time_consume_me

I have to reply to this, it's my major field too (makes me wonder if we've met). My impression is that all of these programs/schools are great.

Columbia and Michigan are hard to compete with on a Early Modern/Modern South Asia level, especially if working on India. They both have stellar placement records and impressive faculties. Michigan having just hired Mrinalini Sinha and with plans to hire two more South Asianists in the very near future. Columbia, with its team taught Nicholas Dirks/Partha Chatterjee advanced South Asian history course, might offer the most provocative course in the country. Michigan and Columbia also have pretty good guaranteed funding packages and there doesn't seem to be much of a problem getting external funding for further language training and/or archival research. Then it comes down to location. Ann Arbor or NYC? Columbia gets to offer an Ivy League consortium and the Inter-University Consortium (NYU, Columbia, Fordham?, CUNY, Princeton, Rutgers?, ), both provide incredible access to other University's, their faculties, libraries, centers, etc. Michigan, on the other hand, has agreements with Big Ten schools and has a working relationship with UToronto, with a good likelihood of working with UChicago and other regional schools (just not a close-by as those around NYC).

Chicago would be an excellent place for a person especially interested in Bengali history, as they boast Dipesh Chakrabarty and Rochona Majumdar and have done well to produce high level scholars. Funding is precarious for some, excellent for others, but with an offer, you should know about the funding package at each of the respective schools listed.

Harvard, in my humble opinion, isn't great as it only has Sugata Bose to offer in the history department, an imminent historian, no doubt, but it seems limited for Harvard. There is a good relationship between Harvard and Tufts, where Ayesha Jalal has done an impressive job orienting advanced study in history toward South Asia. So a person with interests in revolutionary history, Indian ocean, and South Asian Islam would do well at Harvard/Tufts.

Finally, Princeton is a curious place for South Asian history. Of course they have Gyan Prakash on faculty and his eclectic tastes would probably suit anyone's interests. Along with Prakash you have Bhavani Raman, an historian of early modern scribal cultures in India. So, Princeton offers breadth that Harvard/Tufts and Chicago don't seem to. On the other hand, Princeton, an awesome department, doesn't seem to have a strongly articulated institutional interest in South Asia, unlike all of the other schools mentioned.

I can't give a numbered list; however, I think my preferences are somewhat clear.

They can ... if you're an Americanist.?

If you're an aspiring or new graduate student and you think you may end up in the private sector, I recommend carefully researching the industries in which you might want to work, the potential impact of AIs and ASIs on those industries, and then using your outside field to develop skills that aren't going to be replaced by an app on a cell phone in the next twenty years.
Simultaneously, I recommend that you locate and read the (in)famous STFU thread over at the CHE fora as well as other resources that will help you learn the fine art of drinking STFU and staying in your lane. Ultimately, work in the private sector is about generating revenue while cutting costs and keeping your bosses happy. Often, the historian's skill set can collide with those objectives, especially when you're convinced that you're right and that your bosses just need to understand where you're coming from so that you can save them from themselves. 
In these situations you'll be Cassandra to Mr/Ms. You Can't Tell Me Shit/Figure It Out and Get It Done. What then?
On top of that, there will be the tension between your political/philosophical viewpoints and the hard reality that vast swaths of the private sector are right of center because Republican politicians promise tax cuts and deregulation. And did your CEO just quote the Great Orange Overlord? Did your managing principal just go on a rant with racist undertones about Americans exercising free speech during the playing of the national anthem? Did the Galadriel of your organization just make a nativist statement in an email to everyone in your division? Yes, yes, and yes and yes! Now, get back to work, and don't forget to fill out your time card project tracking report .

Having seen this "rule" in action, I am 99% sure it is actually a way to nicely tell a student that they don't want to work with them.

Oh boy - I recently re-read my freshman year intro to history research proposal and was reminded that at one point I wanted to study the history of music. To be more specific - the history of the hardcore punk movement in D.C. I find the way music genres evolve and change overtime due to external influences (e.g. demography) to be very fascinating, and for a while I was convinced that I was going to be a punk historian. Beyond that I also have a soft spot for Tudor History and American Colonial History (particularly Roanoke).
(Also - this is my first post on here! Been lurking forever, so hello!) 

You would have to write the entrance examination, in addition to all the steps of obtaining MEXT.
If you can make it through all the rounds though, the security is unmatched -- the scholarship continues for the duration of your studies in Japan and is automatically extended if you move on from MA to PhD. Moreover, you are given up two years as a 'research student' to prepare for those entrance exams while taking advantage of affiliation with that institution.
 
I would add to @hirosh's post that an 'in' with your prof can help big time on the entrance process. At another national university, for example, the interview provides a great opportunity to make your case to your supervisor and a few other faculty members. This might allow you to make up for a weak showing on paper. It's all about who you know.

I'm not in a MLA field so, take this with a grain of salt, @my_muse. When we recently read applications for a position in my department (teaching-focused institution), we all focused primarily on the person's teaching experience and then, from there, looked at their research to think about the courses they'd be able to teach easily and the types of electives they might offer. I will also say that applicants with scant teaching experience who didn't also put some serious thought into the paragraph(s) about teaching in their cover letter didn't make it very far in the review process. In fact, that was one of the easiest ways to weed people out.
I'll also note that it was super obvious who followed Kelsky's cover letter format and who didn't. On the one hand, following that format meant that I knew exactly where to look for certain information. On the other hand, knowing where to look for specific things led me to gloss over other parts of the cover letter. For my own letters, I did change the structure depending on the type of institution (I also change the order of categories on my CV) because I want to make sure that teaching-focused institutions understand me and why I'd want to work there, rather than somewhere research-intensive (and vice versa!). If you want to be thought of as a serious teacher for a job where teaching is 65+% of your job, I would make sure your cover letter reflects that. If teaching is an afterthought in your letter then, at least for my own department, I don't want to hire you because I already have enough teaching to do.

Good luck surviving in a PhD program with an attitude like this. 

Congrats on graduating! Double woo! to the first gen, and to your other academic accomplishments. 
I have done my share of ESL and Social Sciences teaching during/after college. I think you could take advantage of this because part of the PhD is developing teaching skills. Other grad school skills that you can cultivate while teaching are time-management for reading, synthesizing ideas for non-specialist, and using materials (teaching materials or historical sources) in creative ways. 
Now, how to stay sharp? I don't think any of us is 'sharp' but I kind of get what you mean  I'm on several listservs from the US and from the countries I focus on in order to keep up with what's going on. I may not participate in the conference that they send, but if you see there are three local conferences on women and labor, you pick up that there is a common question circulating among scholars. I also follow people on Twitter and read some blogs regularly. Finally, I set up a Google Scholar alert for key words that interest me. Joining the AHA is a good idea if you are going to use its benefits. When I worked as a teacher outside of the US, I preferred being a member of the British counterpart, the Historical Association. It was more oriented to teaching, and I developed great materials with their publications. A subscription to the Chronicle of Higher Ed could also do the trick.
Since you are still dubious about your field -which is great- start big and general. Read/keep up with larger issues, don't worry about geography. For example, if you are interested in women and labor, focus on that without trying to pinpoint the theme to a map. That will come along. 

I had my CV (sparse as it was back then) online on academia.edu in my first year as an undergraduate. I've often seen other undergraduate and MA students post their own academic CV's online as well - it's certainly not a PhD only thing.

@Sigaba is certainly right about online security. My answer was in the context of given that you are going to have a web presence for your academic life, there's no cons to putting up a CV in your first year vs. your 4th year (or after graduation) other than what I wrote about having better use of your time/efforts. That said, as @Sigaba advised, one should certainly be mindful of what gets put up there! 
Personally, I chose to not separate my personal and professional social media. Well just barely: Facebook for social/personal interactions with both my friends and professional colleagues which whom I choose to have personal/social connections in addition to professional ones. I use Twitter for more professional interactions and for posting things that most of my Facebook friends (family and non-academic friends mostly) would not find interesting (e.g. oh look I found a new algorithm that does X 4% faster! or tweeting at conferences).
I made this choice for myself because I do not want people to see me as "only" a scientist. By "people", I mean my professional colleagues as well as the general public. I think part of removing the ivory tower image of academics is to show that academics are people first and their profession second. In addition, I freely post political stuff and advocate strongly for what I think our field should do in regards to equality etc. I know that this is counter to some advice (e.g. by "The Professor is In") and due to my junior status in my field, I have a lot less protections than if a tenured professor posted similar opinions. However, I decided that I can't just wait until tenure to be the "real" me (and I may never get there anyways). I think I can do more good by being outspoken now than potential harm (and that the downsides, to me, are worth it). 
And finally, I feel an obligation to do things within my power and to speak out where I can because in general, I'm in the majority group for my field. To me, I believe that if there is a reasonable action I could take that will help people, it's my moral obligation to do so.

A related aside: lots of scholars have been choosing to leave academia.edu, primarily because of its shady, nontransparent profit status and its data policies. I suggest checking this article out, it also includes alternatives: 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/drsarahbond/2017/01/23/dear-scholars-delete-your-account-at-academia-edu/#26fedab62ee0
It's a much easier decision for more established scholars to make, though.

In general I would advise against going to a school where there is only one researcher with interests similar to yours. Regardless of tenure, what if that person gets sick or leaves, or you two just don't get along (which does happen!)? Even if you do get along and everything is wonderful, you will need to be able to put together a committee for your dissertation/thesis, and you will need to have at least three people who can write you LORs if you want to apply to any job or further education. Having just one person is not enough. 
As for the question of having an assistant professor as your advisor, there are good and bad sides to it. There is always some risk that s/he will not get tenure and will have to leave before you graduate, and then you are stuck. There is also an option that they are a rising star and get poached by a better school. Assistant professors will often have a better understanding of what it's like to be a student and to be on the job market, because they have had those experiences more recently, and they may be more driven to publish, because they are on the tenure track. They may be more easy to relate to and (as a sweeping and not exceptionless generalization) they may be more supportive of diverse applicants than some older professors. On the other hand, they will be less experienced and may take time to adjust to advising, and they may be more demanding than you'd like in terms of work hours -- so there are potential good and bad aspects of each option. At the end of the day all that matters is what the particular person you are considering is like. You should talk to them and to their current students to get a sense of whether you'd get along with this person. 

I chose my advisor, worked with other professors. I am really not sure why you discuss these issues without any knowledge about them, each and every one of your guesses are wrong. I just said that the MA is better than in the US, I do not think the PhD is better but then again, I think it is comparable to many countries

So.... Anyone think I still have a chance for a SSHRC? I'm 70 and we only take 44.... Concordia University. I keep trying to math out the different probabilities.... 

I asked the right people. I cannot say more than that in case they could get in trouble.
Try asking your program chair, program director or/and graduate assistant. They may be able to get you something ? 

Wait a tick... They announced OGS??? How... When..?
Also, let's just talk about the fact that announcements are 3 days away. 

That's because for Internationals there isn't much. There are those fellowships, a few other ones in that caliber (Marshall etc.) and then there's being lucky in terms of negotiating politics. I have heard that if you do a two year program, they won't offer much for year one, but if you do well and people like you, they'll find a way to establish residency for you and therefore be able to offer you partial or full scholarships for the second year.

If you're looking to go abroad for cheap quality education, I cannot recommend German schools and programs highly enough. 

Grant documents arrived for Japan today (actually arrived yesterday but I was out of town), and wow, the stipend for Graduate Research Fellows is NICE. Now I'm even more excited

The way I understand is that out of all direct applicants that were forwarded to the national competition last year, about 1/3 ultimately got the award

This forum might as well be renamed "perfectionists suffering from OCD and anxiety."

Dear hojoojoh,
    You'll be in Kobe?  Awesome!  I noticed that you are coming from Montreal.  Do you attend McGill?
    I research Edo period visual culture.  The last chapter of my dissertation is looking at woodblock printed books and the construction of race in the late Edo, early Meiji years, so there might be some overlap with our research there.  There are lots of interesting books about the treaty port states that few people have touched in the secondary literature.  I am slightly obsessed with one book that narrates Napoleon's upbringing, which includes him slaying a giant whale/alligator? thing (鰐鮫）hahaa.   
    I lived in Kyoto as an undergraduate for a semester, and then did research at Tsukuba University in Ibaraki between my MA and PhD.  The dorms at Tsukuba were horrendous.  I had a sink in my room, had to pay 100 yen everyday for the student bathhouse - it was not good.  BUT it was sooooo cheap.  I think the rent was about $300?  With regards to the JLPT, I passed N1 in 2013.  
   I am planning on going to a conference in Kobe, which I think might be in October or November, so we should keep in touch.  I said I would leave in mid-August, so I will be there a little ahead of you.  Best of luck finishing your thesis and defending!  I'm trying to finish my proposal and get a draft of one of my chapters before I go.  Having gotten the Fulbright really puts some more gas in the engine.  Must. Not.  Disappoint!      

Cool topic! Best of luck with finishing up your thesis.  I'm working on education and pedagogy of elites in Heian and Kamakura Japan.
We definitely should meet up. I'm sure there will be some events in Tokyo and other major areas for Fulbright, so there should be opportunites. And I'm hoping to travel quite a bit, so I'm sure we'll be in the same neck of the woods at some point. 
I lived in Yokohama from 2010-2011 (went to IUC), and did a few short stints in Tokyo for MA and PhD research. No JLPT for me though; I'm hoping to take N1 next summer as I figure a year abroad may help there. Haha, there are only a handful of threads on here about studying in Japan, and pretty sure I've read them all, so I understand the urge! Feel free to pm any questions if you don't wanna derail the thread.

I got my EAPSI fellowship offer for Japan and received confirmation last week Friday! Now just waiting on Kwansei Gakuin University and JSPS to approve and get a final acceptance. Best of luck to everyone else, Japan or otherwise!

@Neist, @TakeruK, @nevermind Thanks for your perspectives. I think what I'm taking away from this is that I need to talk to the current grad students and learn about their post 5 year funding situations. Cheers.