Changes

Reconstruction of the palace was delayed numerous times, both due to financial concerns given the newness of the Meiji state and [[Meiji government|government]], and due to debates over the style and material the new palace should be built in.<ref>Fujitani, 67.</ref> Construction was finally begun in [[1884]], and completed in [[1888]], with the Imperial family taking up residence early the following year. According to numerous sources of the time, [[Tokyo]] was only an ''[[anzaisho]]'', a temporary base for a Court in motion, until that time, with the 1888 structure being the first in Tokyo to be called ''kyûjô'' (宮城, "Imperial Palace") rather than merely terms such as ''kôkyo'' ("imperial residence"), and with Tokyo's status as the sole Imperial capital (''teito'') ongoing until that time.<ref>Fujitani, 36-37, 44-45.</ref> Further, Imperial communications, among other documents from the time, suggest that until the 1880s, the Imperial Palace was seen as less a national symbol, and more a mere residence. Historian [[Takashi Fujitani]] goes so far as to suggest that up until [[1883]] or so, there may not have been even a single urban planning proposal which featured an Imperial Palace at the center of the new capital.<ref>Fujitani, 71.</ref>

Reconstruction of the palace was delayed numerous times, both due to financial concerns given the newness of the Meiji state and [[Meiji government|government]], and due to debates over the style and material the new palace should be built in.<ref>Fujitani, 67.</ref> Construction was finally begun in [[1884]], and completed in [[1888]], with the Imperial family taking up residence early the following year. According to numerous sources of the time, [[Tokyo]] was only an ''[[anzaisho]]'', a temporary base for a Court in motion, until that time, with the 1888 structure being the first in Tokyo to be called ''kyûjô'' (宮城, "Imperial Palace") rather than merely terms such as ''kôkyo'' ("imperial residence"), and with Tokyo's status as the sole Imperial capital (''teito'') ongoing until that time.<ref>Fujitani, 36-37, 44-45.</ref> Further, Imperial communications, among other documents from the time, suggest that until the 1880s, the Imperial Palace was seen as less a national symbol, and more a mere residence. Historian [[Takashi Fujitani]] goes so far as to suggest that up until [[1883]] or so, there may not have been even a single urban planning proposal which featured an Imperial Palace at the center of the new capital.<ref>Fujitani, 71.</ref>

By 1883, however, there had begun to be a significant shift in attitudes or perspective among the Meiji elites, who now began to look towards developing Tokyo into a modern, national(ist) capital, impressive and symbolically powerful like those of the European nations. A petition to [[Prince Arisugawa Taruhito]] written that year by [[Kawaji Kando|Kawaji Kandô]] is representative of the new view on this subject, expressing the need for an "eternal and immutable palace in Tokyo," which would reflect the majesty of the emperor and of the nation to all those who saw it, including foreign dignitaries and Japanese officials and [[kazoku|nobility]]. In the petition, Kawaji also emphasizes that while the "temporary court" model was appropriate in ancient times when material culture (''bunbutsu'') was undeveloped, in this new modern period, Japan not only could, but should employ its modern architectural resources and technologies to build something demonstrative of those abilities.<ref>Fujitani, 68-69. Kawaji was the grandson of [[Kawaji Toshiakira]], who oversaw the reconstruction of the [[Kyoto Imperial Palace]] in the 1850s.</ref>

By 1883, however, there had begun to be a significant shift in attitudes or perspective among the Meiji elites, who now began to look towards developing Tokyo into a modern, national(ist) capital, impressive and symbolically powerful like those of the European nations. A petition to Imperial Prince [[Arisugawa Taruhito]] written that year by [[Kawaji Kando|Kawaji Kandô]] is representative of the new view on this subject, expressing the need for an "eternal and immutable palace in Tokyo," which would reflect the majesty of the emperor and of the nation to all those who saw it, including foreign dignitaries and Japanese officials and [[kazoku|nobility]]. In the petition, Kawaji also emphasizes that while the "temporary court" model was appropriate in ancient times when material culture (''bunbutsu'') was undeveloped, in this new modern period, Japan not only could, but should employ its modern architectural resources and technologies to build something demonstrative of those abilities.<ref>Fujitani, 68-69. Kawaji was the grandson of [[Kawaji Toshiakira]], who oversaw the reconstruction of the [[Kyoto Imperial Palace]] in the 1850s.</ref>

As construction neared completion, the Imperial Household commissioned numerous artists, textile producers, and the like, including [[Iida Shinshichi III]] of [[Takashimaya]] and [[Kawashima Jinbei II]], in [[1887]], to produce works for decorating the palace.<ref>Ellen Conant, "Cut from Kyoto Cloth: Takeuchi Seihô and his Artistic Milieu," ''Impressions'' 33 (2012), 75.</ref>  

As construction neared completion, the Imperial Household commissioned numerous artists, textile producers, and the like, including [[Iida Shinshichi III]] of [[Takashimaya]] and [[Kawashima Jinbei II]], in [[1887]], to produce works for decorating the palace.<ref>Ellen Conant, "Cut from Kyoto Cloth: Takeuchi Seihô and his Artistic Milieu," ''Impressions'' 33 (2012), 75.</ref>