European vs Japanese Swordsmen: 16th through 19t centuries

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

Re: European vs Japanese Swordsmen: 16th through 19t centuries

Postby yeniseri on Sat Apr 23, 2016 2:36 pm

The 'Western" soldier always had a stronger foundation because of command and control along with better nutrition and training. There is no doubt that the single Japanese samurai was adept but the !one strike draw! was superior in single combat.

Portuguese and Spanish soldiers tended to have the stronger proxmity (conquest, colony, translators (Italian, Portuguese and Spanish) to Asia and therefore were able to discern the strength and weakness (of the Asian soldier generally) and could plan for them through command and control. Plus, the adage that states 1 candle can light up the area but dozens of candles in coordination can transform the battlespace with usage of modern battle techniques to gain superiority through firepower.
When fascism comes to US America, It will be wrapped in the US flag and waving a cross. An astute patriot
yeniseri
Wuji
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:49 pm
Location: USA

Re: European vs Japanese Swordsmen: 16th through 19t centuries

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:59 pm



A fun read. I feel like I may have read it before? Did you write this? Very nice for a non-peer reviewed article. I had trouble finding much fault with it. ;D
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2610
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: European vs Japanese Swordsmen: 16th through 19t centuries

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Sat Apr 23, 2016 4:03 pm

yeniseri wrote:The 'Western" soldier always had a stronger foundation because of command and control along with better nutrition and training. There is no doubt that the single Japanese samurai was adept but the !one strike draw! was superior in single combat.

Portuguese and Spanish soldiers tended to have the stronger proxmity (conquest, colony, translators (Italian, Portuguese and Spanish) to Asia and therefore were able to discern the strength and weakness (of the Asian soldier generally) and could plan for them through command and control. Plus, the adage that states 1 candle can light up the area but dozens of candles in coordination can transform the battlespace with usage of modern battle techniques to gain superiority through firepower.


And yet the Japanese successfully expelled the Spanish and Portuguese from Japan? I also like the primary source that talked about the European super power admonishing their military not to mess with the Japanese. It's worth remembering that, by the late Seventeenth Century Japan boasted the largest city in the world. We also know that (before they were kicked out or killed) the Europeans were quite impressed with the cleanliness of Japan compared to home. ;)
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2610
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: European vs Japanese Swordsmen: 16th through 19t centuries

Postby RickMatz on Sat Apr 23, 2016 4:34 pm

Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:


A fun read. I feel like I may have read it before? Did you write this? Very nice for a non-peer reviewed article. I had trouble finding much fault with it. ;D


No, I stumbled across it on Facebook and thought that you guys might find it interesting.
RickMatz
Huajing
 
Posts: 357
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 6:17 pm
Location: Near Detroit

Re: European vs Japanese Swordsmen: 16th through 19t centuries

Postby yeniseri on Tue Apr 26, 2016 12:23 pm

Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:
yeniseri wrote:The 'Western" soldier always had a stronger foundation because of command and control along with better nutrition and training. There is no doubt that the single Japanese samurai was adept but the !one strike draw! was superior in single combat.

Portuguese and Spanish soldiers tended to have the stronger proxmity (conquest, colony, translators (Italian, Portuguese and Spanish) to Asia and therefore were able to discern the strength and weakness (of the Asian soldier generally) and could plan for them through command and control. Plus, the adage that states 1 candle can light up the area but dozens of candles in coordination can transform the battlespace with usage of modern battle techniques to gain superiority through firepower.


And yet the Japanese successfully expelled the Spanish and Portuguese from Japan? I also like the primary source that talked about the European super power admonishing their military not to mess with the Japanese. It's worth remembering that, by the late Seventeenth Century Japan boasted the largest city in the world. We also know that (before they were kicked out or killed) the Europeans were quite impressed with the cleanliness of Japan compared to home. ;)



I just happened upon the most recent version of Classical Fighting Arts magazine
Now on bookshelf! The use of muskets (similar weapons) per document sources uses a date of 1538! (my years could be off) but the Japanese army has always used musket like weapons since that time period. The samurai class was not the Japanese army, as you know. I believe the article stated the Portuguese introduced said musket weapon when they landed!
Barnes and Noble > Classical Fighting Arts (in the BJJ, Black Belt, TKD magazine area) Excellent read. The article goes through the historical periods and gives an abbreviated synopsis per martial traditions.

http://www.classicalfightingarts.org/
When fascism comes to US America, It will be wrapped in the US flag and waving a cross. An astute patriot
yeniseri
Wuji
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:49 pm
Location: USA

Re: European vs Japanese Swordsmen: 16th through 19t centuries

Postby Marko on Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:52 pm

yeniseri wrote:I just happened upon the most recent version of Classical Fighting Arts magazine
Now on bookshelf! The use of muskets (similar weapons) per document sources uses a date of 1538! (my years could be off) but the Japanese army has always used musket like weapons since that time period. The samurai class was not the Japanese army, as you know. I believe the article stated the Portuguese introduced said musket weapon when they landed!
Barnes and Noble > Classical Fighting Arts (in the BJJ, Black Belt, TKD magazine area) Excellent read. The article goes through the historical periods and gives an abbreviated synopsis per martial traditions.

http://www.classicalfightingarts.org/


First firearms used in Japan, called teppo, were imported from China in XIII century. They were used and developed sporadically since then, but not to any great extent. Widespread use was seen only after Oda Nobunaga (one of the most important daimyos of the Sengoku period) equipped his soldiers with matchlock muskets (Portuguese design, but Japanese made) and had tremendous success on the battlefield with them before his untimely death. Had he not done that (especially the battlefield success part), it would be debatable whether the use of firearms would spread through Japan at all. That said, by all accounts Oda was an all around genius, not only when it came to warfare so what part of his battlefield success came from "superior" European weapons and what to his shrewd command is also debatable. On a similar note, I don't really know where you are drawing the proofs for better command, control and training in "Western" soldiers. I'd like to hear more about that. I doubt one could make an argument for it. Even better nutrition is debatable, IMO.
Last edited by Marko on Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Marko
Anjing
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 3:26 pm

Re: European vs Japanese Swordsmen: 16th through 19t centuries

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:30 pm

Just echoing what Marko said: yes, guns were around before the Tanegashima (as the matchlocks came to be known), but were viewed as exotic collector's items, not used in war.

Marko, I think you are underselling Nobunaga's importance. He was the first of the Great Unifiers and paved the way for Hideyoshi. Certainly there is room for debate about which of the three were the most important Daimyo, but Hideyoshi and Ieyasu only came to rival Nobunaga's power after Honoji.

I don't think it's really much of a debate as to whether matchlocks were going to catch on (even though I have seen it argued), although Nobunaga certainly is the most famous for exploiting them at an early date. Nobunaga was as skilled tactician, but I would argue (and have, publication pending--I hope) that his true genius lay in reversing the Sengoku trend of "authority of power trumping the power of authority." Moving his capital away from Kyoto, abandoning imperial titles, establishing guild-free zones, and, most importantly, claiming divine authority, all helped to bring an end to gekokujo and pave the way for the early modern period.

But, I think we are in agreement about yenseri's statements re command etc...
Last edited by Ian C. Kuzushi on Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2610
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: European vs Japanese Swordsmen: 16th through 19t centuries

Postby Marko on Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:49 am

Hi Ian. Yes, my post really does read that way, doesn't it. FWIW, I think we are in complete agreement on all counts. It was late here when I posted and I didn't pay much attention to word choice when I posted ;D

I agree that Oda Nobunaga was tremendously important, not only in the field of battle (and not even primarily there). I wanted to stress the fact that he was the first to use tanegashima extensively, and that it was his tactical acumen (and not only Portuguese weapon design) that is to credit for subsequent widespread use of them, since, as you say, prior to that, firearms were more curiosities than weapons for use. In that, and in his brilliant social engineering, I do believe he is probably the most important of the Great Unifiers. Yeah, I agree that, had he not been that astute, some other daimyo would eventually do the same or similar thing, but when and to what end remains for speculations.

Great to hear about your paper, sounds very interesting. Good luck with publication, I'd love to read it once it's available.
Marko
Anjing
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 3:26 pm


Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests