Link to Women and Books in Japan (Cambridge)
Okay, back to Onna daigaku. We've now reached the Kyoho period. Ishikawa tells us that in 1716, there was the simultaneous Osaka-Edo publication of Onna daigaku takarabako, the first of a flock of similarly-named texts. It followed the example of Onna Imagawa and Onna jitsugokyô in organization and content, arranged in the form of admonitions. Similarly, aside from being a reader, it was also a calligraphy copybook. Furthermore, it was profusely illustrated.
According to Ishikawa, it's not clear why this (these) texts were called Onna daigaku. The editor is not named, there is no preface, and there's no indication in the main text either. It's entirely speculative to say so, but during the early modern period education for boys was drawn from Confucian curriculum, Song studies (= neo-Confucianism) was very influential, so the Four Books was the basis of education. The Four Books were Daxue, Zhongyong, Lunyu, and Mengzi, and of these, Daxue was the most important. So, perhaps Onna daigaku was thus named in order to function in girls' education the same way that Daxue did for that of boys? In other words, girls should have it to hand, internalize its principles -- the first, most important moral textbook.
Click "read more" for the rest.
Ishikawa continues, there's long been a belief that Kaibara Ekken wrote Onna daigaku, and even today a lot of people continue to think so. This is probably because there's a colophon in Onna daigaku takarabako's original printing that says, "related by Kaibara Ekken sensei." There's actually a short afterword in the edition that says that Ekken secretly had a hand in it. Ekken had published Precepts for Children in the Japanese Manner five years earlier, and died the year before Onna daigaku takarabako was published. Since the content of the latter is very similar to Volume 5 of the former, the claim seemed to have credibility. Ishikawa provides a chart offering a line-by-line comparison of the two texts, and concludes that while Onna daigaku takarabako draws on the content of Precepts for Children Volume 5, the differences are too great to allow you to conclude that they had the same editor. Either Kashiwahara Seiemon 柏原清右衛門, who published Onna daigaku takarabako, borrowed freely from Ekken's book, or just followed his own preferences.
There are other differences, also. Ekken was a philosopher, and he held and wrote about profound and complex beliefs related to the nature of human beings and the universe they lived in. Qi, li, the Way, and people's innate goodness all figured largely in his thinking; he believed that education was necessary in order to cultivate prevent the loss of the virtuous nature with which people were born. He addresses himself to all, regardless of class, status, occupation, or gender. That is not to say that he rejected the distinctions that were commonly made at the time. Onna daigaku takarabako simplifies his teachings quite a bit but it still reflects some of his respect for the education of all people.
Ishikawa's commentary continues on into the end of the Edo period and the beginning of the Meiji period, but I'll stop my summary here with a final note: he points out that in the second part of the early modern period, Onna Imagawa and texts of that ilk were largely supplanted with those related to Onna daigaku takarabako, as demand rose for readers and calligraphy manuals aimed at commoner girls (both members of middle-income families and girls brought into the household as servants) since their content was useful in preserving the ie system.
See also: Basil Hall Chamberlain, "Educational Literature for Japanese Women," The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, New Series, Vol. 10, No. 3, Jul., 1878, pp. 325-343.
