Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 43

Thread: Validity of sources

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    186
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default Validity of sources

    using the strictest guidlines for the validity of sources, what is there available to research?

    * physical artifacts: archeological digs, surveys and independant study. actual weapons, evidence of battle, or training equipment, to name a few.

    * 1st hand writings w/independant non-vested interest translation. works written by the MAist his/her self.

    * 2nd hand accounts/observations (ship logs and travel journals of visitors for instance).

    * Historical context...does all the supporting evidence coincide with prior historical findings for that time period and place?

    * verbal history: useful to find out about their and previous generation but unreliable beyond that since a person can only recall with certainty what they personally witnessed.

    * Folklore: Handed-down stories can tell us a great deal about the society who creating them. Folklore is usually at least partially based on fact, it's often a place to start when nothing else presents itself.


    so, when authors present 'theories' ...or as people call them: "theoroids" You should look for solid and traceable sources.
    Old tactics that seem to be making a come back even stronger recently is in citing sources with intent to deceive. Often we read a cited fact, and since it was cited, we don't question it...especially if it comes from a rare collection.

    ways of source misuse:

    1. Referencing a ficticious/non-existant source.
    2. Falsifying the source's conclusion or taking out of context it's reference.
    3. Translation coercion. (translating in a way that better suits your own conclusions).

    with those three tricks, anyone could 'prove' their own theoroids for whatever gain.

    sources are everything when someone presents a theory. anyone else know of tricks of the 'research' trade to sell books and material?

    I mean, the research is only as good as it's sources, translation credability and intellectual connections to make a larger picture theory. take away any one of those plugs, and you end up with a burning case of theoroids.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    In the KMA, the on-going struggle is one of perpetually working to make a place for documented sources in a world dominated by folklore and oral traditions.

    Confucian and Neo-Confucian culture esteems age and position out of all proportion to reason. Sociologically a case can be made for this and within the context of the typical community perhaps its not a bad thing. However, where research and objective analysis are concerned, such reverence for age and position are too often used as a shield against delving too deeply into a subject. Belief-based conclusions built on absolute faith in the utterances of one's teacher or seniors are often taken and upheld over documented fact in the name of "respect". It would be nice to hear how others frame the use of "oral traditions" within the context of their research. Thoughts?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    For rigor, the non-academic hobbyist community is absolutely brutal. Online writing can be really rough in this regard.

    For lack of rigor, the dissertation community huffs and puffs, but my experience suggests that the profs tend to be pretty lazy about checking sources. Where they get you in trouble is that sometimes they HAVE read that obscure citation, and reach back on the shelf to look it up -- or, worse, they pay for the software that checks your stuff for plagiarism. After that review, however, hardly anyone will ever look at a dissertation again.

    Political, business, and religious writing tends to pick and choose their citations carefully. The tendency is to glorify the patron (hagiography) or an attempt to convince by omission. The writers are not telling lies per se; it's just that they fail to mention certain things that might lead one to alternative conclusions. Much of the martial art history approved by the national federations falls into this category.

    In theory, historical and anthropological writings recognize and correct for these tendencies. History tends to rely largely on written sources, whereas anthropology gives more weight to things that are personally witnessed or heard by the observer.

    Sources themselves are generally divided into archival, primary, secondary, and tertiary works. Archival sources are things like photos or graves. For example, a photo of Tokugoro Ito appears in the Seattle papers in 1909. The photographer was Rogers. We do not know that the photo was taken in 1909, but we can be quite confident that this photo was making the rounds in 1909. Primary sources are written by someone who was there. Problems here are that people tend to be boastful or apologists. Secondary sources are things written by people who were not there, but who conducted interviews, reviewed primary sources, and read other secondary sources. Many newspaper accounts and academic tomes fall into this category. And tertiary works are the stuff one finds when people didn't do much research. Student papers (and much martial art history) fall into this category.

    Many, perhaps most, writings actually represent some combination of these three categories. For example, Winston Churchill's books about WWII are a combination of primary and secondary research. Churchill was active in politics at the time, was privy to many decisions affecting the outcome of the war, and doubtless read lots of reports and talked to lots of people. But he also had political axes to grind, state secrets to keep, and of course was never physically present at places like Tobruk or Singapore in 1941.

    The question of what to believe then falls to the critical judgment of the reader. Even the most careful reading of the available information can lead to conclusions that are superseded by later documentation, and even the biggest yahoo can occasionally be right. So, in this regard, the reader is a jury of one.

    In other words, after reviewing the available evidence, please state, on a more probable than not basis, which story is correct?

    Toward convincing the jury (assuming that the jury's mind is not already made up!), then having sources that you can externally verify is very important. Thus, whenever possible, I try to find sources that one can find online. This doesn't mean that's where *I* first found it, but that way, you're more likely to be able to read what I read, and decide for yourself. Even then, your mileage may vary. After all, you have read different things than me, or may not trust pre-WWII Japanese American community newspapers as far as I do.

    But, as a rule, if you're interested in documented history, insist on sources -- and then follow them! Meanwhile, if you're interested in the folklore, bring a tape-recorder, because then you can document changes in the story over time.

    For further reading on this, I recommend Tom Green's essay "Sense in Nonsense," in "Martial Arts in the Modern World," in Green and Svinth, eds., (2003). Tom's a professor of folklore studies at Texas A&M and a member of E-budo, and most of the essay can be read online at Amazon.com.
    Last edited by Joseph Svinth; 5th December 2006 at 03:30.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Svinth
    For rigor, the non-academic hobbyist community is absolutely brutal. Online writing can be really rough in this regard.

    For lack of rigor, the dissertation community huffs and puffs, but my experience suggests that the profs tend to be pretty lazy about checking sources. Where they get you in trouble is that sometimes they HAVE read that obscure citation, and reach back on the shelf to look it up -- or, worse, they pay for the software that checks your stuff for plagiarism. After that review, however, hardly anyone will ever look at a dissertation again.
    Well done, Joe. And now you have brought us to the pretty pass in which most contributors to many such forums find themselves-- that of presenting documented fact in the face of the desire of the population to keep things based in belief. I note your use of both religion and politics as examples of selective choice of citations and resources. I would certainly as MA to this as you seem to have added them in your post.

    I mention this because I would add the three most common "weapons" I have found used against the inclusion of sound research in the MA community.

    a.) The single most common opposition comes in the form of accusations that the individual is not of sufficient age, experience, knowledge and standing to speak to the subject under examination. In a community which has raised "arbitrary" to an artform, there is, of course, no way to satisfy such an indictment but it does have the effect of cooling discussions and dissuading investigation.

    b.) The second most common tactic seems to be the use of ( or lack of) personal testament. Probably the most common example of this is that only a Japanese can truely understand Japanese traditions, only a veteran can truely appreciate battlefield experiences and only an alcoholic can truely communicate with another alcoholic concerning Recovery.

    c.) The third most common objection is that intellectual examination of a predominantly kinesthetic experience is at best "mental masturbation" and, at worst, an affront to lineage, teacher, art, culture and so forth.

    Please note that all of these objections share two attributes. One is that they are all emotional responses to an otherwise intellectual process. The other is that, in no way, can an individual ever hope to satisfy these objections. And while the rarified atmosphere of learned publications may appreciate a well-supported contribution, majority of forums I have been exposed to not only resist, but open fear, this sort of practice. FWIW.

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    Bruce --

    There are several problems with forums. One is size. Do you read posts that are thousands of words long? I don't, so I'm guessing that you don't, either. Online articles, sure; they can be books for all I care. But, when I go to an online book or e-journal, I expect to be there a long time. I'm not just sneaking in for a quick look-see.

    Another is the drivel factor. A very good post can be surrounded by drivel. Thus, you may not see it, because the stuff before caused you to believe that the entire thread was drivel. Thread drift is related.

    A third is that everyone with a keyboard starts out equal. This offends lots of Famous Folks, most of whom expect everyone to treat them like their sycophantic students do. This can be a bit rough on the ol' ego, especially at first.

    A fourth is that people forget that online communication is not really supposed to be a Rorschach blot, in which you reveal your innermost thoughts to the world, or shock-jock journalism, in which you reveal all your prejudices and bigotries to the world. Keep those to yourself. Online, don't say anything you'd hate to read years later on a Google cache...

    But, to your issue -- how to present documented fact? One of the ideas behind the establishment of EJMAS was simply to provide a place where articles could be printed in their entirety. One isn't forced to read the article, or to agree with it, but it was (and is) really nice to provide a URL for bulletin board postings. If you want to know about the topic, here is a lengthy discussion, with citations and notes, and if you don't, well, don't go there.

    And, sometimes, you just gotta start the ball rolling. Write for the drawer, and you can feel smug and superior, but when you die, the kids will put it in the dumpster. Put it out there, and the reviewers will be savage, but you've hopefully moved the barrier up a notch for the next guy. Put another way, if one sees farther than others, it is because he stood on the shoulders of giants.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Dear Joe:

    I agree completely with your sentiments. I would also add that not a few members of the MA community are of a mind that MA is simply not a field that lends itself to competent research. As I write this I am thinking of comments I recently read in the book by Brian Kennedy and Elizabeth Gou book on Chinese MA manuals. Arguably the work itself was not a little self-serving, but it was of some service, I feel, that they were able to single out a few people who have begun to "raise the bar" in this field including Stanley Hennings and Tang Hao. These folks, however are notable in their small number and I wonder if this is a matter of limited career opportunities in such a specialized field, or if the demand for such scholarship does not provide sufficient incentive. Thoughts?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    Bruce --

    It's isn't that the field doesn't lend itself to competent research. Instead, it's a matter of following the money. Career opportunities in martial art research are very limited. As far as I know, John Corcoran, Stan Pranin, and Mike DeMarcos make their living from MA, but without knowing anybody's finances but my own, I'd be willing to wager that a lot of folks here earn more money every year, at their day jobs, than any two of them combined. Of the people you mentioned, Brian Kennedy is an attorney, and his wife is a translator. Stan Henning is a retired Army officer who now works for the government. Tom Green, Will Bodiford, Kim Taylor, and Karl Friday work for universities. Robert W. Smith used to work for Other Government Agencies. And so on.

    So, if you have a day job and want to write, you need a day job that doesn't burn you out, that gives you lots of free time, and that pays enough that you can afford old books and trips to the library. In my experience, this is not easy to arrange. When I have the time, I don't have the money, and vice-versa, and psychic energy does run out from time to time.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Svinth
    Bruce --

    It's isn't that the field doesn't lend itself to competent research. Instead, it's a matter of following the money. Career opportunities in martial art research are very limited. As far as I know, John Corcoran, Stan Pranin, and Mike DeMarcos make their living from MA, but without knowing anybody's finances but my own, I'd be willing to wager that a lot of folks here earn more money every year, at their day jobs, than any two of them combined. Of the people you mentioned, Brian Kennedy is an attorney, and his wife is a translator. Stan Henning is a retired Army officer who now works for the government. Tom Green, Will Bodiford, Kim Taylor, and Karl Friday work for universities. Robert W. Smith used to work for Other Government Agencies. And so on.

    So, if you have a day job and want to write, you need a day job that doesn't burn you out, that gives you lots of free time, and that pays enough that you can afford old books and trips to the library. In my experience, this is not easy to arrange. When I have the time, I don't have the money, and vice-versa, and psychic energy does run out from time to time.
    I can appreciate that the field of Martial Arts is not exactly what anyone would call "lucrative". Historically, even the better teachers taught out of their houses, taught MA as secondary to some other line of work or simply taught to keep their "hand in" with the MA community of their choice. I see writing as very much the same thing. Its a "labor of love" pure and simple.

    My sense is that the MA community does not make much room for folks who want to deal in facts, though. So much of the MA is based on constructed histories, misrepresented bonafides, contrived material and questionable standings that its no wonder that a person can go mad just trying to sort it out. But my point spoke to the fact that not many people show much inclination towards WANTING things sorted out and made clear. There is very much a need to keep the Oriental "inscrutable". As I write this I am thinking of Henning's comments on the source of Shaolin mythology having its base in 18th Century Chinese opera rather than historical fact. All the same, it is all too common to see people continuing to perpetuate the myth of Chinese Boxing beginning with Bodhidarma. Too often I am left to consider that "against stupidity even the gods labor in vain", yes?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    To quote Tom Green (at length!):

    QUOTE:

    To reiterate, the literal, documented, and historiographical accuracy of martial histories is not an issue in the present analysis. Neither is accuracy an issue to students of the martial systems in which these stories circulate, in part because questioning too rigorously can (and often does) lead to expulsion or resignation from the system. At the same time, however, these stories serve quantifiable functions for group members. These functions range from encouraging a sense of group pride to demonstrating the proper procedures for doing something as straightforward as asking to get a drink of water.

    Comparing folk histories to invented traditions (here defined as “instant formulations of new traditions”) is instructive. Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger (1983) contend that invented traditions serve the respective functions of establishing social cohesion, legitimizing institutions or “relations of authority,” and socialization. Although the historical narratives of the martial arts should be viewed as consciously organized and utilized rather than invented, they serve the same ends as invented traditions. For instance, martial art narratives provide a common ground for instructors and students. In addition, they perpetuate the manners and habits of foreign cultures. Finally, they improve group solidarity.

    At the same time, the stories and personal narratives suggest attitudes and strategies for dealing with persecution or violence (these are among the lessons of Shaolin resistance to foreign rule) and encourage a particular mindset. This unitary worldview is conducive to extraordinary bonding, and is one reason that the Marine Corps began stressing “Warrior Values.”

    Finally, the stories seek to minimize the stresses resulting from the physical and psychological demands of a rigorous curriculum. Virtually all systems develop narratives claiming a previously closed nature for their arts. In the “bad old days,” training was far harder than it is today, or it was available only to a particular ethnic group, banned by authorities, or otherwise limited in circulation. The rhetoric of such narratives suggests that modern students should be grateful for any access at all: No price is too great to pay.

    Because these constructed histories draw on traditional models found in both folklore and comic books (see Lewis, 1987), we give blatant charlatans too much credit when we accuse them of creating a martial art myth out of whole cloth. Returning to the observations of El-Shamy, we note a set of central motifs

    * Childhood difficulties

    * Early weakness being offset by emergence of mentor or guardian figure demonstration of superhuman strength and ability

    * Rapid rise to prominence

    * Struggles against representatives of evil

    * Proneness to pride or other personality defects

    Consequently, biographies of the Founder often include the following features

    * Claims of mixed ethnic ancestry, typically resulting in the Founder being bullied as a child

    * The Founder being taught an ancient, covert art by a family member in order to overcome illness, persecution, or personality defect (especially temper), or by a family friend in order to repay a debt to the Founder’s parent

    * The Founder’s exceptional devotion to training leading to rapid advancement (typically a master’s rank at a young age)

    * A final lesson in humility from a mentor figure

    * Finally, superhuman exploits against forces of evil

    Thus, these accounts present us with a series of contradictions. While martial art practitioners continually modify their stories in response to contemporary events, their folk biographies remain remarkably consistent in their plots and presentation. While martial art stories seek to reassure the listener that the art he is learning has not changed in decades, the stories themselves are in a constant process of revision, reformulation, and mutation. Finally, although most recent history can be documented using newspaper articles, promotion certificates, photographs, and interviews, it remains almost impossible to set down a history of a martial art that both practitioners and non-practitioners will accept.

    On the other hand, we can attend to the relationships between martial folk histories and the group contexts in which they exist. Barring outright commercial exploitation, these histories are for the most part, to quote Nagamine (2000: 116), “positive and serve to teach important lessons.”

    END QUOTE

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    "......
    Comparing folk histories to invented traditions (here defined as “instant formulations of new traditions”) is instructive. Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger (1983) contend that invented traditions serve the respective functions of establishing social cohesion, legitimizing institutions or “relations of authority,” and socialization. Although the historical narratives of the martial arts should be viewed as consciously organized and utilized rather than invented, they serve the same ends as invented traditions. For instance, martial art narratives provide a common ground for instructors and students. In addition, they perpetuate the manners and habits of foreign cultures. Finally, they improve group solidarity.

    At the same time, the stories and personal narratives suggest attitudes and strategies for dealing with persecution or violence (these are among the lessons of Shaolin resistance to foreign rule) and encourage a particular mindset. This unitary worldview is conducive to extraordinary bonding, and is one reason that the Marine Corps began stressing “Warrior Values.”

    Finally, the stories seek to minimize the stresses resulting from the physical and psychological demands of a rigorous curriculum. Virtually all systems develop narratives claiming a previously closed nature for their arts. In the “bad old days,” training was far harder than it is today, or it was available only to a particular ethnic group, banned by authorities, or otherwise limited in circulation. The rhetoric of such narratives suggests that modern students should be grateful for any access at all: No price is too great to pay.
    ...................................."

    All good and true enough. I wonder, however, if you just made exactly my point?

    Given all of the "services" that such traditions provide, would it not follow that an academic approach to the MA might be seen to undercut these same traditions and the services they provide to the arts? For instance, if contrived traditions or constructed histories are seen to aid in group cohesion, would it not follow that less romantic or "convenient" views might be seen as a threat to that cohesion? In like manner, if a particular oral tradition supports the authority of a hierachy, might not an intelligent examination into and report on that hierarchy be viewed as a threat to authority?

    To my own questions I want to answer "yes" but I also hold out hope that there might be some reconciliation between what I see as two very disparate approaches. I wonder if there are examples where such detente' has been accomplished? Thoughts?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    Bruce --

    Judo and boxing generally respect both the traditions and the documentation.

    At the other extreme, professional wrestling has two camps, those who like the documentation (small) and those who like the camp (large). Because the money is almost entirely with the camp (known today by the euphemism, "sports entertainment"), that is where most McDojo operators ultimately head.

    In my opinion, understanding the professional wrestling model is very, very important for understanding the marketing of commercial martial arts.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    186
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    interesting thoughts so far.

    Bruce, agendas and investure probably run as rampant (percentage-wise) in MAists publishing books as there are MAists on forums. There's going to be spin wherever we go and wherever we read.

    I'd imagine whats even harder to decipher are the special interests of past authors who are now long dead.


    BTW,
    if you haven't already, have a look at "Marrow of a Nation" (by 'Andrew Morris' - author is no relation to me).
    http://www.amazon.com/Marrow-Nation-...e=UTF8&s=books

    when you superimpose that book's info (particularly the CMA section), with the training manual compilation by Kennedy you mention...it gives an interesting composite.


    thats all anyone can really do...make composites by overlaying mutually exclusive sources. the most popular/reasonable author views bubble to the top and become quotables on forums and references in subsequent publications. then the reference perpetuates for better or worse without anyone ever looking up the source of the original reference to it.

    one lesson learned should be from the Gichen Funakoshi / Iha Fuyu translation of the supposed Shuri 'weapons ban' proclamation document. That translation in the early 30's was central to 'legitimizing' Karate....it remained mis-translated for 50 years until in the late 80's, Prof. Mitsugu Sakihara of the University of Hawaii demonstrated it was a stockpiling of weapons...not a ban.

    The probable motivation by Iha and Funakoshi for mistranslating was evident...they needed a historical reason how Karate developed while downplaying it's Chinese roots. What better way for a weaponless art to develop than among the Okinawan people during a weapons ban!

    sad part is...people still buy books where this mistranslation is propegated.

    really have to be careful what we read....

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Dear Ed:

    Thanks for the resource. Its always great to get productive titles. Joe (Svinth) has done me much good service with any number of titles he has run across.

    BTW:

    Is the "ban" you are speaking of the much-touted proscription against weapons following the Japanese (Satsuma) incursion in 1607? The reason I ask is that I was of an understanding that a personage no less than Napoleon Bonaparte once alluded to an Asian nation where all weapons were banned and I had taken that as a kind of affirmation that such a ban was historically accurate. Comments? Thoughts?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    Ed --

    Stan Henning turned me on to Morris's book. See Stan's essay in "Martial Arts in the Modern World." You're right; it's good stuff. (Though about as popular as garlic in a vampire convention.)

    See also http://seinenkai.com/articles/henning/index.html , where you'll find links to some articles, and citations for more.

    Bruce --

    KRONOS, 1509:

    A monument is built at Shuri, Okinawa, to honor the accomplishments of the Ryukyuan King Sho Shin. In 1926, the Okinawan scholar Iha Fuyu interprets that part of the monument reading "Swords and bows and arrows exclusively are accumulated as weapons in the protection of the country" to mean that the king had ordered the collection of all the iron weapons in the country. In 1987, Professor Mitsugu Sakihara of the University of Hawaii showed that this was a misinterpretation of the text, and that King Sho Shin was actually stockpiling arms rather than suppressing them.

    Sources: Monument and correct translation: Sakihara, 1987, 164-166, also 199, fn. 76; Prohibition myth: Funakoshi, 1981, 30-31; Kerr, 1958, 105-107; Footnote: Okinawan swordsmen at Malaka: Kerr, 1958, 127; Strauss, et al, 1991, 684-699; Absence of resistance: Bishop, 1989, 139-140; Funakoshi, 1981, 12-13; Haines, 1968, 79.

    See also 1609:

    Samurai belonging to the Satsuma clan of Kagoshima, Japan, raid the Ryukyus. Although Japanese historians rarely admit this, the Satsuma brought with them 700 muskets and 30,000 bullets. The chief exception is Hokama Tetsuhiro, who wrote in 1984 that the Okinawans believed that the firearms were some kind of magic stick. He added that the Japanese lost 7 musketeers, 6 archers, and 44 pikemen during a forty-day campaign that caused the death of over 500 Okinawans. While this raid was of little importance in 1609, during the mid-seventeenth century the Satsuma began using it as justification for organizing "tribute" expeditions that were little more than government-sponsored smuggling operations. (Barred from trading directly with China or the West except through heavily watched Nagasaki, the Satsuma were of course free to do any trade they liked in their Okinawan "protectorate.") The Satsuma raid became historiograpically important following the Meiji Restoration of 1868, as it gave the Japanese the excuse they needed to occupy Okinawa in 1879.

    Sources: Bottomley and Hopson, 1993, 128-137, 149, 151; Kerr, 1958, 158-165; Personal communication with Graham Noble dated 6/96; Perrin, 1979, fn., 27-28; Sakamaki, 1963, 89-92; Turnbull, 1991, caption, plate 10

    ***

    Doesn't mean I'm right, of course, but that's my take on the sources.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Lindenhurst, Illinois
    Posts
    1,114
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    ".......Samurai belonging to the Satsuma clan of Kagoshima, Japan, raid the Ryukyus. Although Japanese historians rarely admit this, the Satsuma brought with them 700 muskets and 30,000 bullets. The chief exception is Hokama Tetsuhiro, who wrote in 1984 that the Okinawans believed that the firearms were some kind of magic stick. He added that the Japanese lost 7 musketeers, 6 archers, and 44 pikemen during a forty-day campaign that caused the death of over 500 Okinawans. While this raid was of little importance in 1609, during the mid-seventeenth century the Satsuma began using it as justification for organizing "tribute" expeditions that were little more than government-sponsored smuggling operations. (Barred from trading directly with China or the West except through heavily watched Nagasaki, the Satsuma were of course free to do any trade they liked in their Okinawan "protectorate.") The Satsuma raid became historiograpically important following the Meiji Restoration of 1868, as it gave the Japanese the excuse they needed to occupy Okinawa in 1879.

    Sources: Bottomley and Hopson, 1993, 128-137, 149, 151; Kerr, 1958, 158-165; Personal communication with Graham Noble dated 6/96; Perrin, 1979, fn., 27-28; Sakamaki, 1963, 89-92; Turnbull, 1991, caption, plate 10
    .........................."

    Thanks, Joe:

    That puts quite a different spin on things for me. For quite a while now I had been working to reconcile the activities of the 'WA-KO" (See: SO Kwan-wai) with the autonomous nature of pre-1609 Okinawa with Ming China. (See: Kerr). The conclusion I was moving towards was the idea that the Japanese may have grown tired of relating to the Okinawans as peers so as to use the islands as a base of operations for their expansion south. The missing pieces were the roles of the Portugese, Spanish and Dutch all of whom have been mentioned in the "WA-KO" materials I have found. As much as I would like to agree with your thoughts about the Satsuma working to get out from under the administrative thumb in Japan, I took the view that they also may have feared encroachment into their "sphere of influence" by Western elements moving up from the Phillipines and Indonesia. Thoughts?

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
    Bruce W Sims
    www.midwesthapkido.com

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 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
  •