ARCHIVE TABLE / TERM UNDER EXAMINATION

大東亜Daitōa

A learning chamber for examining the phrase “Greater East Asia” through documents, maps, testimony, and postwar interpretation.

190019051931194019421945
FILE 01 / AFTERMATH

Meiji aftermath and imperial vocabulary

Modernization, treaty revision, military victory, and regional ambition changed how empire was discussed. The archive asks how words of “order” and “civilization” traveled beside coercion.

Classroom note: distinguish state aims from lived experience. Documents can reveal confidence in policy while hiding the costs imposed on colonized communities.

「近代化」was not a single road. It was argued, exported, resisted, and administered through unequal power.

Folded continental map: boundaries shown as argument, not certainty.
FILE 02 / 1931

Continental expansion

The Manchurian Incident and subsequent occupation demonstrate how military initiative, resource strategy, and diplomatic crisis converged. The visual register stays provisional: lines move, overlays disagree.

CLASSROOM FRAME / TERMS

Ideology, propaganda language, and 「共栄」

co-prosperityempireoccupation

Political language presented hierarchy as liberation and mobilization as shared destiny. The lesson is not to repeat slogans, but to inspect how slogans recruited emotion and obscured violence.

Glossary: “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere” was an official wartime slogan; this exhibit treats it as contested rhetoric requiring evidence and context.
WITNESS FILE / OCCUPIED TERRITORIES

Administration, mobilization, and everyday coercion

Documents from occupied territories record labor demands, resource extraction, schooling policies, censorship, and survival strategies. Blank fields mark lives absent from state reports.

NAMEPLACETESTIMONY
drag acetate
1945

Surrender did not end interpretation; it began decades of memory, denial, testimony, restitution debates, and classroom responsibility.

POSTWAR INTERPRETATION

After empire: memory under examination

The final table leaves space for questions. Which archives remain closed? Whose testimony is centered? How do educators separate historical explanation from justification?