Samurai Helmets(news.kynosarges.org) |
Samurai Helmets(news.kynosarges.org) |
Almost all of these pieces date from after the unification of Japan under the Tokugawa shogunate (c. 1600). From 1600 to 1850 Japan experienced a stable period marked by very little real armed conflict. During this time, the samurai transitioned from soldiers to what were effectively mid-level bureaucrats. However, unlike most bureaucrats, they managed to retain all of the trappings of a martial lifestyle, including ornate armor, beautiful swords, and the occasional mortal duel. It was during this time of relative peace that these (sometimes ridiculous) fashion pieces developed, somewhat complicated by the tradition of incorporating pieces of much, much older helmets into the "core" of the helmets (one of the helmets in the OP has a core dating from the 14th century, but was significantly embellished later on).
†This is generally true of what arms and armor have survived from around the world. The stuff that was actually used rusted away long ago; the highest chance for survival was to have been so valuable that no one dared to actually take it onto a battlefield.
Duels under Tokugawa were forbidden and punishable by death of both opponents. The only fighting that samurai could see was terrorizing of unarmed peasants.
Samurai were not warriors in European sense but more of a mob enforcers. Good for terrorizing peasants not really fit for fighting in any military sense.
During Meiji when peasants got professional military training and leadership samurai became toothless.
[BUSHIDO: WAY OF TOTAL BULLSHIT] https://www.tofugu.com/japan/bushido/
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Kumamoto_Castle
[2] https://www.historynet.com/satsuma-rebellion-satsuma-clan-sa...
Also, the exhibition venues will often do things like find local artisans to demonstrate related skills. E.g. I demoed making the armor lacing braids (as much as 200-400 yards, in reeled silk, per suit!) when the show was at the Portland Art Museum.
A master of the more technologically advanced European saber would probably cut a Katana-wielding Samurai to ribbons. Good thing the Samurai would probably just shoot him from horseback anyway.
"In taking a step, it is the weight rolling smoothly and the next step arising. In breathing in completely, it is this breath. In breathing out completely, it is this breath. In life, it is this life. Zanshin means complete follow through, leaving no trace. It means each thing, completely, as it is."
In other words, it is not a traditional sword system but a modern one.
I don't recall seeing another helmet with a full statue. Are there more examples?
https://frompariswithlove-becky.blogspot.com/2015/03/les-inv...
Cmd/ctrl+f, "dragon". It's not quite half way down. Picture's not great. IIRC it was right inside the entrance we came in, though I don't know how much help that is as there are probably a few, even if you narrow it down to entrances open to the public.
There's a closer, somewhat sharper shot of just the top on this page:
https://thetreesaroundnunhead.blogspot.com/2011/08/paris-3-t...
Searching on page for "dragon" brings one straight to it, again.
It's a European helmet, not a Japanese one, though.
That would be my bank holiday recommendation.
My interest is piqued.
I'm inferring that they're just very small museums? Do they have any essential characteristics?
Google isn't being very helpful.
Side note : one of the most amazing parts of the exhibition was the archery equipment -- fantastic and frightening-looking arrow broadheads especially
;; Usage: (get)
;; Parse the entirety of stdin as a sequence of s-expressions. Return
;; that list of expressions.
;;
;; The definition of this function is a little contrived, because in
;; lisp it's simpler to prepend to a list than to append to it, which
;; would be the natural thing to do. So instead, we build the list
;; such that it is backwards, then we call (reverse LIST) on it when
;; we read EOF.
(define (get)
(get1 (quote ()) (read)))
;; Usage: (get CURRENT-BUFFER JUSt-READ-EXPRESSION)
(define (get1 b r)
(if (eof-object? r)
(reverse b)
(get1 (cons r b) (read))))
;; Usage: (put)
;;
;; Read the entirety of stdin as a sequence of characters, perform the
;; global string substitution ")" -> ")..", then return the result as
;; a string.
;;
;; The definition of this function is a little contrived, because in
;; lisp it's simpler to prepend to a list than to append to it, which
;; would be the natural thing to do. So instead, we build the list
;; such that it is backwards, then we call (reverse LIST) on it when
;; we read EOF.
(define (put)
(put1 (quote ()) (read-char)))
;; Usage: (put CURRENT-BUFFER LAST-READ-CHAR)
(define (put1 b r)
(if (eof-object? r)
(list->string (reverse b))
(if (char=? #\) r)
(put1 (cons #\. (cons #\. (cons r b))) (read-char))
(put1 (cons r b) (read-char)))))
;; Usage: (final LIST)
;; ???
(define (final lis)
(if (null? lis)
lis
(final1 (car lis) (cdr lis))))
;; Usage: (final1 FIRST REST)
(define (final1 f r)
(if (and (pair? f) (pair? (cdr f)) (eqv? (quote quote) (car f)))
(cons f (final (cdr r)))
(if (list? f)
(final2 f (gather (count (car r)) (cons (quote ()) (final (cdr r)))))
(if (or (vector? f) (pair? f) (eq? #\) f))
(cons f (final (cdr r)))
(cons f (final r))))))
;; Usage: (final2 f g)
(define (final2 f g)
(cons (append (final f) (car g)) (cdr g)))
;; Usage: (count SYMBOL)
(define (count s)
(- (string-length (symbol->string s)) 2))
;; Usage: (gather c lis)
(define (gather c lis)
(if (= c 0)
(cons (reverse (car lis)) (cdr lis))
(gather (- c 1) (cons (cons (cadr lis) (car lis)) (cddr lis)))))
;; 1. Use (put) to read stdin as a string and perform the ")" -> ").."
;; global string replacement.
;; 2. Feed that resulting string to (get), which parses it in to a
;; sequence of s-expressions.
;; 3. Feed that list of expressions to (final), which does something
;; to it and returns a list.
;; 4. (write) each item that (final) returns.
(for-each write (final (with-input-from-string (put) get)))Also if you look at any Japanese castle (Himeji had been well preserved by US Bomber Command for navigational purposes) you will quickly realize that any continental army will take at most a week to dry it's moats and dig mines under it's wall. Fortunately Japan never had seen invading army on its soil.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yumi
[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_bow
This samurai / bushido hype is so much out of proportion and simply untrue.
While in the same time real history of Asia is full of military class of exceptional value. Indian Rajput, Islamic Gunpowder Empires, Malays, Mongols - to name just a few
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_Empires
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajput
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malacca_Sultanate
If Japan was suddenly in the continent, I am sure they would have to compete and modify their war society like the rest did. But the root aesthetics would be the same.
Given that both Judo and Aikido were born from Jiu Jitsu, that makes sense.
Stormtroopers were from the First World War.
> Stormtroopers were specialist soldiers of the German Army in World War I.
(+ 6 (*).... 2 3 2 3)
It certainly wasn't why I chose to practice Krav Maga.
The seeming lack of it, might be why I never took a closer lock into it. So I am also surprised that there might be one. Can it be that just some instructors personal spirituality got mixed into it?
It's one man's work of passion. When I went, it was quiet enough that an attendant guided us around the entire first floor personally. It's not exactly tiny, but it's just two narrow floors behind an unassuming frontage, and so a big change from the other (public) museums in Tokyo.
It just depends on context and skill.
I don't ever recall seeing a 2 handed bronze sword, and if the steel is worse than bronze, why didn't they go back to that? Which kind of suggests that it isn't.
I'm assuming low quality steel is overly soft rather than overly brittle. If it were overly soft wouldn't that favour shorter blades? You'd either get flex, or as you mentioned, added weight, which seems a bad trade off compared to a shorter sword and shield?
I got the impression 2 handed swords/no shield was an honour thing, rather than a tactically advantageous thing, I'm in no way an expert on such things though.
I am not an expert either but as I understand it, Samurai were nobles and fought on horseback with their primary weapons being spears and bows, and they considered swords a backup weapon.[0]
The mythologizing of the Samurai, their honor-above-reason mentality ("bushido") and the katana as their primary weapon was a retrofiction created in the Edo period, when the Samurai had been disarmed and relegated to bureaucrats, and they wanted to justify and romanticize their violent past, and the term bushido was invented in the 20th century, and was itself based on Western ideals of chivalry in knighthood (which also, really, didn't exist.)[1,2]
[0]https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/10331/why-didnt-...
Agreed, I was focussing more on the not tactically advantageous, rather than ascribing an honour code per se.
It is generally a good idea to agree weapons beforehand, it helps keep the battlefield survivable. The 20th century wasn't known for it's 'honour' but WW2 combatants did refrain from using chemical weapons for example, and nukes were never used in the cold war and it's proxy battles. I'd label that as part of an honour code? I'm not making the case too forcefully though.
Primary weapons were generally either bows or some kind of long stick with something sharp on the end. Primary weapons and shields are both inconvenient and tacky to carry when not expecting battle, so the sidearm becomes the badge of office or nobility for the warrior class.
Samurai also carried the smaller wakizashi which was used in one hand. Further, some of the lesser known swordsmen used a two-sword technique, holding a katana in either hand.
But my memory may be fuzzy; it's been a good 15+ years since I was really into all this stuff :-)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miyamoto_Musashi
"Musashi, as he was often simply known, became renowned through stories of his unique double-bladed swordsmanship and undefeated record in his 61 duels (next is 33 by Itō Ittōsai)."
I think there are a lot of ways to not get it right with steel. In a sword hardness and toughness are in conflict. You really want a sword with a hard edge and a tough back. Which implies differing amounts of carbon and temper. Not only that but the grain is very important as well.
A common European way of sword making was to carburize iron rods/wire and then forge weld those into a sword. The outer layer is hard steel which is strong. The inner core is milder tougher. Japanese achieved the same by folding and forge welding. I think there are were a lot of ways to do this but labor intensive, highly skilled work where if you goofed or the starting material was off the result was crummy.
> I got the impression 2 handed swords/no shield was an honour thing,
Not an expert either but I think 2 handed were symbolic/ceremonial/rank artifacts.
Bronze fell out of use not because iron/steel was better but because tin was rare and hard to come by. So, I'm not sure of the exact answer to your question but I suspect it's some version of "because they couldn't".
Gold is rare and expensive, but you see the same thing, with people displaying it all the more.
So unless their supply of tin was literally completely cut off, which I don't know for sure, but would be very surprised if it were.
I wasn't thinking MAD specifically, although I'm aware of at least one example where Russian early warning picked up an incoming object that appeared to them to be a missile, and they didn't respond, which seems very un MAD. I was thinking of the proxy wars, Vietnam, Korea, etc. I'm not even sure the threat of nuclear attack was used. I suppose you could say that's part of MAD (not attacking allies), if that were the case, wouldn't the same reasoning extend to not fighting them in the first place, in the same way there were never any conventional wars between Russia and the US?
So agreed it is mainly about self preservation, but I would say it goes a little further than that.