40 replies to this topic

[mariusj]

The difference between a Shogun and a Regent has everything to do with heritage, and land.

I assume you are talking about Kampei.

Hideyoshi chose Kampei because that is the second best choice. The amount of land he own is more than enough to proclaim a Shogunate. He controlled territory from former Mori to Mino, with all the major Daimyos submitting to him.

Hideyoshi was not eligible to become Shogun because he had no lineage to Minamoto.

To either the Genji clan or the Taikra clan.

And if you have no land then you cannot be a daimyo (by definition) and you cannot be a Shogun unless you are a daimyo (unless there is some technicality I am missing). To be Shogun you also must have unified Japan(obviously I suppose).

A shogu is still a daimyo even if you are kicked out of your land.

Togukawa did not unified Japan when he became the Shogun. Few became Shogun when they unified Japan.

A Shugo daimyo was a governor basically, and a Sengoku daimyo was basically a local warlord that evolved from a Shugo daimyo.

You also need to know Japanese titles were given randomly, distantly, and 'emptly'

A Shugodai could definitely EFFECTIVELY become a daimyo. Effectively, however, Hideyoshi was shogun but OFFICIAL he was not.

Oda was a Shugodai. Almost EVERYONE of the daimyo you heard of is Shugodai except for a few with very noble lineage.

THe next technicality was Hideyoshi was a retainer of the Oda clan of which he was never the head of the Oda clan officially.

You can be both a daimyo and someone's retainer at the same time. Much like a baron is a noble while still a retainer to the king.

And he was effectively and officially the head of Oda after the death of all three sons, and the puppet grandson became the official ruler.

He was a warrior of a daimyo, but since he was not the head of the Oda clan he was not a daimyo and Harima officially was an Oda holding....and like I said he was never official the head of the Oda clan.

What？
You honestly don't have an understanding of feudal system do you?
Either way, land can have multi tier ownership.

Hideyoshi did not even receive a family name until 1585...so he could not have been a daiymo until that point anyway, and at that point he was Regent.

...
Then what is Hashiba? Just because he was from a peasant family doesn't mean he didn't make a name.

So it all comes down to technicalities...but when you are discussing titles technicalities are everything.

I am discussing technicalities. But you are missing the technicalities.
Shogun could be landed or not. Daimyo could be landed or not.

We are way off topic. Can you just stop using basic general claims such as Hideyoshi didn't become Shogun because he wasn't a daimyo, etc etc. And focus on the small things.

[jamjoh]

The word daimyo is formed from "dai" meaning large or great and "myo" for "myoden" literally name-land which means private land. So yes a daimyo has to have land. In much the same way that a Baron has to have a land but a knight doesn't. Knight can equate to a samurai and a daimyo is more like a baron.

Hideoyoshi underwent so many name changes because he didn't have a surname. Eiji Yoshikawa invented a name for him for the first few chapters of Taiko but he actually hints somewhere that the name is ___ or something like that. So Hashiba wasn't his family name and was in fact not the first surname he had (Kinoshita was and he was married to Nene under that name). His final name of Toyotomi was granted to him by the Emperor and unless I am misunderstanding he didn't have an official surname until that point.

Ieyasu did not unify Japan? No Hideyoshi did in 1590...Ieyasu just had to beat every other daimyo that opposed him at the Battle of Sekigahara in 1600 in order to be called the Shogun (although he still did not receive the title until 1603). Oh now...wait...he defeated everyone that opposed him before he became Shogun? Well I guess if no one was left to oppose him then he must have unified Japan. Since according to everything I have read that as a requirement to be Shogun I guess I am not surprised.

And the main reason Hideyoshi didn't become Shogun was because he had no direct lineage to Minamoto.


Finally...I understand feudal systems in both European history and Japanese, and I refuse to join you in childish insults. And Hideyoshi was never the official head of the Oda clan since he was granted a family name when he became Regent and at that point he was the Toyotomi clan, and several of his retainers were given the Toyotomi surname. AS for the whole feudal system...since Nobunaga could and did take land away and grant it to different retainers, and the only example I can think of where that occurred was in a science fiction novel, and if your land can be taken...

Oh forget it, I am tired of this already. Yes we are way off topic...and nono of these honorific titles and technicalities has anything to do at all with the topic...I was rather enjoying the empty fort discussion since military history is what I really like and the last thing that was pertinent to the topic of this thread.

And I still would like to know if anyone knows for sure or not if the novel "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" made it to Japan before 1600 or not.

[SlickSlicer]

Oh now...wait...he defeated everyone that opposed him before he became Shogun? Well I guess if no one was left to oppose him then he must have unified Japan. Since according to everything I have read that as a requirement to be Shogun I guess I am not surprised.

Didn't he declare himself Shogun before defeating the resistance at Osaka Castle? In that case he didn't really defeat everybody left to oppose him since there was still Hideyori to deal with. Sure he had defeated nearly all opposition to his regime, but the West needed to still be consolidated and it was technically feasible for Hideyori to expand his own base of power or army, if left to his own devices.

I wish I knew the answer to whether or not Romance of the Three Kingdoms had made it to Japan by this time. I was under the impression that it had. I've heard Takenaka Hanbei being compared to Zhuge Liang and Kato Kiyomasa to Guan Yu, but I don't know if these were later analogies or concurrent with the time. I somewhat doubt that the strategies of the novel had a direct impact on tactical decisions made during this era of Japanese history though. I think it's more fair to regard things such as Hideyoshi's flooding strategems as independent, yet very likely not unprecedented, occurrences. In other words, he was probably influenced by previous ideas of military theory when deciding on these things, but I don't think he was necessarily directly inspired by passages from Romance of the Three Kingdoms or other works.

It would be interesting if any of the Japanese sources at this time mention anything from or related to Romance of the Three Kingdoms

Edited by SlickSlicer, 04 August 2011 - 03:24 AM.

[oldbreadstinks]

ignoring romance of the three kingdoms, is it possible that records of the three kingdoms made its way to Japan?

the Japanese were avid readers of Chinese history and literature right? records of battles and strategies should be in there.

[jamjoh]

Didn't he declare himself Shogun before defeating the resistance at Osaka Castle? In that case he didn't really defeat everybody left to oppose him since there was still Hideyori to deal with. Sure he had defeated nearly all opposition to his regime, but the West needed to still be consolidated and it was technically feasible for Hideyori to expand his own base of power or army, if left to his own devices.

I wish I knew the answer to whether or not Romance of the Three Kingdoms had made it to Japan by this time. I was under the impression that it had. I've heard Takenaka Hanbei being compared to Zhuge Liang and Kato Kiyomasa to Guan Yu, but I don't know if these were later analogies or concurrent with the time. I somewhat doubt that the strategies of the novel had a direct impact on tactical decisions made during this era of Japanese history though. I think it's more fair to regard things such as Hideyoshi's flooding strategems as independent, yet very likely not unprecedented, occurrences. In other words, he was probably influenced by previous ideas of military theory when deciding on these things, but I don't think he was necessarily directly inspired by passages from Romance of the Three Kingdoms or other works.

It would be interesting if any of the Japanese sources at this time mention anything from or related to Romance of the Three Kingdoms

I really don't think that he can technically declare himself Shogun...he has to be appointed it by the Emperor.

I know that the Records of the Three Kingdoms definitely made it to Japan so those names would not be foreign to them. I believe if I am not mistaken that Hanbei gave the idea to Hideyoshi on his deathbed.

[jamjoh]

ignoring romance of the three kingdoms, is it possible that records of the three kingdoms made its way to Japan?

the Japanese were avid readers of Chinese history and literature right? records of battles and strategies should be in there.

I am almost positive that they did.

[SlickSlicer]

Good point. He was appointed Shogun, though, before he had fully unified the land (since Hideyori was still a threat). That was my main point.

[jamjoh]

In 1600 Hideyori (who was 8 at the time) was married to Ieyasu's granddaughter (7 yrs old), which was apparently enough to satisfy Emperor Go-Yōzei that Ieyasu had unified Japan. In 1614 Hideyori began fighting against the Shogun, but at this point it is an uprising against an established Shogunate, not a failure to unify Japan.

[SlickSlicer]

The rhetoric may have been enough to satisfy the Emperor, but I don't think in practical terms the Empire was fully unified. Ieyasu knew very well that Hideyori constituted a threat, and it was Ieyasu himself, from what I recall, who manufactured a casus belli to declare war on Hideyori. Aside from that, as decisive as Sekigahara was, the Western regions were still not fully at peace or consolidated. A good example of this trend is the fact that rebellions occurred in Shikoku among Chosokabe retainers even after Sekigahara. Ieyasu himself must have acknowledged that a single decisive battle (Sekigahara) wasn't enough to fully win him the entire realm, as he stated after the fight, "After victory, tighten the helmet cord."

In technical terms, you're correct though. I guess the Emperor observed that there was very little that could pose a long-term threat to Ieyasu, and therefore his acknowledgement of Ieyasu unifying the land was more important than the political reality at the time. I can agree with you on that, and I can see how this argument is getting pretty vastly off-topic as well.

I'm also curious if Romance of the Three Kingdoms had any impact on Korea and other foreign countries. Sanguozhi or other historical records must have had an impact on foreign "barbarians" that conquered North China after the Jin dynasty for example. Liu Yuan and Li Te, who founded Han-Zhao (more specifically Han in Liu Yuan's case) and Cheng-Han respectively, mentioned the state of Shu-Han in their own propaganda. However, that was also not long after the actual Three Kingdoms period. I'm not sure how relevant the period's memory lasted in later times of disorder, or whether the history or novel of the time affected entirely foreign polities.

Edited by SlickSlicer, 08 August 2011 - 02:06 PM.

[jamjoh]

In the case of titles it is all about the technicalities lol.

I need to learn more about the history of Korea before I can comment on that. I do not see any similarities in the actions of the Mongols, but obviously Japan had to be influenced.

[longbaby]

Well ROTK is not totally fictional. Like "empty fort strategy". In the book it was designed by Zhuge Liang but in real life it was Zhao Yun's strategy. But anyway it was a good strategy. And Japanese benefited a lot from this book, not only in military but also in trade.