EUROPE FROM THE ASIAN PERSPECTIVE.

RELATIONS TO A (LITERALLY ONE) CONSTRUCTION (HI)STORY

Andreas Wei

Introduction
The Magazine East-Asia and Tmai Kisak
The Frontier Problem
The West as Student
Strong Europe
Weak Europe
The Source Text in Time Context

Introduction
The forming of Europe in demarcation to Asia lies on the roots of the Western Self-definition. However,
there is a dominant research imbalance meaning: there are opposite opinions on this matter.
According to that, the main question would be: what images, stereotypes, etc. Asia ascribes to Europe
as a continent and unified cultural space. Previously reflected continues so far to what degree these
Asia ascriptions have been accepted and incorporated and which opposing concepts have they
developed. One of the few exceptions is the literature over the Pan-Asianism, as well as the older works
as the work of Stephen Hay over Rabindranath Tagore and his concepts over Asia. But these are not the
only questions that Asia asks over the Construction. In spite of the in the meanwhile non-controlled
literature over the term Europe, seldom researches were interested in which stakeholders (actors)
from the different regions formed/constructed Europe.
This essay would examine the present construction of Europe from the perspective of a
Japanese person, Tamai Kisak published in 19th century. The study on the use of the terms Europe and
Asia would not be justified only because, if needed, there are more or less references in the secondary
bibliography. The already set use of Europe on the part of the non-European stakeholders, demands a
historical analysis of this term, which here would be based on the original texts. Considering that the
additional title was The First Monthly Magazine/Journal of the Japaneses in Europe, apparently it is
assumable for Tamai that the term Europe awoke enough interest and positive connotations to be
used in a title of the new journal. In this essay is, thereby, assumed that both sides, European and notEuropean, use these terms (Europe and Asia) so that they could, in confrontation (one) to another,
situate themselves in a dialog composed by the European ideas and terms (term like begrip). Not only
have the European lands/states/nations define themselves as European in demarcation (contrast) to the
others, but the others are adopting this model so they can/could show their practical knowledge and
discuss each others modernization and power differences. Although there is no clear cut between the
West, Europe and similar accumulated terms, still the frequent use indicates that Europe just didnt rise
in the West (like the sun rising - stupid) and that America was separated from Europe. Also the view
from out of Europe seems rather to see Europe as a unit that Europeans themselves have created,
because Asians rather emphasize those connections than the elements that divide them from Europe. It
has to be brought out as well, that because of the geographical and cultural concept too, Asia had and
has no clear frontiers. So as the East could have started from beyond the Elba, so did Asians consider the
the 19th century Europeans to be on this side of the Ural. However one idea prevailed and that is
lumping Asia together with ancient civilizations, especially Indian, Chinese and Japanese.
Asia established the Europeanized layers in their efforts to learn from the West. The new elite
Asiatic lands oriented themselves to European model, studying Greek classics. So both Europeans as well

as Asians took over their geographical world division, and their doctrinal examples (from the Greek
classics I guess). And in this term clearness Europe was Europe and Asia was Asia, and as required
both had to be (further) distinct within each. Indeed, these fascinations for the European concept lost
weight/decreased from the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, and their own counterconcepts shaped the appropriate/corresponding cultural landscape. Still those counter-concepts served
(often unspoken) as a negative filter towards the European concepts and ideas. That is why this essay
we pay attention to a triad of terms: The European concept of Asia; the Asian concept of Asia; and the
counter-model of the Asian terms towards/for Europe, which were developed so that other terms could
oppose their own concept. However, they do not show up in this essay in the same weight/amount of
importance. The range/scope of the terms Asia in Asia and the meaning of counter-constructs of
Europe for the Asians always remain controversial. Nevertheless, it would not be the issue here, how
Asians perceive Asia as a mutual (experience) space, but how they constructed the European counterpart in this dialog. However it is not always possible to represent the Asian view (of Europe) without
using Asian. It is merely assumed that Asians hardly perceived Europe(ans) as a unit before and often
after too the establishment of the EC, and therefore was this large structure quite irrelevant to them.
On the other hand Europeans, who invented the terms Europe and Asia, used those frequently over
centuries, although sometimes they had a vague meaning to them (to the Europeans). In the 19th
century the west colonial forces used the term Europe only to justify their aggressive behavior and
civilizational superiority so as a quasi-alibi term. Was it because of the colonialist claims that Europe
represented itself as a unit? For Asians, Europe stayed, however, a subordinate category. (I dont get
this.) As mentioned this essay does NOT follow this perspective/point of view. It is more likely that a
wide list of European ideas is taken as a unit, to clarify the construction of European and its
connotations. How Asians what so ever construct Europe, how they relate to this term (Europe) and
what image do they create for Europe? These questions would be pursued in two steps/niveaus, based
on the journal East-Asia, that was released/published between 1898 and 1910 in Berlin. First, the
different attributions of Europe and Asia will be shown, based on the source. After that, in another step
would be word about specific and general European ideas. Finally, the source would be placed in a
context and the final conclusions would be drawn.
The Magazine East-Asia and Tmai Kisak
The magazine East-Asia was published by a Tamai Kisak (samizdat self-published) until his death in
September 1906, with an initial print run of 5000 copies. Tamai had already lectured German in Japan,
and it took him around 15 months to travel to Germany via Siberia. He wrote a report on his caravan trip
and published it in the Cologne Gazette. He started earning as a journalist, founded a self-publishing
office and continued working as a patent agent. After his death in Berlin, the next/following number was
published in October 1906, by his chef editor, Oikawa Shigenobu. The magazine shows the view of an
educated German, East-Asian, and above all a Japanese intellectual from the end of the 19th and the
beginning of the 20th century. However it had been seen as a platform for all Asians. By far it a unique
case, because a group of the Others in Europe get to say something. That makes the perspective of the
Others in Europe, about the European construct, visible. The magazine aimed at three different target
groups (types of readers). The first group readers were looking for information over Japanese economic
interests, German merchandizers and manufacturers. The second group focused on Asian community
in Berlin and Europe. These were consisted mainly of Japanese people, still reports on club activities etc.
could also be found here, as well as the address list so Chinese and Indians also represented as
members of this target group. The third group consisted German daily newspapers and German
speaking audience in general, who used this magazine as source of information about Japan and East-

Asia. This way they could gather information and stay informed about the variety of themes concerning
Japan and East-Asia.
For the essay the term Japanese body (as in body of voters, not human body) will be used,
because Japanese were by far the biggest Asian group in Berlin at that time. They came to Germany
mainly as students, or with the governments scholarships. German Reich bided a great range of
offerings in the military field, but also in the field of law or medicine. It also includes the military doctor,
Mori Ogai, with his translations of German classics (Goethes Faust for ex.), who, up to this day,
represents one of the most important mediators of the German High Culture in Japan. Therefore,
Japanese were predestined to make contact with the German middle and upper classes by both, their
position and education. This closeness to the European is what so ever relevant for this essay, since the
European self-assurance and self-construction are postulated by the demarcation to the others. Long
story short: Europe became confident in contrast to others. Because the public spirit was an European
founded occurrence/thing of the Early New Age, the direct contact with the Non-Europeans, defined as
the Out-of-Europe-Nations was associated to the construction of their own superiority. Shortly: In
interaction to others Europe became confident of herself. Here, however would be examined how this
(European) construction was adopted/accepted and formulated by the others in Europe. This can also
show the effective and persuasiveness power of the European self-description/definition, reviewed in
the source text, which was written in Europe (dat will zeggen Germany) and addressed to the Europeans
(in German language). The question is: What Tamai Kisak took over from this European selfdescription/definition, and where and how he diverged from these ideas.
The Frontier Problem
In the preface of the first edition of his monthly magazine, Tamai Kisak writes carefree about East-Asia
and Europe; about Germany and Japan. For him both, East-Asia and Europe, represent a unique
culture, and Europe is seen as a unit. Both consist of states and nations, with focus on German Reich
and Japanese Empire, the two most distinguished empires in East-Asia and Europe in the past two
decades. Still he misses to clarify to the reader, what he finds fundamental in the European unity, and
he
believes
that
the
East-Asian
unity/cohesion/togetherness
requires
more
justification/explanation/reason, than the European one. There could be several explanations for that.
And thus Tamai, the Japanese, seems to try hard to emphasize the Japanese cultural autonomy and the
independence of Japan from the Chinese roots that is to be concluded out of the hidden reference of
the source text. He strived to be included in a rising of a nation, and refused to be associated to the
political moribund/dying/sinking China. And maybe the idea of the Asian Community of China, Korea,
and Japan seemed strange/aliened, because the notion of the common cultural roots doesnt
automatically presume a common culture and sense of belonging. A subliminal/subtle feeling of
inferiority is to be seen, as well as a distance from the European ascriptions/attributions. Although EastAsia supposes a geographical definition, Tamai emphasizes culture as defining criteria. That allows him
to be open and flexible towards several aspects: per. ex. he does not explain why some of the states are
seen as part of the unity and others not. In that way, he also doesnt have to make a distinction between
Asia and the West. With this unclear demarcation of Asia, the issue of a coalitional partnership in a
community of faith towards/to European was considered as open/possible. Because of the
commitment to Buddhism as a base of defining the East-Asian culture, East-Asia reached suddenly all
the way to India.

The West as Student

It is amazing from todays perspective is the confidence that author showed at that time. Therefore he
believed that Chinese and Japanese newspapers did not correctly interpret Europeans, even after long
years of studying it; and that the Germans, additionally, made limitations of their (own) research on
information, since almost every newspaper in East-Asian languages would appear in English. Only
native/indigenous East-Asians could mediate between the East and the West. Europeans have been
deprived of the understanding of the East-Asian cultures. Therefore, this alludes to the undermining of
the European expertise. Many of the western experts collected/gained/earned their knowledge second
or third hand and then they played the role in literature, the role of a translator, interpreter and host
upon whom the information about it depended. So they acted to repeal/annul of the European
classically postulated superiority; Tamai however oscillate with the self- and the external-attributions.
Thus, the ancient civilized nations of the East are here apparently differentiated defined and it is
difficult to say that young uprising Europe is overburdened with its interpretation. The East Japan in
this case was not passive and static, but an active, uprising trade nation. With this pairing young
Europe = nave and ancient East-Asia = intellectual superior, Tamai countered/undiminished the
European self-perception and the intellectual superior continent, entering the modern (age?),
overtaking other civilizations and making them obsolete. (Mit dieser Paarung junges Europa = naiv und
altes Ost-Asien = intellektuell berlegen...)
Strong Europe
How did Tamai see Europe? Or better said: What were the European self-attributions that Tamai
recognized and took over to belong to the European. One of the first keywords to be mentioned are
Modernity and Civilization. Classical terms such as State and Nation were also mentioned, which he
didnt use apart/selectively but linked to the term Empire (reich). Economy and trade were put in the
foreground, for those were points in which Europe was still generally perceived as superior. The
emphasis on the development of economic contacts was back then - as now as well - a point that
reached a wider audience attention. In that way Tamai tried to deliver an argument for selling his
magazine. Nevertheless, the focusing on economics could also be interpreted in the context of the
general Japanese economic policy. For Japan, the fastest way to overcome the financial imbalance with
the West, took place in trade developing. That was partly due to the dominant Anglo-Saxon free-trade
theory and partly because of the cost intensification for the heavy industrialization as well as because of
the unbeatable technological lead of the West as it seemed back then. Tamai also put in the
foreground that Europe promoted its culture and civilization through trade contacts with the East. (The
East) was seen as a place of many trade and merchant nations, whose freedom and success stayed
limited only by the European military power. Above all Englishmen and Germans - relying on the
Hanseatic League and the colonial strongholds/cities were seen as successful and long-distant
commercials/merchants and that formed another field of discussion (in this magazine) overcoming the
asymmetry and therefore claiming the equality with Europe.
Europe remains an example, at least for Tamai, a model that grabs attention and to which one
(the East) seeks contacts. Therefore Tamai operates in one of the western languages, using western

terms and form of standard western political ideas. Reasons why Europe was taken for a model for nonEuropeans were mainly European technical and physical offers/deals. Because those points were taken
as actual causes of the power imbalance between Europe and the others/rest. Therefore if anyone
wanted to catch and overtake the West, they must have been done it in these areas.
Politische Einrichtungen wie eine parlamentarische Demokratie, wie es beson- ders
Grobritannien als Modernisierungskennzeichen betonte, wurde zwar von einem Teil der Bevlkerung
begierig aufgegriffen, vom Groteil der Eliten der Transformation aber eher als uere Hlle denn
Ursache europischer berlegenheit gedeutet. Tiefgrei- fende Sozialreformen wurden nur ergriffen, um
der Regierung den direkten Zugriff auf alle Teile der Bevlkerung zu ermglichen. Weitreichende
partizipative Elemente, die das Vorbild Europa mit seinen parlamentarischen Monarchien und
Demokratien bieten konnte und von Europern auch als spezifisch europische Werte und Freiheiten
defi- niert wurden, wurden nur von einem Teil der Intellektuellen gefordert. Europas Vorbild- funktion
im sozialpolitischen Bereich beschrnkte sich dadurch nur auf kleine Kreise der Bevlkerung. Zu
bedenken bleibt die besondere Beziehungsgeschichte Japans zu Deutschland und warum Tamai einen
Underdog-Partner wie Deutschland whlt, um die anderen dominanten Mchte herauszufordern.
Deutsche Experten waren in vielen Bereichen der Modernisierung Japans whrend der Meiji-Reformen
angestellt worden. Die erfolgreichen Einigungskriege Deutschlands dienten als Vorbild fr den
erwarteten Erfolg der eigenen Modernisierungsbemhungen, ebenso wie die starke Stellung des Kaisers
in der Reichsverfassung und die eingeschrnkten Befugnisse des Parlaments. Allerdings wurde dieses
Deutschlandbild entscheidend durch die Beteiligung des Deut- schen Reiches an der Intervention von
Shimonoseki 1895 getrbt. Da das Deutsche Reich hier im Verbund mit Russland und Frankreich Japan
nach dem gewonnenen chi- nesisch-japanischen Krieg dazu zwang, auf weitreichende Gebietsansprche
gegenber China zu verzichten, Teile Chinas aber 1897 selbst annektierte, fllt die Grndung die- ser
Zeitung in die Zeit gespannter japanisch-deutscher Beziehungen. So wurden denn auch die europischen
Staaten von vielen Japanern als unmoralisch wahrgenommen, da sie in ihrem Streben nach Macht und
Geld jedes Prinzip verrieten. In dieser Situation Allianzen zu bilden und Partner aus dem europischen
Block herauszubrechen, lag da- her im Interesse der eigenen Souvernitt. Diese gegenseitige
Wahrnehmung als Bedro- hung verschrfte sich nach dem Sieg ber Russland 1905. Japan wurde vom
Westen nun teilweise als Gefahr wahrgenommen man denke nur an die grere Debatte der Gelben
Gefahr , eher selten als gleichwertige Macht. Doch hatte der einheitliche Block Europa schon vorher
Risse bekommen. Denn whrend sich im Boxerkrieg Euro- pa scheinbar einig gegen einen asiatischen
Gegner stellte und die japanische Rolle in der ffentlichkeit minimalisiert wurde, ging England 1902 eine
Allianz mit Japan ein.
Weak Europe
In anderen Punkten Kultur, Zivilisation, Staatlichkeit, konomie beanspruchten Asiaten
Ebenbrtigkeit. Insofern ist der hier vorgelegte Text im Gesamtzusammenhang der Machtasymmetrie
zwischen europischen und auereuropischen Mchten ein un- gewhnliches Beispiel, aber ein
Beispiel japanischen und vielleicht sogar schon asiatischen Selbstbewusstseins schon vor 1900. In
wirtschaftlichen Dingen beansprucht man Gleichrangigkeit, im Erlernen von Sprachen scheint man den
Europer berlegen und auch bei geistigen Gtern scheint man davon berzeugt zu sein, den

Europern noch etwas anbieten zu knnen. Europa wird hier also aus Sicht der Europer degra- diert,
eine Strategie, mit der sich Ost-Asien im Weiteren auf eine Stufe mit Europa stellt.
Mit den letzten beiden Punkten Wirtschaft und Gleichrangigkeit haben wir schon die Ebene
der eigentlichen Quelle verlassen und wollen uns nun den weiteren Implikationen der von Tamai
verwendeten Begriffe zuwenden. Einerseits sollen The- men angesprochen werden, die im
Zusammenhang der Konstruktion der Einheit von Europa und Asien stehen, andererseits Konnotationen
aufgedrselt werden. Interessant ist hier zuerst, was Tamai weglsst. Ein in dieser Zeit wichtiger Aspekt
war die Frage des Christentums. Europas Einheit wurde vor allem aus seinen gemeinsamen christli- chen
Wurzeln abgeleitet. Vor allem Grobritanniens Auftreten und Beharren auf christ- lichen Werten aber
auch Frankreichs Rolle als Schutzmacht katholischer Missionare lie diese Staaten als Vertreter eines
aggressiven, missionarischen Christentums, und damit Kolonialismus, erscheinen. Das Christentum
wurde daher in Asien eher als Ar- gument fr eine heuchlerische Ummantelung von Machtansprchen
verstanden, wel- ches eine Expansion und ein Eingreifen in innere Angelegenheiten legitimieren sollte.
Japan hatte hier eigene Erfahrungen mit den Missionsversuchen des 16. Jahrhunderts gemacht. Diese
wurden als Bedrohung verstanden und fhrten mit zur Abschlieung Japans gegenber dem Westen
unter dem Tokugawa-Shogunat. Andererseits konvertier- te ein Teil der neuen Elite Japans Ende des 19.
Jahrhunderts zum Christentum, um da- mit seine Affinitt zum Westen zu betonen. Andererseits wurde
in der zweiten Hlfte des 19. Jahrhunderts auf asiatischer Seite das Argument, das Christentum wre
eine asiatische Religion, herangezogen, um dadurch, zusammen mit dem Hinweis auf den Missbrauch
der Mission, die Sonderrolle Europas zu untergraben. Dies wurde verbun- den mit dem Argument, die
Europer htten das Christentum nur nicht richtig verstan- den und mssten daher vom Osten
christliche Familienmodelle, Moral etc. wieder ler- nen. Dabei bernahmen sie die europischen
Zuschreibungen vom moralisch und religi- s berlegenen, aber politisch und wirtschaftlich schwachen
Asien; die Schuld hierfr wurde den Europern zugeschrieben. Wissenschaftliche und religise
Kongresse bele- gen die starke westliche Faszination an asiatischen Religionen (vom Weltparlament der
Religionen 1893 in Chicago ber den Berliner 5. Kongress fr Freies Christentum und religisen
Fortschritt 1910 bis zu den buddhistischen Kongressen in Berlin und Lon- don in den 1930ern). Unter
anderen war Rabindranath Tagores Ruhm in Europa und seine Briefwechsel mit Romain Rolland dieser
Zuschreibung geschuldet, Swami Vive- kananda grndete schon Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts Yoga-Schulen
fr reiche Amerika- ner. Aber auch fr manchen konservativen Christen diente der Verweis auf die
asiati- schen Gesellschaften mit ihrem scheinbar traditionsverhafteten Familienbild und ihrer
Alltagsreligiositt als Folie, um die Gottlosigkeit der eigenen Gesellschaft zu beklagen. Das Christentum
wurde somit in zweifacher Hinsicht zu einem Symbol eines degene rierten Europas. Einmal, indem
Missionierungsversuche als Ummantelung von Machtansprchen gedeutet wurden, zum anderen,
indem der Selbstdiskurs eines skularisier- ten Europas aufgegriffen und in die Deutung eigener religismoralischer berlegenheit umgemnzt wurde.
Tamai Kisak konstruierte, wie oben gezeigt, Europa eher als Kulturraum denn geographische
Einheit. Doch bildet dieses geographische Europa eine Hintergrundfolie, die im Kern nur aus wenigen
Nationen bestand, wie sich an den klassischen Bildungs- reiserouten asiatischer Besucher rekonstruieren
lsst. Unabhngig von eventuellen ko- lonialen Abhngigkeiten bildeten Grobritannien, Frankreich und

das Deutsche Reich das Zentrum. Danach folgten Italien, sterreich-Ungarn und Spanien sowie die
Schweiz. Interessant werden diese Zuschreibungen immer dann, wenn einer westlichen Nation die
Zugehrigkeit zu Europa abgesprochen wurde, wie dies mit Russland wh- rend des russisch-japanischen
Krieges geschah. Hier fhrte die Kombination von milit- rischer Schwche mit angeblicher Barbarei und
Rckstndigkeit dazu, dass sich Japaner als europischer als die Russen empfanden. Russlands
Zugehrigkeit zu Europa war somit auch auf asiatischer Seite umstritten. Die Japaner stilisierten sich
nach ihrem Sieg ber Russland als Retter Europas, ja als nun Europa gleichberechtigt. So bezeichnet
Tamai den Krieg zwischen Russland und Japan als Kampf der Zivilisation gegen das Barbarentum,
wobei Russland der Barbar ist.10 Untersucht man andere Zeitschriften und Berichte, so sieht man, dass
die Inder die englische Furcht vor Russland als Gegner im Great Game sehr genau wahrnahmen und in
diesem Zusammenhang bestndig das Argument von Russland als asiatischer Despotie hrten.
Islamische Gruppen sahen in Russland, teilweise auch in sterreich-Ungarn und Grobritannien, den
Gegner des Osmanischen Reiches und des Kalifen, und betrachteten damit Russland nicht als Teil einer
nachahmenswerten Zivilisation. Das Fehlen einer religisen Definition Europas spielt hier eine
entscheidende Rolle. So schloss der Kulturbegriff aus nichteuropischer Perspektive die Mglichkeit des
Europer-Werdens mit ein. Denn wenn Europa kein geographischer Begriff, sondern eine Bezeichnung
fr eine Zivilisationsstufe ist, konnte man hoffen, ein Teil Europas zu werden. Dies war auch ein
entscheidender Punkt hinter vielen Modernisierungs- und Verwestlichungs-Bewegungen. Nur das
scheinbar inklu- sive Modell einer Zugehrigkeit zur modernen, europischen Welt konnte diese nach
Innen legitimieren. Das berhmteste Beispiel ist sicher die dem Khediven Ismail Pascha zugeschriebene
Aussage, gypten wre nach den Reformen kein Teil Afrikas mehr, sondern lge in Europa.11 Und die
Europer forderten diese Reformen mit eben diesem Argument ein. Die ungleichen Vertrge etc.
wrden aufgehoben, die Unabhngigkeit gewhrt, sobald ein Land im Inneren und nach Auen
europische Standards eingefhrt und umgesetzt htte, so zumindest versprachen es die westlichen
Mchte.
An inneren Werten aber bot Europa Asien scheinbar nichts. Vom Westen lernen heit siegen
lernen bezog sich nur auf materielle Aspekte, wie der bekannte Ausspruch Zhang Zhidongs belegt:
chinesisches Lernen fr das Substantielle, westliches Lernen fr das Ntzliche. Insofern wurde zwar
Europa als einheitliche Kultur, aber fragmen- tierte Macht erlebt, die eben nicht als in allen Bereichen
berlegen definiert wurde zumindest am Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts. Wenn man den technischen
Vorsprung auf- holte, konnte man so ein Teil Europas werden ohne seine eigene kulturelle Identitt aufzugeben. Familien- und Geschlechterbeziehungen wurden oft thematisiert, doch eher selten zum
Vorteile Europas. Besonders Japaner sahen ihren eigenen Patriotismus als berlegen an. Europa schien
hier schon degeneriert, individualisiert, eine berreife Frucht, die nur noch gepflckt werden msse.
Auch wenn Tamai und mit ihm viele Ja- paner (und andere Asiaten) unverhohlen vieles an Deutschland
bewunderten, man poch- te doch auf die eigene berlegenheit und Unabhngigkeit. Europa war
einerseits der junge Spund, der einem den eigenen Platz streitig machte, andererseits aber schon so
dekadent und schwach, dass das Ende seiner berlegenheit absehbar war. Dies wird vor allem an der
Stelle ber die Lernfhigkeit der Europer und die Sprachbegabung der Deutschen im Besonderen
deutlich. Ob dies nun eigenen Wnschen entsprang oder auf verallgemeinerbaren Beobachtungen
beruhte, lsst sich anhand dieses Quellentextes nicht beantworten.

The source text in time context

Finally there must be mentioned that the preface of the East-Asia with its self-conscious tone in an
exceptional source of this period. It is an exception that the magazine was published by the Asians, as
well as the Asian part pleaded very confidentially for itself. Other known magazines, like the Indian The
Modern Review, reflected an ambivalent self-image. For Asian authors the status of the British colony,
that India had, represented a (reasoning) problem in argumentation. On the one side India was prud of
itself, on the other it was seen as it had an inferior feeling towards Europeans. Else, they expressed
critics in their mother tongue or via dedicated pamphlets. The confident style in East-Asia seems to be
symptomatic/characteristic to Japanese authors, that is for sure due to the fact that Japan was not only
formally independent (unlike India), but the modernization progress was also visible (in contrast to
China). Therefore, here should not be any strict separation in (opinion of a) Japanese in Germany, and
discussions led in Asia. Just as Tamai always kept contact with his (Japanese) homeland, in order to act
like an up to date economic mediator as well as attractive to the audience so had this homeland
interest in the meaning of the Western experts. From whom the idea about it came first, that is difficult
to say, also because at that time the Western elite took its form increasingly. Was it because of their
politeness as guests, of out of some political considerations, the position of Asians in Europe, as they see
it, was generally speaking very cautiously formulated. But that changed over the time -the World War I
was one of the dramatic moments. Even so, this magazine itself was something special. It was one of the
few regular and inclusive sources of Asian concepts of Europe and their homelands, contrasted with the
European self-image. The periodical (magazine) that speaks out the perspective of a (guest)foreigner in
such broad period of time in this way (stylistically seen), also speaks about how it was of a great interest
for Europeans, respectively to Germany, what Asians say Japanese have to say about Europe.