Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Samurai atrocities

  1. #1

    Default Samurai atrocities

    We often get so worked up talking about samurai honor and chivalry we can forget that the period relevant to our discussions was that of a brutal civil war. And just like in contemporary Europe, codes of chivalry, if they existed, only applied to other samurai. Now, the Chinese and Koreans spared no details as to Japanese brutality towards civilians during the Imjin War yet popular sources are much more quiet towards Japanese domestic atrocities. Was this part of a deliberate policy of the Tokugawa later regimes to paint the Sengoku Jidai as a period of nostalgia, where the samurai were not only chivalrous but well-behaved? Or were the samurai in fact far more humane to civilians of their home nation compared to outsiders?

  2. #2
    Lord Baal's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Republica de Venezuela
    Posts
    6,704

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Well I think Bushido does not forbid to kill womens, children, olds, (civilian in general). But don't take my word on this, I might be wrong. Perhaps some other mate here with better (real) knowledge of Bushido can explain this better.
    PROUD TO BE A PESANT. And for the dimwitted, I know how to spell peasant. <== This blue things are links, you click them and magical things (like not ending up like a fool) happens.
    Visit my utterly wall of doom here.
    Do you wanna play SS 6.4 and take your time while at it? Play with my 12 turns per year here.
    Y también quieres jugar Stainless Steel 100% en español? Mira por aca.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Quote Originally Posted by Stellerex View Post
    We often get so worked up talking about samurai honor and chivalry we can forget that the period relevant to our discussions was that of a brutal civil war. And just like in contemporary Europe, codes of chivalry, if they existed, only applied to other samurai. Now, the Chinese and Koreans spared no details as to Japanese brutality towards civilians during the Imjin War yet popular sources are much more quiet towards Japanese domestic atrocities. Was this part of a deliberate policy of the Tokugawa later regimes to paint the Sengoku Jidai as a period of nostalgia, where the samurai were not only chivalrous but well-behaved? Or were the samurai in fact far more humane to civilians of their home nation compared to outsiders?
    There were plenty of domestic atrocities - Oda's famous torching of 2934823423 temples come to mind. Do you mean military "atrocities" in general during the Sengoku era, or are you looking for specific actions of specific samurai?

  4. #4

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Quote Originally Posted by Ying, Duke of Qin View Post
    There were plenty of domestic atrocities - Oda's famous torching of 2934823423 temples come to mind. Do you mean military "atrocities" in general during the Sengoku era, or are you looking for specific actions of specific samurai?
    The Sengoku Jidai in particular. Actually Oda Nobunaga is the best example of a ruthless daimyo, when he burned those temples he spared not women or children inside, and his soldiers stayed outside to cut down any who tried to escape.

  5. #5
    Daqin's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chattanooga TN, USA
    Posts
    190

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    We all know it happened, its just a question of how widespread it was. Nobunaga's destruction of Enryakuji on Mt. Hiei is certainly one of the worst examples, but its also a well documented one, so its hard to say if that's closer to the exception or the rule.

    Speaking of Nobunaga, a far smaller scale example occurred on the day he died. To be certain that no alarm was raised and that neither Nobunaga or Nobutada had time to escape, Akechi Mitsuhide sent out a small advance force to literally clear the outskirts of Kyoto before the attack. This meant summarily killing anyone unfortunate enough to have risen early that morning and be out in the fields, gathering water, travelling, etc. It was a very practical precaution and wasn't carried out maliciously, but nonetheless, dozens of innocent people were killed, women and children included, cut down by either samurai or ashigaru under their command. These things happen in war.
    "There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."
    - Sima Yi

  6. #6

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    We all know it happened, its just a question of how widespread it was. Nobunaga's destruction of Enryakuji on Mt. Hiei is certainly one of the worst examples, but its also a well documented one, so its hard to say if that's closer to the exception or the rule.
    I'd argue that "atrocities" (defined here as just terrible things that happen to people) happen at the fall of every clan, at the fall of every castle. The basis for this is that we have specific instances recorded in history where it would go something like this: and the order was kept and there was no looting, killing, or wanton destruction. My guess is that the author wouldn't specify such a condition unless it was considered to be unusual.

    An additional bit of food for thought: one of the first things given to every daughter born into a samurai family upon her coming-of-age ceremony is a small knife. I do not need to go into much detail, but there is one chapter in the Dai-nihon-shiryo (だいにほんしりょう) that details horrible things that were done to women. You can figure out what the knife is for - she is trained in its usage.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Quote Originally Posted by Stellerex View Post
    We often get so worked up talking about samurai honor and chivalry we can forget that the period relevant to our discussions was that of a brutal civil war.
    I dont see anyone getting "worked up" about samurai honor and chivalry. Can you show some examples of this?

  8. #8

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Generally it didn't make much sense for the samurai to abuse their peasant population during a time of war. Those peasants could probably escape into another clan's territory, considering if the clan's land was unstable. After all, the 16th cnetury was the age of the farmer-warrior. Those farmers could just join another lord or take up arms against their leaders - 'the poor oppressing the strong' I think was the term used by Japanese historians for the social background of this era.
    Then again that doesn't mean it didn't happen - I'm sure on an individual basis the samurai did kill and rape civilians. I also think they casually looted villages/towns of thier resources and destroyed that which they could not take.

    Interesting enough during the Shimabara Rebellion of 1638, a samurai lord did wrap his peasants in straw capes then set them alight. Under a feudal government there is not much consideration given to those on the lower rungs of society's ladder, or protection from abuse on that matter. As for the Imjin War, the samurai did cause large scale devastation of the Korean population. Oda Nobunaga's destruction of temples has already been brought up, and I'm sure I've read that slaughtering peasants and burning villages was common during the Genpei War in the 12th century - even though early samurai combat was much more ceremonial. I'll have to check up on this again.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Anyone have any references on the subject of "samurai atrocities" that they would care to share with the rest of us so we can see were you are getting your information from? You must have read it some were.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lordbaal19 View Post
    Well I think Bushido does not forbid to kill womens, children, olds, (civilian in general). But don't take my word on this, I might be wrong. Perhaps some other mate here with better (real) knowledge of Bushido can explain this better.
    I really doubt it. I dunt know about Bushido but I know that in imjin war Jap troops slaughted a great deal of Koreans and POW.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    It's a war .... of course there are atrocities, what do you want to discuss?

    I really don't want to know the details of how samurai armies rampaged villages and raped/slaughter... If you are interested just read Eji Yoshikawa's "Mushasi" or if don't like reading something that can kill a cat when thrown at, try reading its manga translation "Vagabond"

  12. #12
    Daqin's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chattanooga TN, USA
    Posts
    190

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Quote Originally Posted by SanadaYuki View Post
    It's a war .... of course there are atrocities, what do you want to discuss?

    I really don't want to know the details of how samurai armies rampaged villages and raped/slaughter... If you are interested just read Eji Yoshikawa's "Mushasi" or if don't like reading something that can kill a cat when thrown at, try reading its manga translation "Vagabond"
    That's a good book, as is Yoshikawa's "Taiko." I recommend reading both. Yes, they are each over 900 pages, but so what: they're worthwhile, and most people need to read more, anyway.
    "There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."
    - Sima Yi

  13. #13

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Quote Originally Posted by american samurai View Post
    I dont see anyone getting "worked up" about samurai honor and chivalry. Can you show some examples of this?
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=445102

    Maybe "worked up" is the wrong word but are you really disputing that 'samurai' is synonymous with 'honor'? The point of this thread was to talk about an aspect of the Warring States Period of Japan that isn't seen through rose-colored glasses.

    As for books, why don't we start here?

    http://www.amazon.com/Samurai-Source...6424906&sr=1-1

    http://www.amazon.com/Hideyoshi-Harv...6424897&sr=1-1

  14. #14

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    I think its important to keep in mind that our modern notions of "Bushido" did not really exist in the time period in question.

    The exemplar samurai, Musashi, even if we are to take his claims at face value (which we should not) was a man who not above assassinations, murder, cheating and even killing children. The history of the samurai of the era is full of betrayals, fratricide and piracy. They would have found the idea of selfless loyalty to ones lord, of fighting to the death and unflinching honour rather amusing. The very idea of a Bushido code is really a late 19th century/20 century invention.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Quote Originally Posted by Stellerex View Post

    Maybe "worked up" is the wrong word but are you really disputing that 'samurai' is synonymous with 'honor'?
    It really depends on who you are talking to. Most people with any knowledge of history understand that all warlike civilizations use death and destruction to achieve their goals. To me "samurai" means soldier. People who do not really have an interest in the subject may believe in fairy tales but most people who post here seem to have a sightly more realistic grasp of the subject, just different opinions on the finer points. Samurai in general were not worse or better than any other civilization, and like people from other civilizations certain individual samurai did strive to live their lives to a higher standard than the average person.

  16. #16
    Ashu-Siralis's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    VA, USA
    Posts
    1,048

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    I think it's important to make a note on historical and cultural narratives here.

    Any h/c narrative, be it the narrative of freedom in America or Bushido in Edo period Japan, is constructed to bolster a certain ideology. Historians write history to privilege certain narratives over others. The same is truer about social philosophers, such as those that constructed the notions of Bushido. These narratives have the main function of maintaining a power hierarchy and status quo, and all the nice things, such as compassion, kind treatment of peasants and women, etc. are appeals to innate empathy in human nature (the post modernists that were with me just jumped off a bridge) to justify the real crux of the narrative: that is, to preserve and put forth a system of power. For that purpose, Bushido was remarkably successful: the Tokugawa regime enjoyed a loyalty from its vassals and retainers that was quite rare in an decentralized, feudal society.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Well, I wouldn't call it an atrocity per-se , more like a standard morbid cultural variation, but I was interested to learn that the Samurai were "head hunters " . Taking heads as trophies was apparently common practice. I've seen a picture where a Samurai's horse furniture is decorated with a string of human heads .
    Oda Nobunaga had a party once which featured a display of a collection of defeated factions generals heads.
    " Head hunters " seems to generally conjure up images of painted savages with bones through their noses running around the jungle. But head hunting was apparently a common fixation among civilized folk up until rather recently. They were still putting heads on spikes on tower bridge in England in the 17th century, and the original symbol of French republicanism was the guillotine. And I suppose it is no more curious than the practice of execution by lethal injection as underlining vindication of justice is.

  18. #18
    Daqin's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chattanooga TN, USA
    Posts
    190

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    A severed head was the best proof of a person's death in those days, and publicly displaying heads at city gates, market places, etc., was meant to serve as a deterrent. In eastern cultures (meaning the sino-sphere, places directly influenced by Chinese culture, which of course includes Japan), there was a great deal of shame attatched to losing one's head, and to an extent, suffering any form of bodily mutilation (pre or post mortem). This has its roots in classical Confucianism, specifically the Xiao Jing ("Classic of Filial Piety"), which states that since one's body is a gift from one's parents, one should take the utmost care of it, not the least of which includes keeping it intact. In ancient China, this extended even to the hair: neither men nor women would cut it, though they would wear it up in a bun of some sort whenever in public. Having one's hair cut off was a particularly shameful punishment, not unlike losing one's nose and ears, being tattooed as a criminal, and so forth. Many would prefer to be executed than to suffer such punishments. Also related to this is that traditionally, only men would be beheaded, while women would be poisoned or strangled, the rationale being that the latter kept the body intact (though notably, men would occassionally be strangled 'like a woman' as an especially shameful form of execution). An interesting side note to this is related to when the Qing (Manchus) conquered China in the 17th century and forced the native Han Chinese to cut their hair in the Manchu style to symbolize their submission--the Manchu queue (shaved top of the head, long braid in back, as the Chinese typically appeared to Westerners in the 18th-19th centuries). Phrases such as "keep your hair and lose your head" or "cut your hair and keep your head" became common.

    A lot of this carried over to Japan. While it became popular for the samurai class to shave their forelocks, their overall hair remained long (unless shaved as in the case of devout Buddhists and monks), though again like the Chinese, would always be worn tied up in a queue whenever in public. And of course, many samurai didn't shave any part of their heads. Conversely, there were times when a samurai would "take the tonsure" as a sign of either great shame or for purposes of mourning. Hideyoshi was said to have done this before the battle of Yamazaki for the late Nobunaga.

    Getting back to the head taking, there was often a degree of reverence taken with the heads of defeated enemies after a battle, especially those of famous people (unless they were infamous). And of course, presenting the head of a noteworthy opponent to one's lord was a sign of great achievement. If the deceased's head fell into the hands of family or someone who respected him, it might be buried honorably, and in some cases (though this was more common in ancient China), an effigy of the rest of the body, often carved out of something valuable like sandalwood, would be buried with the head in place of the corpse, symbolically making the person whole again. This notion of keeping the body whole can also be seen in the way hari kiri was carried out when the person committing suicide had the fortune of having a second. Instead of dying by effective self disembowelment--a slow and horrific death--the second would stand by with his sword drawn (this person would be either a friend or a respected enemy) and behead the condemned as soon as the latter plunged his knife into his stomach. Ideally, however, the head would not be completely severed in this case, but would remain attatched by a thin strip of flesh. Doing this properly required a great deal of skill.

    One last thing about beheading in general: as awful as it would be to watch, it was considered to be a humane form of execution, escpecially compared to the many horrific ways (which were meant to be torturous) people were executed in ye olden days. The guillotine in particular was noted as a humane way to behead someone rather than rely on an executioner with an axe, who might be sloppy or even take his time on purpose. When Charles I of England was executed, he purportedly paid his executioner to do it quickly and cleanly, as doing so was not necessarily the norm, particularly for hated public figures like himself. Of course the same thing could happen with the guillotine if the blade wasn't kept sharp, as it sometimes purposely was not...
    Last edited by Daqin; May 28, 2011 at 12:55 PM. Reason: typos
    "There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."
    - Sima Yi

  19. #19

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    On the subject of severed heads, the "kubi oke" or head bucket was an important item in feudal Japan at one time, now another very rare item with not much information available. Here is a link to an article from a 1921 newspaper. http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...g=2127,1712834

    A picture of a kubi oke that was destroyed during ww2 from http://english.tsukudo.jp/treasure-backet.html



    And the only other kubi oke I have seen.



  20. #20

    Default Re: Samurai atrocities

    Quote Originally Posted by american samurai View Post
    It really depends on who you are talking to. Most people with any knowledge of history understand that all warlike civilizations use death and destruction to achieve their goals. To me "samurai" means soldier. People who do not really have an interest in the subject may believe in fairy tales but most people who post here seem to have a sightly more realistic grasp of the subject, just different opinions on the finer points. Samurai in general were not worse or better than any other civilization, and like people from other civilizations certain individual samurai did strive to live their lives to a higher standard than the average person.
    That's nice and all but the other question for this thread was, if the atrocities were so widespread, why were they so poorly documented? Was it because it was really of no interest or did someone have an agenda in making this period seem rosier than it really was?

    Anyway, the following is an account of the massacre at Shikano castle (1581) found in the Shinsho Taikoki and portrays the event in a level of detail which is apparently rare for the period:

    Morishita and Nakamura (Mori retainers) entered the castle gate and as they looked around they saw crucified bodies without heads hanging in a line, and near to them were also the children of the eight rebels who opposed the lord. 'This is what has happened to these people' was written in large brush strokes on a paper flag set up beside them. They could not endure the pain, and shed tears in sorrow as they contemplated each crime resulting from the actions of this detestable fellow. With feelings of great bitterness, they joined together the corpses and their respective heads, and returned to Tottori.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •