was almost predestined, along with the disintegration of traditional agricultures and by-employment systems.

The Garabō, however, did not completely disappear. From the second half of the 1930s, there was a striking resurgence of the rattling spindles, which accelerated following government controls after the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese war in 1937. Garabō yarns were not regulated because of their capacity to use recycled wasted cotton. The sector's growth was rapid, from about 850,000 spindles in 1936 to 1,737,000 in 1941.68 Once again, as during the Meiji industrialisation, the indigenous Garabō spinners association, such as the Mikawa association, were at the forefront of this remarkable resurrection. The Pacific war allowed the Garabō technology to return to the main stage of domestic cotton manufacture.69 In 1942, as the pressure of war escalated, the material and energy-saving characteristics of the Garabō, and its indigenous origin, appealed to the state. Garabō factories were placed under the state control to manufacture cotton yarns for ‘everybody’. Many Garabō factories were built not only in Japan but also in Korea, Manchuria, China, and Southeast Asia, (including Burma [Myanmar], Malaysia, and Indonesia), to produce cotton yarns for local weavers.70 Some frames were even taken to the Pacific islands.71 This remarkable return of the Garabō, however, was more indicative of failings of the Showa war economy rather than pride in an indigenous invention.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES

During the 1870s and 1880s, the key to the Garabō's popularity and swift diffusion resided in its cost efficiency, which was derived from its great technical compatibility with the traditional system of cotton manufacture. The native technology enabled peasants to maintain their conventional scheme of domestic by-employment together with a noticeable increase in productivity. Behind this, technical and cultural familiarity also contributed to cost savings as well.

The rise of the Garabō sector in the early Meiji industrialisation is a remarkable case of lasting historical and technical continuity, with deep roots in the traditional by-employment of the late Tokugawa Japan.72 It was large a private initiative aimed at improving productivity in the traditional sector undertaken independently from the state's policy of Western-style mechanisation. The Garabō was an innovation that exploited the indigenous potential for mechanisation that was also suited to the technical and institutional structures of the existing local system of manufacture.

Further evolution ended abruptly after 1889, however, as the British-style modern spinning sector took off. In addition to the Garabō's technical limits to further innovation, managerial backwardness was also at issue – as described in the case of the Nukata spinning association. The Garabō technology was conceived as an affordable, accessible, and familiar technology to enhance productivity of peasant house-hold spinning, a common rural by-employment. Despite its technically-groundbreaking mechanism for resource and labour saving, in the absence of managerial transformation, it was unable to compete with the emergent British-style sector and its modern entrepreneurship.73 No conceptual stop-gap between the traditional putting-out scheme and the modern organisation for mass production surfaced; the Garabō remained in an essential cul-de-sac during the Meiji period.

Previous studies have shown that the cotton weaving districts were able to transform successfully into the factory system in the Meiji weaving sector.74 The rise of the factory was evolutionary for the domestic weavers, with the gradual development of new clusters of regional production; the same did not happen in the spinning sector. Still, the diffusion of the Garabō technology demonstrated the private initiatives within the Meiji rural economy to further specialisation of spinning and reform of traditional textile manufacture to meet growing market demand. While after 1890 the Garabō spinners were eclipsed by the British-style spinners, the traditional weavers were able to forge their own path to growth. Neither group benefited from the governments' strategy of mechanisation and the bureaucrats' determination for cultural and technological westernisation.75 The Garabō hardly lived up to the bureaucrats' ideal of progress required for government-supported enterprise. Nonetheless, most of the Meiji state enterprises, especially in textile manufacture, were unimpressive in terms of their managerial performance and development.76 Even the takeoff of the British-style spinning sector was realised not by state leadership but by the innovative private entrepreneurs to whom the state enterprises had been sold.

Further research on the technical, organisational, and institutional elements within the Garabō spinning scheme promise richer perspectives for our understanding of the difficulties associated with late industrialisation. It would help us to reconsider the significance of the British industrialisation and its consequences for many indigenous systems of manufacture around the world throughout the nineteenth century.

REFERENCES

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GARABŌ
  4. THE THIRD BREAKTHROUGH IN THE SPINNING MECHANISM
  5. THE DELIVERY OF THE NATIVE SPINNING FRAME
  6. DISTINCTIVE TECHNICAL FEATURES
  7. A POPULAR MACHINE FOR EVERYBODY
  8. PURELY DOMESTIC SYSTEMS OF COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE MEIJI INDUSTRIALISATION
  9. NEW EVOLUTION AFTER THE INESCAPABLE DROPOUT
  10. CONCLUDING REMARKS
  11. REFERENCES
  • Abe, T. (1989) Nippon Ni Okeru Sanchi Men Orimonogyō No Tenkai (Tokyo: Tokyo University Press).
  • Abe, T. (2004) Organizational changes in the Japanese cotton industry during the Inter-War period: from inter-firm-based organization to cross-sector-based organization. In: D. A.Farnie, and D. J.Jeremy, eds. The Fibre That Changed the World: The Cotton Industry in International Perspective, 1600–1900s (Oxford: Oxford University Press). 46193.
  • Abe, T., and Saito, O. (1988) From putting-out to the factory: a cotton-weaving district in late-Meiji Japan. Textile History, 19 (Special Anglo-Japanese Issue), 14358.
  • Aichi Garabō Association (1957) Garabōseki (Okazaki, Japan: Aichi Garabo Kyokai).
  • Aichiken Tokeisho (1911) Aichi Ken Tōkeisho. (The statistical records of the aichi prefecture, the section on cotton yarn production, from the 13th Meiji Year, 1880, to the 43rd Meiji Year, 1910), The National Diet Library of Japan, Tokyo, Japan, YDM 45743 the sections from the 18th Meiji year to the 24th Meiji year.
  • Ando, Y. (1975) Kindai Nippon Keizaishi Yōran. (A Summary of the Economic History of Modern Japan) (Tokyo: Tokyo University Press).
  • Bito, M. (1981) Tokugawa Jidai No Shakai to Seiji Sisō No Tokushitsu. Shiso, 685, 112.
  • Catling, H. (1970) The Spinning Mule (Manchester: David & Charles: Newton Abbot).
  • Catling, H. (1978) The development of the spinning mule. Textile History, 9, 3557.
  • Choi, E. K. (2009) Entrepreneurial leadership in the Meiji cotton spinners' early conceptualisation of global competition. Business History, 51, 92758.
  • Francks, P. (1999) Japanese Economic Development: Theory and Practice, 2nd edn (London; New York: Routledge).
  • Francks, P. (2006) Rural Economic Development in Japan: From the Nineteenth Century to the Pacific War (Routledge Studies in the Modern History of Asia). (London: Routledge).
  • Garabōki No Enkaku (1942) A history of the Garabō spinning frame. (No Information about the author, hand-written in October 1942).
  • Hills, R. L. (1979) Hargreaves, arkwright and crompton. Why three inventors? Textile History, 10, 11426.
  • Inoue, J. (1895) Mengyō Ron (A Theory of Development of Cotton Industry) (Tokyo, Japan: Author).
  • Ishikawa, K. (1986) Gaun Tokimune – Garabō No Hatsumei. In: K.Nagahara, K.Yamaguchi, K.Katō, and K.Hukaya, eds. Kōza Nihon Gijyutsu No Shakaishi, Bekkan 2 Jinbutsu Hen, Kindai (Tokyo: Nihon Hyōronsha).
  • Kajinishi, M. (1948) Gijyutsu Hattatsushi (Kei Kōgyō), Nippon Shihonshugi Kenkyuu Kōza 46 (A History of the Development of Japanese Technology, Light Industries; A Research on the Japanese Capitalism) (Tokyo: Kawade Shobō).
  • Kajinishi, M. (1950) Nippon Kindai Mengyō No Seiritsu (Tokyo: Kadokawa Shoten).
  • Kannokyoku and Shomukyoku (1880) Mentō Kyōshinkai Hōkokusho [The Association of Promoting Cotton and Sugar Manufactures] (Osaka: Shikada Sensishi).
  • Kato, K. (1987) Kindai Bōsekigyō Heno Tenkan, Kōza Nippon Gijyutsu No Shakaishi Daisankan Bōshoku. (Tokyo: Nippon Hyōronsha).
  • Kinugawa, T. (1937) Honpō Menshi Bōsekishi [History of Japanese Cotton-Spinning Industry, Published by the Japan Association of Cotton Spinners in 1937–41] (Osaka, Japan: Nippon Mengyo Kyokai).
  • Kitano, S. (1994) Hatsumei No Bunka Isan: Gaun Tokimune To Garabōki, Wabōshi, Wafu No Nazo Wo Saguru (Tokyo: Agune Gijyutsu Senta).
  • McCallion, S. (1989) Trial and error: the model filature at Tomioka. In: W.Wary, ed. Managing Industrial Enterprise, Cases from Japan's Prewar Experience (Mass and London: Harvard University Press).
  • Meiji Jyuunen Naikoku Kangyō Hakurankai (1877) Shuppin Kaisetsu (Commentaries on Exhibits at The 10th Meiji Year (1877) Exhibition of Promoting Industries). Material Code 606-3312-56 Wa 3312 Gō, The National Archives, Tokyo Japan The Area 4, Machinery; The Category 3, Textile Cotton Spinning Frame, pp. 61–64; Gaun, T. from Namita-Mura, Chikuma-Gun, Shinano-Koku, Nagano-Ken.
  • Mendels, F. F. (1972) Proto-industrialization: the first phase of the industrialization process. Journal of Economic History, 32, 24161.
  • Mikawa Suisha Bōsekigyō Ni Kansuru Chōsa Siryō (1919) A Collection of Research Materials on the Mikawa Waterwheel Cotton Spinning; published by the Provisional Bureau of Industrial Survey, the survey had been done in 1917).
  • Minami, R. (1987) Power Revolution in the Industrialization of Japan: 1885–1940 (Tokyo: Kinokuniya Company LTD.).
  • Miyashita, K. (1993) Gaun Tatchi, Garabōki Hyakunen No Sokuseki Wo Tazunete [Gaun Tatchi, Tracing Back the Footprints of the Rattling Spindles] (Matsumoto, Nagano Prefecture, Japan: Kyōdo Shuppansha).
  • Morris-Suzuki, T. (1994) The Technological Transformation of Japan: From the Seventeenth to the Twenty-First Century (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press).
  • Murase, M. (1965) Gaun Tatchi. Edited by the Japan Association of Historical Studies (Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kōbunkan).
  • Naikoku Kangyō Hakurankai Jimukyoku, Meiji Jyuuyonen Dai Nikai Naikoku Kangyō Hakurankai Hōkokusho, The Section Four (1881) The secretariat of the national exhibition of promoting industries, the national archives, Tokyo, Japan; in the section of NAIKAKU BUNKO WASHO No. 3284-1.
  • Nakamura, T. (1942) Nippon Garabō Shiwa (Tokyo: Keio Shuppankai).
  • Nakamura, S. (1968) Meiji Ishin No Kiso Kōzō (Tokyo: Miraisha).
  • Nōshōmushō (The Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce) (The Serial Code: YO 505-0019. Nōshōmushō Kōmukyoku Kōmukyoku Geppō. (The Monthly Report of The Bureau of Engineering) published by The Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce; also, The Serial Code: YO605-0107. Nippon Menshi Bōsekigyō Enkaku Kiji (1901). Nōmukyoku Kōmukyoku Zanshi Orimono Tōshikki Kyōshinkai (1885) Shinsa Hōkokusho (The Assessment Report by Bureau of Agricultural Affairs; Bureau of Engineering Affairs. The Association of Promoting Silk Yarn and Cloth, Pottery and Japanese Lacquer). (Tokyo: Yuurindō).
  • Oguchi, Y. (2004) The finances of the tokugawa shogunate. In: A.Hayami, O.Saito, and R. P.Toby, eds. Emergence of Economic Society in Japan (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
  • Otsuka, K., Ranis, G., and Saxonhouse, G. (1988) Comparative Technology Choice in Development: The Indian and Japanese Cotton Textile Industries (New York: St Martin's Press).
  • Ryder, M. L. (1968) The origin of spinning. Textile History, 1, 7381.
  • Saito, O. (1983) Population and the peasant family economy in proto-industrial Japan. Journal of Family History, 8, 3054.
  • Saito, O. (1986) The rural economy: commercial agriculture, by-employment, and wage-work. In: M. B.Jansen, and G.Rozman, eds. Japan in Transition: From Tokugawa to Meiji (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
  • Saito, O. (1997) Hikakushi No Enkinhō (Tokyo: NTT Press).
  • Saito, O., and Tanimoto, M. (2004) The transformation of traditional industries. In: A.Hayami, O.Saito, and R. P.Toby, eds. Emergence of Economic Society in Japan 1600–1859 (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
  • Sakakibara, K. (1949) Garabōsekigyō No Shisō, Gaun Tokimune Ou Tenki (A Biography of Gaun, The Originator of The Garabō Cotton-Spinning Industry), The Association of The Garabō Industry of Aichi Prefecture.
  • Sasaki, S. (1948) Nippon Keizai Shōsho Dai Yon Kan, Men Bōseki (The Bureau of Textile in the Ministry of Commerce and Engineering, and Nippon Keizai Shinbunsha).
  • Shimbo, H., and Hasegawa, A. (2004) The dynamics of market economy and production. In: A.Hayami, O.Saito, and R. P.Toby, eds. Emergence of Economic Society in Japan 1600–1859 (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
  • Shimbo, H., and Saito, O. (2004) The economy on the eve of industrialization. In: A.Hayami, O.Saito, and R. P.Toby, eds. Emergence of Economic Society in Japan 1600–1859 (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
  • Smith, T. C. (1955) Political Change and Industrial Development in Japan: Government Enterprise 1868–80 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).
  • Smith, T. C. (1959) The Agrarian Origins of Modern Japan (Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press).
  • Smith, T. C. (1988) Native Sources of Japanese Industrialization, 1750–1920 (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).
  • Takamura, N. (1971) Nippon Bōsekigyōshi Jyosetsu (Jyō) (Tokyo: Hanawa Shobō).
  • Tamagawa, K. (1986) Garabō Seibōki no Gijyutsuteki Hyōka [A technical assessment of the Garabō spinning machines]. Gizyutu To Bunmei [Journal of The Japan Society For The History of Industrial Technology], 4 (3), 120.
  • Tamagawa, K. (1995) Waga Kuni Menshi Bōseki Kikai No Hatten Ni Tsuite [On the development of the cotton spinning technology in Japan, c. 1866–90]. Gizyutu To Bunmei [Journal of The Japan Society For The History of Industrial Technology], 9, 120.
  • Tamura, H. (2004) Fasshion No Shakai Keizaishi, Zairai Orimonogyō No Gijyutsu Kakushin To Ryuukō Sijyō. (The Socio-Economic History of Fashion: The Growth of Traditional Weaving Sector, Technological Innovations, and Market of Vogue) (Tokyo: Nippon Hyōronsha).
  • Tanimoto, M. (1987) ‘Bakumatsu Meiji Ki Menpu Kokunai Sijyō No Hatten’ (The development of the domestic market for cotton textiles in the Late Tokugawa and Early Meiji Periods). Tochi Seidoshigaku, 115, 5467.
  • The Association of Wabō (Japanese Traditional Cotton Manufacture) (1957) Wabō (Okazaki, Japan: Wabo Kyokai).
  • Wittner, D. G. (2008) Technology and the Culture of Progress in Meiji Japan Routledge/Asian Studies Association of Australia, East Asia Series (London & New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group).
  • Yahashi, H. (1947) Garabō Montōshuu (Sono Ichi) (Gifu, Japan: Gifu Prefecture Laboratory of Metallurgy).
  • Yamawaki, T. (2002) Kinu To Momen No Edo Jidai (Silk and Cotton in the Edo Period) (Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kōbunkan).
Footnotes
  • 1

    Smith, The Agrarian Origins; Morris-Suzuki, The Technological Transformation, pp. 89–91.

  • 2

    Kinugawa, Honpō Menshi Bōsekishi. See Vol. 2, Chapter 1, ‘The circumstance of the Meiji cotton industry’.

  • 3

    Morris-Suzuki, The Technological Transformation.

  • 4

    Kajinishi, Nippon Kindai Mengyō no Seiritsu, pp. 136–41. Also, see Sasaki, Nippon Keizai Shōsho Dai Yon Kan, Men Bōseki, pp. 24–9.

  • 5

    Tamagawa, Garabō Seibōki no Gijyutsuteki Hyōka, pp. 8–14.

  • 6

    Minami, Power Revolution, pp. 202–7; Kato, Kindai Bōsekigyō Heno Tenkan, pp. 244–8; Morris-Suzuki, The Technological Transformation.

  • 7

    Yahashi, Garabō Montōshuu (Sono Ichi), p. 1.

  • 8

    The Association of Wabō (Japanese Traditional Cotton Manufacture) (1957), Wabō, See Part One on The History of Garabō Industry, Chapter One on the History of Garabō Frame. Nakamura, Nippon Garabō Shiwa, pp. 64–71.

  • 9

    Bito, ‘Tokugawa Jidai No Shakai To Seiji Sisō No Tokushitsu’, pp. 1–12.

  • 10

    Smith, The Agrarian Origins, Part II.

  • 11

    Shimbo and Hasegawa, The Dynamics of Market Economy and Production.

  • 12

    Oguchi, The Finances of the Tokugawa Shogunate; Smith, The Land Tax in the Tokugawa Period, in Smith, Native Sources.

  • 13

    Tamura, Fasshion No Shakai Keizaishi.

  • 14

    Ando, Kindai Nippon Keizaishi Yōran, p. 37. Yamawaki, Kinu To Momen No Edo Jidai.

  • 15

    Kajinishi, Nippon Kindai Mengyō No Seiritsu, Part I Pre-Industrial Period, Chapter 2 on The Development of The Early-Modern Cotton Manufacture, especially, Section 2 on The Development of Commercial Production, pp. 34–9 and Section 3 on The Varieties of Production Schemes, pp. 40–48.

  • 16

    Nōshōmushō Shōkyō Nenpyō Meiji 11 Nen, also, cited in Nakamura, Nippon Garabō Shiwa, pp. 38–9.

  • 17

    Inoue, Mengyō Ron, chapter five, section three on the development of dyestuff.

  • 18

    Kato, Kindai Bōsekigyō Heno Tenkan, p. 248; Kajinishi, Gijyutsu Hattatsushi (Kei Kōgyō), Nippon Shihonshugi Kenkyuu Kōza 46, p. 33.

  • 19

    Nukata was followed by Hazu, Aomi and Chita. The four accounted for about 95 per cent of the gross production in the Aichi Prefecture during the 1880s. See Aichi Ken Tōkeisho Menshi Seisan, 1888 (p. 74), 1889 (p. 47), 1890 (p. 51), 1891 (p. 49).

  • 20

    The first Japanese patent system was enacted in 1885.

  • 21

    For a detailed survey of the dynamics between commercial agriculture and by-employment in the nineteenth century rural economy, Saito, ‘The Rural Economy’, pp. 405–16, Shimbo and Saito, ‘The Economy on the Eve of Industrialization’, pp. 338–47.

  • 22

    Ryder, ‘The Origin of Spinning’, pp. 73–81.

  • 23

    Catling, The Spinning Mule, p. 14.

  • 24

    Hills, ‘Hargreaves, Arkwright and Crompton. Why Three Inventors?’ p. 124; Catling, ‘The Development of the Spinning Mule’, pp. 35–8.

  • 25

    The first official record, depicting the technical details of the machine can be found in the material code, 606-3312-56 Wa 3312 Gō, The National Archives, Tokyo Japan; Meiji Jyuunen Naikoku Kangyō Hakurankai Shuppin Kaisetsu (Commentaries on Exhibits at The 10th Meiji Year [1877] Exhibition of Promoting Industries). The Area 4, Machinery; The Category 3, Textile Cotton Spinning Frame, pp. 61–64; Gaun, T. from Namita-Mura, Chikuma-Gun, Shinano-Koku, Nagano-Ken.

  • 26

    Meiji Jyuunen Naikoku Kangyō Hakurankai Shuppin Kaisetsu, pp. 62–3. For a more technical description, see Yahashi, H., Garabō Montōshuu (Sono Ichi), p. 1.

  • 27

    Tamura, Fassion No Shakai Keizaishi, Chapter 3.

  • 28

    Meiji Jyuuyonen Dai Nikai Naikoku Kangyō Hakurankai Hōkokusho, Naikoku Kangyō Hakurankai Jimukyoku (1877), The Secretariat of The National Exhibition of Promoting Industries, pp. 64–5; and Catling, Spinning Mule, pp. 21–30.

  • 29

    Yahashi, Garabō Montōshuu (Sono Ichi), p. 1 and pp. 12–15; Tamagawa, Garabō Seibōki no Gijyutsuteki Hyōka, pp. 11–12, and 18.

  • 30

    Tamagawa, Garabō Seibōki no Gijyutsuteki Hyōka, p. 17.

  • 31

    Kitano, S., Gaun Tokimune To Garabōki, pp. 36–40.

  • 32

    Kitano, S., Gaun Tokimune To Garabōki, p. 86.

  • 33

    Zanshi Orimono Tōshikki Kyōshinkai, Menshi Shuudankai Kiji (1885), p. 4.

  • 34

    Kitano, Gaun Tokimune To Garabōki, pp. 110–11.

  • 35

    Aichi Ken Shi, in the section on industry; cotton spinning. Also, Nakamura, Garabō Shiwa, pp. 105, 113–117, 118–121.

  • 36

    Kinugawa, Honpō Menshi Bōsekishi, Vol. 1, pp. 187–9.

  • 37

    Tamagawa, Waga Kuni Menshi Bōseki Kikai No Hatten Ni Tsuite, pp. 7–8, 12–13.

  • 38

    The Tamashima mill was one of the early mills, which experienced this. See Kinugawa, Honpō Menshi Bōsekishi, Vol. 2, Chapter 7, especially pp. 174–85, 207–10.

  • 39

    Abe, Nippon Ni Okeru Sanchi Men Orimonogyo No Tenkai; Abe, and Saito, ‘From Putting-out to the Factory: A Cotton-weaving District in late-Meiji Japan’, pp. 143–158; Abe, Organizational Changes in the Japanese Cotton Industry during the Inter-War Period: From Inter-Firm-Based Organization to Cross-Sector-Based Organization, pp. 461–94.

  • 40

    Saito, ‘Population and the Peasant Family Economy in Proto-industrial Japan’; ‘The Rural Economy: Commercial Agriculture, By-employment, and Wage-Work’.

  • 41

    Saito, Hikakushi No Enkinhō, especially in the section of Transformation II, Chapter 3, The Social Structure Before the ‘Dawn’– Yamanashi Prefecture in the end of 1879.

  • 42

    Tanimoto, ‘Bakumatsu Meiji Ki Menpu Kokunai Sijyō No Hatten.

  • 43

    Nakamura, Meiji Ishin No Kiso Kōzō, Chapter Five presents the noticeable increase of the import volume of cotton goods as well as the faster growth in demand, compared to domestic production.

  • 44

    Tamura, Fassion No Shakai Keizaishi. Chapter 2 on ‘the innovations in the traditional weaving sector and the British cotton yarn’.

  • 45

    Even the British-style Meiji mills could not produce any counts above 20 s until the beginning of the 1890s.

  • 46

    Tamura, Fassion No Shakai Keizaishi, pp. 36–47.

  • 47

    Kinugawa, Honpō Menshi Bōsekishi.

  • 48

    Ishikawa, K., Gaun Tokimune, p. 161 and p. 167.

  • 49

    Kannokyoku and Shomukyoku, Mentō Kyōshinkai Hōkokusho, cited in Nakamura, Garabō Shiwa, pp. 83–4; Murase, Gaun Tatchi, Chapter Three, especially pp. 62–3 for the nation-wide diffusion of the Garabō; Sakakibara, Gaun Tokimune, p. 8.

  • 50

    See Table 2, The Composition of Supply of Cotton Fabrics.

  • 51

    Murase, Gaun Tatchi, p. 89 and p. 93. Nakamura, Garabō Shiwa, p. 106.

  • 52

    Wabō (Japanese Cotton Spinning; Throstle Spinning & Weaving), p. 2. Section Two, The Power Supply of Garabō Spinning.

  • 53

    Murase, Gaun Tatchi, p. 128.

  • 54

    Mikawa Suisha Bōsekigyō Ni Kansuru Chōsa Siryō (A Collection of Research Materials on the Mikawa Waterwheel Cotton Spinning, 1919, published by the Provisional Bureau of Industrial Survey; the survey had been done in 1917).

  • 55

    Sakakibara, A Biography of the Father of Garabō Cotton Spinning, Mr Tokimune Gaun, in p. 29, Mikawa Suisha Bōsekigyō Ni Kansuru Chōsa Siryō (The Garabō of Mountain). Also, Nakamura, Garabō Shiwa, pp. 129–30.

  • 56

    Chita Momen (Chita Grey Cotton) was one of the well-known traditional brands of cotton cloth and other cotton goods from the Tokugawa era. The region of Chita is located in present-day Owari Ichinomiya in the Aichi Prefecture.

  • 57

    Mendels, ‘Proto-industrialization: The First Phase of the Industrialization Process’, pp. 241–61.

  • 58

    Nakamura, Garabō Shiwa, pp. 104–5, for his study of the traditional hand-spinning and the Garabō production; the average productivity of Garabō was approximately 13–14 times more productive, quoted: Meiji Jyuuyonen Dai Nikai Naikoku Kangyō Hakurankai Hōkokusho, Naikoku Kangyō Hakurankai Jimukyoku (1877), Tokyo 1877, The section on the Garabō in Matsumoto, Shinshuu (the present-day Nagano Prefecture), pp. 54–6; also Kōmukyoku Geppō, Vol.11, on yarn production.

  • 59

    Nakamura, Garabō Shiwa. pp. 114–16; Sakakibara, Gaun Tokimune, pp. 28–9; Miyashita, Gaun Tatchi, p. 122.

  • 60

    Sakakibara, Gaun Tokimune, pp. 26–31, 32–35.

  • 61

    Sakakibara, Gaun Tokimune, pp. 29–30.

  • 62

    Murase, Gaun Tatchi, p. 87, also Nakamura, Garabō Shiwa, p. 120.

  • 63

    Murase, Gaun Tatchi, p. 88.

  • 64

    With the traditional hand-spinning wheel, a female spinner could produce 40–50 momme of cotton yarn (1 momme = 3.75 grammes) per day; whereas a Garabō spinner on average produced 650 momme (about 2.4 kg).

  • 65

    Nakamura, A Tale of the Garabō in Japan. p. 165.

  • 66

    Nippon Menshi Bōsekigyō Enkaku Kiji, (The Historical Records of the Cotton-Spinning Industry of Japan), the Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce (1901), Chapter 5, especially the table, p. 101.

  • 67

    Nippon Menshi Bōsekigyō Enkaku Kiji, Chapter Five Cotton Yarn, especially see the table in p. 101.

  • 68

    Kitano, Gaun Tokimune To Garabōki, p. 163.

  • 69

    Sakakibara, Biography, chapter 7 on the industrial transition during war time and chapter 8 on the state control of the Garabō sector (under the war regime).

  • 70

    Kitano, Gaun Tokimune To Garabōki, p. 165.

  • 71

    Garabōki No Enkaku (A History of the Garabō Spinning Frame, No Information about the author, hand-written in October 1942), pp. 11–2. Also see Kinugawa, Honpō Menshi Bōsekishi, Vol. 2, Chapter 1, p. 4.

  • 72

    Implications discussed in Francks, Rural Economic Development in Japan, especially, pp. 1–19; Saito, ‘The Rural Economy: Commercial Agriculture, By-employment, and Wage-Work’; Abe and Saito, ‘From Putting-out to the Factory: A Cotton-weaving District in late-Meiji Japan’.

  • 73

    Choi, Entrepreneurial leadership in the Meiji.

  • 74

    Abe and Saito, From Putting-out to the Factory; Saito and Tanimoto, The Transformation of Traditional Industries, pp. 278–98.

  • 75

    Wittner, Technology and the Culture.

  • 76

    Francks, Japanese Economic Development, pp. 13–59; McCallion, Trial and error: the model filature at Tomioka; Takamura, Nippon Menshi Bōsekigyōshi Jyosetsu (Jyō), pp. 39–59; Smith, Political Change.