Register :: Log in :: Profile   


Tanegashima questions
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    The Samurai Archives Citadel Forum Index // Arms and Armor
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ltdomer98
Daijo Daijin
Daijo Daijin
Veteran Member



Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 5456
Location: Washington (the one with all the politicians)

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
estcrh wrote:
ltdomer98 wrote:
Yes, I've read the book. No, I don't own a copy, because I don't like to pay money for things so badly done.
So obviously you can not post any text from the book that you seem to despise so much. If you do not have a copy then you are not really able to discuss text in the book which you believe is false and misleading now can you? Well the offer stands even for you, I will send you a copy and then you can participate in this discussion without relying on your memory and other peoples opinions and beliefs on what the books says and does not say.


You don't seem to understand--why debate the fine points of the argument when the entire argument is wrong?

How about you post what you think are CORRECT points from the text? You're not making any defense at all, merely asserting that no one here can attack the book unless they have it in their hands as they type. That's preposterous. How about you address the criticisms in the two reviews, then, since obviously THEY had the book in front of them?

Oh by the way, PM sent with my address. Feel free to send it to me. If you feel strongly enough about this that you want to spend the money to convince me I'm so totally wrong and Perrin is the be-all end-all of Japanese history, despite everything that's been put forward above, the least I can do is let you have the opportunity.
_________________
Bring it on, laddie 'Domer
The Sengoku Field Manual Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kitsuno
Forum Shogun
Forum Shogun



Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 9481
Location: Honolulu, HI

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

_________________
Shop Amazon.com, support the Samurai Archives: http://amzn.to/wnDX2j

Subcribe to Blog FeedS-A Podcast homepage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kitsuno
Forum Shogun
Forum Shogun



Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 9481
Location: Honolulu, HI

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 7:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
estcrh wrote:
So obviously you can not post any text from the book that you seem to despise so much. If you do not have a copy then you are not really able to discuss text in the book which you believe is false and misleading now can you? Well the offer stands even for you, I will send you a copy and then you can participate in this discussion without relying on your memory and other peoples opinions and beliefs on what the books says and does not say.


My apologies Dr. Perrin. You're right. We are unfairly criticizing your expert analysis of Edo period Japan. Thanks for putting us straight.
_________________
Shop Amazon.com, support the Samurai Archives: http://amzn.to/wnDX2j

Subcribe to Blog FeedS-A Podcast homepage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
estcrh
Artisan
Artisan
Veteran Member



Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 103

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 7:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
More rain covers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
estcrh
Artisan
Artisan
Veteran Member



Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 103

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ltdomer98 wrote:


Oh by the way, PM sent with my address. Feel free to send it to me.
It will be on its way Mon or Tues. To all the people who have NOT read the book, ltdomer98 has courageously taken the challenge and is risking ridicule and possible brain aneurysm by reading this book so that you will not have to suffer, how awesome is that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Bethetsu
Oki no Kami
Oki no Kami
Veteran Member



Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 1376
Location: Center of Musashi

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
While we are waiting for some first-hand criticism of Perrin's book, perhaps someone can answer a question I brought up once earlier but no one answered: once guns started being manufactured in Japan, how long were they important in foreign trade? When did whole-sale importation stop? Foreign trade was extremely important during the whole (or almost every) period, but guns became less and less so, presumably.
Also, the early tanegashima in Japan now, are they mostly imported, or Japanese-made?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
estcrh
Artisan
Artisan
Veteran Member



Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 103

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bethetsu wrote:
While we are waiting for some first-hand criticism of Perrin's book, perhaps someone can answer a question I brought up once earlier but no one answered: once guns started being manufactured in Japan, how long were they important in foreign trade? When did whole-sale importation stop? Foreign trade was extremely important during the whole (or almost every) period, but guns became less and less so, presumably.
Also, the early tanegashima in Japan now, are they mostly imported, or Japanese-made?
I have never heard of any importation of matchlocks into Japan other than the first few that were brought by the first Portuguese visitors in 1543. According to legend, work on reproducing the newly purchased, Portuguese supplied matchlocks began almost immediately. With a large labor pool of skilled metal workers it did not take long for various lords to establish their own production centers.

Now that you mention the early matchlocks in Japan you bring up an interesting point. Were did they go?
According to what I have read there may have been hundreds of thousands produced and used during the 50 or so years of internal conflict before the Edo period, with matchlocks still being used to some extent during the early part of the Edo period and yet from what I have been told by a European enthusiast who lives in Japan and studies this subject there are not very many of these old matchlocks to be found. Yes you can readily find and purchase a Japanese matchlock but rarely are they from the 1500-1600 period, so what happened to them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
estcrh
Artisan
Artisan
Veteran Member



Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 103

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here is an interesting quote on the history of the Japanese matchlock by Ian Bottomley from the largest collection of Japanese matchlock information in the world to which I have provided a link. Anyone with a serious interest in these weapons should take a look here and do some reading, there are a lot of images of various Japanese matchlocks and equipment as well.

http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/search.php?keywords=tanegashima&terms=all&author=&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

Quote:
By a strange coincidence I have spent the day with a Prof of Chinese history discussing guns and other items. What you must realise is that although the gun was brought to Japan by the Portuguese, it wasn't a European gun they were carrying. In 1510 the Portuguese captured Goa and the arsenal there. After rounding up the workers, they set them to work making guns under German supervisors.Although it was a gun-making establishment, I suspect almost all of their production prior to the take-over was cannon. It was the Germans who introduce the notion of the snapping matchlock and I suspect the basic stock shape. If you examine guns from the Carnatic region, in particular from Kurg, the stock shape is weird, but can be visualised as being derived from the European petronel. These and the snapping mechanism being popular in Germany at this period. This basic gun moved eastwards with the Portuguese reaching Burma, China and ultimately Japan. Leaving aside local differences in ornamentation, they are the same guns. Chinese texts illustrate exactly this gun, complete with ornamental finial to the end of the lockplate, as do the Burmese guns and as do the two guns in Nagoya (which can be identified as Portuguese imports by the Indian style decoration and the Catholic ornament on the barrels). By this time, some 40 odd years, the butt shape had evolved into the familiar pistol-grip style we associate with Japanese guns (the same shape occurring on the guns illustrated by the Chinese - known by them as 'bird-beaked guns'). These snapping matchlocks did not take off in most of India - their guns being based on those carried by the Turks and Mamaluks who sent a force to India to help the Muslim maharajahs chuck the Portuguese out.

The two guns in Nagoya illustrate the two basic lock mechanisms adopted by the Japanese - that with an external spring and a pivoted sear poking through the lockplate, and those with a spiral spring and a sliding sear acting on a tumbler. The only contribution the Japanese seem to have made to these models was the simplification of the lockplate shape and the elimination of the screws - using tapered pins and mortices and tenons instead. The Nagoya gun with external spring is an early model with the mainspring being straight and attached to a secondary plate in front of the lock. The Chinese illustration shows this as a U shape and attached to the main plate like later Japanese guns so I don't think the Japanese actually came up with this idea.

It is a complicated story in which there are gaps. For example, a gun was brought to Osaka in 1510 from China and a few were made but it failed to catch on. Why? I don't know because there appears to be no illustration or description of it in either China or Japan. The Goan guns however spread like wildfire in Japan. Why was it so superior? again I don't really know but is suspect it was the fact that it had a decent barrel and could be sighted. Until more information comes to light it must reamin a bit of a mystery.
Ian Bottomley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
estcrh
Artisan
Artisan
Veteran Member



Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 103

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
An interesting article from the National Museum of Japanese History on the Japanese matchlock, it has been translated from Japanese to English so it is a bit rough but it contains some good information including the theory that wako pirates actually brought the matchlock to Japan.

http://www.rekihaku.ac.jp/exhibitions/project/img/061003/061003_e.pdf
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Tatsunoshi
Miko no Kami
Miko no Kami
Forum Kanrei
Forum Kanrei
Multi-Year Benefactor
Multi-Year Benefactor



Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 4923
Location: 京都日本 Cincinnati, OH

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bethetsu wrote:
While we are waiting for some first-hand criticism of Perrin's book, perhaps someone can answer a question I brought up once earlier but no one answered: once guns started being manufactured in Japan, how long were they important in foreign trade? When did whole-sale importation stop? Foreign trade was extremely important during the whole (or almost every) period, but guns became less and less so, presumably.



For much of the period, it largely depends on the 'clan' involved; those with readier access to the regions with gun factories (like Sakai or Omi) were far likelier to get them from there. More remote regions that might be closer to the sea lanes used for trading were more likely to acquire them through trading. For example, northern Kyushu daimyo largely acquired theirs through trading (hence the Christian conversions)-the Otomo being a prime example, especially given their proximity to Nagasaki. Daimyo in eastern Japan usually got them through middlemen-traders from the trading cities who would bring items to their areas and 'take orders', filling them either by buying from the gun factories or through trade with the Europeans. Conlan, in the book I mentioned earlier, speculates that a large contributing factor to many eastern daimyo being conquered was their inability to acquire sufficient firearms. There are a couple of bills of sale in the Chiba family records for matchlocks in the 1550's and they specify that the guns were acquired by the merchant house from nanban traders (and delivered by ship). There are also plenty of records (mainly company records still existing on the European side of things) that show there was a thriving trade in arms with Japan. The records of the Dutch East India Company, although founded in 1602, have many examples of this (one presumes they absorbed the records of smaller trading companies whose assets they acquired).

Conlan also flat-out states that it was easy for Japanese smiths to produce matchlocks Wink .

Trading for guns never really went out of vogue until the fighting began to wind down in the Sengoku (makes sense). The demand for firearms increased by leaps and bounds until that happened-the percentage of guns making up a daimyo army continued to increase, and the armies themselves continued to increase, meaning that each single percentage point represented more and more guns. While the Japanese capacity for turning them out increased exponentially, they were never able to meet the demand (just look at some of the letters home from Korea in the 1590's, asking for guns and more guns); so there was always a need to acquire the shortfalls through trading. Oda's army, even though it held the territory many of the primary production centers were in, continued to trade for guns (Sakai being great for this, as it was both a trading and production center). Conlan's book contains examples of Kyushu daimyo receiving arquebus from nanban traders. It would be hard to speculate on the ratio of produced/traded for at any given time given the paucity of records and their scattered nature. That'd be a good thesis for someone.

There were many thousands, probably several tens of thousands, of matchlocks imported into Japan. I would say trading became far less important after 1587 (the first round of anti Christian edicts and the confiscation of Nagasaki by Hideyoshi) and especially after 1596 (the wreck of the San Felipe and the subsequent political fallout), but there was still some demand-an easy example is that when William Adams's ship was confiscated, among the goods it had on board to trade were dozens of arquebus. After Sekigahara, demand obviously fell off. Records from Richard Cock's trading company and the Dutch East India Company both show that arms trading increasingly began to turn to gunpowder and cannon (for those daimyo who could afford it), since the Japanese had trouble acquiring the materials to produce high quality gunpowder and casting large cannon.

Can't answer the part about existing matchlocks from the era being imported or produced; my father-in-law has one from the 16th century (along with the nightmarish mountain of paperwork that comes with owning it) and it's domestically produced.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ltdomer98
Daijo Daijin
Daijo Daijin
Veteran Member



Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 5456
Location: Washington (the one with all the politicians)

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
estcrh wrote:
ltdomer98 wrote:


Oh by the way, PM sent with my address. Feel free to send it to me.
It will be on its way Mon or Tues. To all the people who have NOT read the book, ltdomer98 has courageously taken the challenge and is risking ridicule and possible brain aneurysm by reading this book so that you will not have to suffer, how awesome is that?


The only "ridicule" I'm risking is that of those here who have counseled me not to bother with you. Seriously, stop being an ass. Your tone isn't necessary at all. As I've said, I've read the book 3 times already. I'm not going to have a brain aneurysm. Your hyperbolic sarcasm isn't appropriate to the discussion. You act like YOU are being personally attacked, yet you're the one attacking everyone here. Stop.

You STILL have not addressed one criticism to this point. Instead of waiting, you would be best served to answer the following:

You obviously disagree with our (mine and Tatsu's, plus the two reviews--I'm only going to mention people who have expressly READ the book) assessment of the theme: Japan "gave up" guns in the Edo period.

There are two things you could possibly disagree with: A, that this is Perrin's thesis, or B, you could believe that is Perrin's thesis and that it is correct. Rather than shouting like a lunatic about brain aneurysms, why don't you tell us which one of these characterizes your stance, and you provide some sort of discussion point to explain to us how it is correct and we are either incorrectly understanding Perrin or how Perrin is right and all of us are wrong.

We'll just start there, as this has been needlessly painful as it is.
_________________
Bring it on, laddie 'Domer
The Sengoku Field Manual Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ltdomer98
Daijo Daijin
Daijo Daijin
Veteran Member



Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 5456
Location: Washington (the one with all the politicians)

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
estcrh wrote:
Fyi..Perrin is deceased, and can you show were I offered any "analysis of Edo period Japan"? All I have done is question how so many people can so thoroughly thrash a book and its author with out even reading the book or being able to quote even one questionable passage from the book, maybe you should go back and read my posts again as you seem to be confused.


How many books can you quote word for word that you last read 3 years ago? Honest question.

You seem completely clueless as to how you are coming across.

Tell me which of these statements are wrong:

Perrin was an English literature PhD.
Perrin didn't speak Japanese.
Perrin's main source for Sengoku period history was Stephen Turnbull.
A PhD in Japanese history, by definition, has a better grasp of the Edo period and whether or not guns were "given up" than a PhD in English literature.

Please, enlighten us all as to how any of these statements are incorrect. Doing so is called making an argument, something which would be much more effective than shouting "no one here can quote it!"
_________________
Bring it on, laddie 'Domer
The Sengoku Field Manual Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
estcrh
Artisan
Artisan
Veteran Member



Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 103

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Tatsunoshi wrote:
There are a couple of bills of sale in the Chiba family records for matchlocks in the 1550's and they specify that the guns were acquired by the merchant house from nanban traders (and delivered by ship). There are also plenty of records (mainly company records still existing on the European side of things) that show there was a thriving trade in arms with Japan. The records of the Dutch East India Company, although founded in 1602, have many examples of this (one presumes they absorbed the records of smaller trading companies whose assets they acquired).
Were does this information come from?

Quote:
Conlan also flat-out states that it was easy for Japanese smiths to produce matchlocks Wink .
If they were so easy to make why would the Japanese go through the expense of importing them, that does not make any sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ltdomer98
Daijo Daijin
Daijo Daijin
Veteran Member



Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 5456
Location: Washington (the one with all the politicians)

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
estcrh wrote:
I have never heard of any importation of matchlocks into Japan other than the first few that were brought by the first Portuguese visitors in 1543.


Funny, I thought you said you had read Olof G. Lidin's book Tanegashima: The Arrival of Europe in Japan.

He talks extensively about how guns were an important trade item between the Portuguese and the Japanese throughout the latter half of the 16th century. Especially in the chapter on Pinto and his visits to Bungo. Though really, common sense should be enough to conclude that with as enthusiastically as guns were received by the Japanese, and as interested in making money as the Portuguese traders were, that weapons would be traded by the boat load.
_________________
Bring it on, laddie 'Domer
The Sengoku Field Manual Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ltdomer98
Daijo Daijin
Daijo Daijin
Veteran Member



Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 5456
Location: Washington (the one with all the politicians)

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
estcrh wrote:
Were does this information come from?


Well, considering Tatsu's father in law is the heir of the Chiba family, I'm guessing the family records at his father in law's house.

Quote:
If they were so easy to make why would the Japanese go through the expense of importing them, that does not make any sense.


Well, up above you just said you'd never heard of any importation beyond 1543. So, which is it? Did they import them, or did they not? Logic (and Lidin, and bills of sale) indicate they did, so we'll go with that. So, if they imported them, why did they make them? Well, they did make them, as we know--at Kunitomo, at Sakai, at Tanegashima, at Saika, at various other places.

So, why both? Gee...could it possibly be the fact that the entire country was at war with itself? And that those that could import them (say, in Matsunoura) might not have access to iron deposits, etc. in order to make self-manufacture worthwhile? Or that those in central Japan (say, around Kunitomo) might have had the smiths and iron deposits, so making it themselves was easier than getting them from the Portuguese who they might rarely see, or that other daimyo in the way might prevent them from seeing?

This really doesn't seem like a hard question. You're in the middle of a war. You get more guns however you can--by both means, if you can.
_________________
Bring it on, laddie 'Domer
The Sengoku Field Manual Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tatsunoshi
Miko no Kami
Miko no Kami
Forum Kanrei
Forum Kanrei
Multi-Year Benefactor
Multi-Year Benefactor



Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 4923
Location: 京都日本 Cincinnati, OH

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
estcrh wrote:
Were does this information come from?


The Chiba family records come from (oddly enough) the Chiba family records, under the caretaking of my father-in-law, a descendant of the family. They'll be appearing in my magnum opus on the Chiba, to be written when I retire.

Try out http://www.tanap.net/ for the online archives of the Dutch East India company.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ltdomer98
Daijo Daijin
Daijo Daijin
Veteran Member



Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 5456
Location: Washington (the one with all the politicians)

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Tatsunoshi wrote:
It would be hard to speculate on the ratio of produced/traded for at any given time given the paucity of records and their scattered nature. That'd be a good thesis for someone.


That's the most frustrating thing with Lidin's book, as that's what I wanted out of it (that, and the fact that the organization of it is so haphazard there is no central theme). I was hoping for some production numbers at various locations, but he doesn't go into that at all. One of the big justifications for using the "1000" guns in the Shinchokoki vs. the "3000" in the Shinchoki for the #'s of guns present at Nagashino is that "oh my gosh that's such a big number no way could any daimyo have had that many...." which I think is complete BS because no one ever shows any production numbers to back it up. Considering in 1549 Nobunaga was able to place an order for 500 guns, and in 1575 he had access/control of Kunitomo and Sakai, plus a good relationship with the Portuguese, 3000 seems like a paltry number to have. Further (as those who have seen listened to the podcast know), troop composition percentages indicate that if there were 38,000 Oda/Tokuagawa troops present, having only 3,000 guns means they would have left about 3,000 of them at home, which makes no sense either.
_________________
Bring it on, laddie 'Domer
The Sengoku Field Manual Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tatsunoshi
Miko no Kami
Miko no Kami
Forum Kanrei
Forum Kanrei
Multi-Year Benefactor
Multi-Year Benefactor



Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 4923
Location: 京都日本 Cincinnati, OH

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ltdomer98 wrote:
Funny, I thought you said you had read Olof G. Lidin's book Tanegashima: The Arrival of Europe in Japan
He talks extensively about how guns were an important trade item between the Portuguese and the Japanese throughout the latter half of the 16th century. Especially in the chapter on Pinto and his visits to Bungo.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tatsunoshi
Miko no Kami
Miko no Kami
Forum Kanrei
Forum Kanrei
Multi-Year Benefactor
Multi-Year Benefactor



Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 4923
Location: 京都日本 Cincinnati, OH

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
estcrh wrote:
Japanese go through the expense of importing them, that does not make any sense.


Makes plenty of sense. There weren't enough Japanese gunsmiths to keep up with the demand. In economics, production routinely falls behind a fast rising demand. And when production doesn't meet the demand, you go to an outside source to make up the difference. And that's exactly why the records of trading sharply drop off after Sekigahara-demand began to fall and was met by production.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maikeruart
Shushou
Shushou
Veteran Member
2009 Benefactor
2009 Benefactor



Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 870
Location: Southbridge

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would imagine it would be difficult to import guns if your not on the coast. It would be interesting to see who imported and who manufactured.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bethetsu
Oki no Kami
Oki no Kami
Veteran Member



Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 1376
Location: Center of Musashi

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
estcrh wrote:
Now that you mention the early matchlocks in Japan you bring up an interesting point. Were did they go?…Yes you can readily find and purchase a Japanese matchlock but rarely are they from the 1500-1600 period, so what happened to them.
Maybe that is because in the early period only "works of art" were kept, and that would apply to few domestic and no imported matchlocks. The Tokugawa-ten had four matchlocks made between 1611 and 1615 for Ieyasu by Noda Kiyotaka, but those were not ordinary. (By the way, the English part of the catalogue translates 銃 as "pistol", though they are 120-150 cm. Be warned!) Tatsu, would you describe the one in your family as a work of art?

I think I will comment on the rekihaku link later.

Tatsu, thank you for your summary. Even if there are no percentages, the main point is that both sources were considerable. About how many Chiba guns were ordered in the 1550s ? (Like dozens, or hundreds?) "they specify that the guns were acquired by the merchant house from nanban traders (and delivered by ship)." I wonder where the merchant houses were. And does that mean that merchants from (say) Sakai sent ships to Chiba by the Pacific route? Did any foreign ships get to the east, Pacific, coast of Japan until well into the 17th century?

Tatsunoshi wrote:

The Chiba family records…'ll be appearing in my magnum opus on the Chiba, to be written when I retire.
I hope you take early retirement. Or does that put me on the side of the Bad Guys?Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AJBryant
Shikken
Shikken
Veteran Member



Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1782

PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You know, something occurred to me last night.

Since we can make guns here in the States (e.g., Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Colt...) there's no reason for me to buy guns from overseas manufacturers like Walther or Česká Zbrojovka -- yet I do.

Why would they buy from overseas guys instead of local? Dude. Seriously.

Why do people buy French wine when there's perfectly good wine made here? And why buy Mercedes or Jags or VWs when we have perfectly good cars made here? And what's so special about German or Belgian beer? And...

You get the point.

There is a certain cachet that overseas products bring to the game. Sometimes they're just damned good (I love my Walther PPQ), and sometimes it just comes down to the exotica bonus points. It's part of why many wealthy and powerful samurai developed a fondness for European armours (hey, Japan had it's OWN armour!) and clothing (ditto!).

Among real historians of Japan, Perrin is considered a laughing stock -- if he's considered at all.

You're really hitching your ideological wagon to a bad horse.
_________________
http://www.sengokudaimyo.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tatsunoshi
Miko no Kami
Miko no Kami
Forum Kanrei
Forum Kanrei
Multi-Year Benefactor
Multi-Year Benefactor



Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 4923
Location: 京都日本 Cincinnati, OH

PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bethetsu wrote:
Tatsu, would you describe the one in your family as a work of art?


No-it's not from the family but something that was bought twenty or thirty years ago. I haven't seen it for a few years but it was pretty basic. Even though I'm well acquainted with muzzle loaders I wasn't allowed to take it out and shoot it (although that of course wouldn't be quite as easy as doing it in the US), and I found out that indeed it's never been shot since the old fella bought it.

I think many of the old muskets were just trashed or melted down for scrap as they were replaced by new ones-and many of them met the same fate as many castles did under the Meiji, being scrapped as they were replaced with new guns (and as we've seen, the stocks were refitted so what else would you do with the barrels?). Not to mention the metal drives of the Russian and Chinese wars and especially WWII-not sure if they had those for WWI although Japan was involved. And whatever might have lasted through the war would have been confiscated by SCAP after the war (although certain wily Japanese were known to bury their family armor, swords, and other weaponry under the floorboards rather than surrender their legacy to callous gaijin souvenir hunters).

And if the market for tanegashima was anything like the market for armor and swords during the Meiji, I feel that many of the tanegashima acquired by Western collectors during that time were 'surplus' late Edo muskets-so that fits in with your thoughts.

Bethetsu wrote:
Tatsu, thank you for your summary. Even if there are no percentages, the main point is that both sources were considerable. About how many Chiba guns were ordered in the 1550s ? (Like dozens, or hundreds?) "they specify that the guns were acquired by the merchant house from nanban traders (and delivered by ship)." I wonder where the merchant houses were. And does that mean that merchants from (say) Sakai sent ships to Chiba by the Pacific route? Did any foreign ships get to the east, Pacific, coast of Japan until well into the 17th century?


According to my notes (and since I couldn't read Japanese, much less old handwritten Japanese at the time, my wife translated so they should be accurate) the first one was in 1552 for thirty-one muskets; this was all that could be delivered out of the fifty that were ordered. The second was in 1555 and was for thirty-six, again out of an order of fifty. The numbers might seem low, but I have a feeling they were constantly ordering these and might have had three or four hundred by the end of the decade-not a bad amount for an eastern clan at that time. The merchant was the same in both cases, but we couldn't ID the kanji-actually what the name might be rendered as-I plan on trying things again now that we both know a little more, and there's probably an online database of merchant houses and names by now Wink . The ship was operated by the merchant and one would presume there was lots of other stuff on board-there were a few other scattered transactions with the same date, and since these merchants were 'traveling salesmen' they likely had lots of other customers in the area.

Bethetsu wrote:
I hope you take early retirement. Or does that put me on the side of the Bad Guys?Wink


Well, I'll take it as a compliment Very Happy -and I'd sure like to do it!


Last edited by Tatsunoshi on Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:33 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shin no sen
Izumi no Kami
Izumi no Kami
Veteran Member
Multi-Year Benefactor
Multi-Year Benefactor



Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 1056

PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
For sure the matchlocks would have been scavenged for their iron in the most part as they would have been totally useless for conversion to breech loading with modern cartridges. The barrels were made in a damascus fashion with the steel being wrapped around a mandrel to form the tube. It would never take the barrel pressures of a modern round. John
_________________
知恵は時間及びエネルギーである
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
maikeruart
Shushou
Shushou
Veteran Member
2009 Benefactor
2009 Benefactor



Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 870
Location: Southbridge

PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 7:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Just realized Perry observed men with aquerbus during the 19th century.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    The Samurai Archives Citadel Forum Index // Arms and Armor All times are GMT - 10 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Help the Samurai Archives




alexisRed v1.2 // Theme Created By: Andrew Charron // Samuraized By: Aaron Rister

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group