Page 233 - Changing Living Spaces

Agricultural Crises Due to Flood, Drought, and Lack of Sunshine

1,8

1,4

1,1

0,7

0,4

0,0
May(4) June(5) July(6) August(7)
Drought in 1799 Floods in 1803
Good harvest in1804 Bad harvest in 1816
Figure 6 A Comparison of a Drought Year in 1799, a Flooding Year in 1803, a
Good Harvest Year in 1804, and a Bad Harvest Year in 1816
Notes Monthly averages of weather points were drawn from the diaries’ descriptive
records on rainy, cloudy, and sunny days from May to August. A traditional lunar
calendar was adjusted to a solar calendar. A higher index indicates a rainier month:
extreme/heavy rain = 2.5, rain = 2, light rain = 1.5, cloudy = 1, and clear = 0.
Source Original digitised database from Amakusa-cho Kyoiku-iinkai (1985–1998);
UkM, Ueda Yoshiuzu Diaries.

achieved in 1798. The crucial point was the timing of the rain. Regarding
the rainy days in 1803, the number of days that rain fell was exception-
al. The case of 1816 may indicate that there was not enough sunshine in
July and not enough rain in August, so there was not enough mature rice
for the harvest.
In summary, there was no rainy season in the drought year 1799.
Second, the line plots for June (5) comparing the daily rainfall of 1799,
1803, 1804, and 1816, the 1803 curve of the flood year shows in the 1803
curve that the intense rains seems to be lasted longer than usual during
the rainy season. According to the diary, the heavy rain surely continued
from May 9 to 10, the fifth month of the lunar calendar (June 27–28 in the
solar calendar). Then there were floods. Third, comparing the case of 1816
with that of 1804, when there was a normal harvest, figure 5 shows that
the main rainy season in 1816 was not very strong. There were only a few
days of fine weather in July; it is assumed that there was a lack of a suffi-
cient amount of sunshine.

231