Talk:Samurai/Archive 1

message: Samurai is usually recognized by it’s armor by it’s distinctive armor and helmet. Lamellar armor is done by uniting metal scales into a small plate which is covered and polished with lacquer to make it waterproof. The small, light plates was by fastening the plates together with cords of leather so each plate slightly overlaps each other. Originally, there were two basic types of lamellar armor:
Yoroi- Is worn by a mounted Samurai, this armor is rather heavy and so is the helmets and imposing shoulder guards.
Do-Maru- Is worn by foot soldiers, this armor was more closely-fitted and lighter than the Yoroi armor. As time went by, as hand-to-hand combat became more prevalent, the do-maru style armor became more popular among all Samurai.
Do-maru was modified to include heavy helmets and light- weight shoulder and shin guards, similar like the Yoroi armor. 
Helmets, also called kabuto, are made from metal plates riveted together. Lots of designs, the rivets form rows of ridges along the outside of the helmet adding to the distinctive look. 
Higher ranking samurai are aloud to add clan symbols and other decorative flourishes to their helmets. Before donning his armor, a samurai would wear a one-piece undergarment covered by a kimono and a pair of baggy pants. A padded cap would help ease the weight of the heavy helmet. 
Armor Glossary
Do- the main torso armor, which hangs from the shoulders
Tsurubashiri- leather covering on the do, sometimes with elaborate and colorful designs.
Sendan-no-ita, kyubi-no-ita- small armor plates which hang from the shoulders and protect the cords that hold the rest of the armor together.
Kote - armored sleeve, only worn on the left arm, leaving the right arm free to fire a bow. This practice of leaving the right arm unarmored was continued out of a sense of tradition long after samurai no longer relied on archery in combat. 
----
If the last link has even a shred of truth, those samurai must have been a bunch of really sick bastards.
::What was this about? Banaticus 21:00, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Samurai Armor 

message: Quote from this article: "In battles against Mongolian invaders, these compound bows were the decisive weapon outdistancing the shortbows and crossbows that the Mongolians and Chinese preferred". 
The statement is abosolutely wrong. First of all, Mongolian bows or the composite bow were much much powerful than that of simple longbow of Japanese. According to the book The Devil's Horsemen: The Mongol Invasion of Europe, the "mediavel English lonbbow had a pull of severnty-five pounds and a range of up to two hundreds and fifty yards", whereas the reflex composite bows from Mongols had "a pull of between a hundred and a hundred and sixty pounds and a range of over three hundred and fifty yards".
In addition, Japanese Samurais were incapalbe of defending themselves against much advanced-tactical, mobile, and technological (gunpowder weapons were used by Mongols on Samurai) superiority of invaders. Had not the two Typhoons destroyed the two massive armada forces sent by the Kubli Khan in China, Japan would suffered the same fate as other victims of powerful empires throughout the 13th century.--Themistocles 06:04, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yumi/ Japanese long bow 

message: Quote "Samurai films and westerns share a number of similarities, and the two have influenced each other over the years. Kurosawa was inspired by the works of director John Ford"
Well, the oppinion, that kurosawa was influenced by ford was started by an interview, in which kurosawa mentions ford once.
But it is very likely that this was just japanese politeness. Kurosawa was brought up as a child of a very old Samurai family (reaching back before 1000 ad) and got the education of a samurai. besides, the remakes of The Seven Samurai are problematic in this 
way, that cowboys (and revolvermen) in america have a totally different social position than samurai in japan.
:I meant similarities in themes and style, and not social standing and order. Strip away the surface details, and you'll see the similarities. It goes beyond the weapons used, the languages spoken, or the  social rank that the heroes have compared to who they're fighting for, or against. --Paul Soth 20:55, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note to Samurai in fiction 

message: It must be understood that there is a difference between the two.
Samurai does come from the verb "to serve" and literally means just that.  The samurai were allowed to carry a sword as a ways to show their rank within Japanese society, but does not necessarily mean this person was a warrior.  There were samurai doing various duties and functions besides fighting.
The article did a wonderful job in its description of the Samurai and Bushi as with its illustrations of the Kanji (Chinese characters) associated with it. But time and again I hear people mixing the two and they are different as Maiko is to Geisha as is to Baishun (literaly means : selling spring. a prostitute).
:The role of the samurai varied widely over time, and from place to place. Can you comment on what time period you had in mind, and can you tell us what you mean by bushi and warrior?
***
By the 9th and 10th century the use of "bushi" and "samurai" became interchangeable, according to William Scott Wilson in his 1982 book "Ideals of the Samurai".  Wilson carefully researched the Kanji used to represent the word "warrior" in Japanese History and read all of the major Japanese literary history of the time.  A good background is here:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0897500814/102-7695821-9109753?v=glance
The Wikipedia pages on "Samurai", "Bushido", "Ronin" etc. are ridden with errors and are obviously the work of 15 year old boys who played too many video games.  Since my grandparents were the sons and daughters of Samurai, I am going to rewrite them.  sign me as "a pissed off Japanese person"
:I'd really avoid language like that if I were you... --Paul Soth 21:34, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Samurai vs Bushi 

message: According to Wilson's book, "the Chinese character 侍 was originally a verb meaning to wait upon or accompany a person in the upper ranks of society, and this is also true of the original term in Japanese Saburau"
:Agreed. The Japanese had a native Japanese word, saburau, and wanted to write it, so they searched for a kanji having a similar meaning, and wrote 侍. The service referred to might have included domestic service (I don't know) but the kind of service that eventually became associated with the word samurai was specifically military service. And perhaps (again, I don't know) they chose the term bushi from Chinese either to distinguish their military (martial) form of service from domestic, or to dignify themselves with a Chinese term as their class grew in importance, or for some purpose I can't imagine. I wish I had more than speculation to offer... But I've never heard anything about the actual word samurai being a Chinese word; rather, it's apparently an ancient Japanese word which the Japanese wrote using a Chinese character, as they wrote thousands of other native Japanese words. Fg2 11:39, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
You must understand a few things about Japan.  They appropriated the Chinese alphabet as their own.  As much as they hate to admit it, they didn't have any way to write things, so they took the Chinese characters and attached their own pronunciations. (see the history of Kanji for more info)  The verb represented by the charcter for "saburau" implies military service to a upperclass person, a noble person.  It was a ancient term which always meant an upperclass position.  Same thing with BUSHI.  The Japanese appropriated the character as their own and attached their own pronunciation.  The term always signified an educated, upperclass connotation.  This is not speculation of any kind, this is from chinese text which over a thousand  years old.  read this great book:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0897500814/102-7695821-9109753?v=glance
interview with the author:
http://www.kodansha-intl.com/books/html/en/477002942X.html
:Look, everybody discussing this here already knows what a kanji is, so there's no reason to be high-falutin'. What you say I have no trouble believing, except that you contradict yourself by saying that Bushi is a Japanese pronunciation added to a Chinese character. It certainly isn't; you had it right the first time. - Nat Krause 13:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese origin of &#20365; 

message: Yes, that is precisely the person I was referring to, I just didnt mention his name.  The lord changed sides from supporting the Toyotomi's family to Tokugawa, thus altering the course of history.
You could change Toyotomi to "Toyotomi Hideyori", but most of the lords were actually respecting the authority of his now deceased father, Hideyoshi.  Hideyoshi had asked his council of regents to be loyal and allow his son to succeed him at adulthood.
-----
I can't understand why this article begins with the tritest, most sensationalistic aspect of the samurai: suicide after dishonor.  This opening makes the article seem amateurish and childish.
-----
The history section should be moved into a seperate article.  --ColdFeet 14:41, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hideyori was Hideyoshi's son 

message: I am having a hard time finding a Japanese source regarding this "Miyagawa Isshō", author of the homoerotical image. Is there any Japanese link or any book available as a reference? Would anybody happen to know what the ideograms for his name are in Japanese? By the way would anybody have some primary source regarding these depictions being homoerotical rather than hetero? PHG 11:06, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, no information, but I second the questions. Further, I'm not convinced that the person on the left is a samurai. Possibly 宮川一笑　Fg2 11:34, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There only appear to be sites who have taken the content from Wikipedia. Also, the figure on the right appears to be a woman-or at least dresses like one206.124.153.213 12:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Homoerotical image

message: I just rewrote the "Bushido" page, and now I am faced with fixing the horrible Samurai page too.  I cannot beleive that someone would write that a ronin is "someone who had foresaken honor" or had "failed to commit seppuku".  Back in those days, if ordered to commit seppuku, you would be EXECUTED if you failed to do it.  Samurai followed budo? GAHHHHHHHHHHHH.  I have my work cut out for me.  It will take weeks, THIS PAGE IS ABSOLUTE GARBAGE.  There are bits of truth sprinkled in with the BS, so I will try to salvage it.  If you want to find out what the Samurai were really like, read their own words, don't make up fiction.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0897500814/102-7695821-9109753?v=glance
signed,
A disgruntled Japanese person
:Calm down. First, I can understand if incorrect information presented offends you (and for good reason), but we try to keep a level of civility on Wikipedia. Being angry and resorting to name calling will not help you. Second, if you're going to be making extensive edits and involving yourself in discussions, please create an account. That will help you in the long run. I think I speak for everyone else watching this page that we gladly welcome any first-hand knowledge you can share with us to expand the articles here. But please, before any major changes and revisions, start a calm discussion first. Just familarize yourself with the procedures and techniques of Wikipedia, and I'm sure we'll all be happy to help and support you. --Paul Soth 21:21, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A disgruntled Japanese person 

message: The below [now above; note by Rama ] post by a native Japanese is justifiable.  This page seems to have been written by an enthusiast who is more familiar with anime cartoons and stylistic though inaccurate Western movies than with a serious study of Samurai.  This is not a thoughtfully and accurately written article, and anyone with real knowledge of Samurai should edit it.  Sadly, the nature of Wikipedia--informative and simple to reference as it is--lends itself to deep problems of inaccuracy.  Yet more sadly, people trust its articles, and an unknowing victim might read this one and come away thinking he has an understanding of Samurai.  If only they could make it less easy for anyone to write... but I suppose such a system would, in fact, be anti wiki.  :)
: I second what Paul Soth says. I daresay I can describe myself as quite in love with Japanese culture; I aknowledge that some Japanese culture related pages are quite terrible in their present state (especially those which are "popular" in Western culture -- last time I checked, kamikaze was revolting), and look forward very much to reading the insights that someone with a first-hand knowledge of these subjects will say. I reckon that the legendary Japanese politeness and courtesy will also be much appreciated. Rama 07:05, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I third that - where are any references to anything? This section needs a very serious edit - and preferably a significant reduction in spurious commentary. This is a serious topic people, and perhaps a little less romanticizing. I am happy to start doing some major work on this page, but I have to say, I'd like to be rather ruthless, and start removing all POV or non-cited components. OzzieB 08:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems of Intent and Accuracy 

message: the truths of the samurai are surrounded with mystery, one man,one source excalaims one fact, when another exclaims the others. What is needed is not exclaimation but evidence and proof for ones belief on a certain case. When refering to such an enigmatic issue people should choose their words carfully, say only what they understand, and prove to people of the truth. a serious scholar who studies japanese herritage who holds certainty to information should compose an article of the samurai, until then all we recieve is a jumbled madness of people's oppinions and various rumors.
: Whilst there are very few experts out there, but lots of people with an interest in the topic of samurai. As such this is a hard task. HOWEVER I have to say that the writing on this page is very chaotic, and it would seem that most contributors are writing opinions, or fact without appropriate citation to anything. I think this whole section needs some very serious editing, section by section. We need to remember, that this is a serious historical topic, and needs to be treated that way.--OzzieB 08:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Samurai: A Delicate Issue 

message: To whoever said that it is a slice across the stomach, your wrong. Its a stab through the stomach, then quickly decapitated right after the stab.
:First of all, it's seppuku, and it's performed by stabbing inward, then drawing the sword upward sharply. The other person is standing by in case the person committing seppuku can't do so. --nihon 05:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: But during the Edo period, most samurai would stab themselves and be decapitated immediately.  No one was expected or even given the chance to go through the whole thing by themselves.  Even during the warring states period, I've never heard of someone who completed seppuku without help. Tbjablin 07:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, now that I think about it General Nogi did it without help, but it was pretty rare. Tbjablin 08:06, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In seppuku, it's the thought that counts.  A credible commitment to sacrificing one's life prevents disgrace by registering sincerity whether in apology or protest.  Suicide could equally be an act of obedience or rebellion.  The horrible suffering involved was proof of that resolve.  The reason the abdomen was cut open is because that is where the spirit resides.  Ladies however generally thrust the knife through the neck, after binding their legs together to prevent unintentionally immodest display.  Men were expected to be willing to sit stoically in agony until death, but once the cut had been made any further suffering was rightly understood to be unnecessary.  Eventually, custom allowed the second to give the coup de grace as soon as one reached for the knife, all other preparations having been made as usual.  Much more humane and to everyone's liking.  But not having a second is no excuse for not committing seppuku!.70.95.168.25 14:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Sempuku 

message: Is there actually a dispute on the accuracy of this page or has an anonymous user just done their only edit ever and added it for the sake of it? Ben W Bell 07:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to take it down when I saw it yesterday, but I figured I should give the benefit of the doubt and allow whoever added it at least a couple hours to offer an explanation here on talk (but then ended up falling asleep).  Clearly it hasn't materialized, so I'm taking it down now. siafu 15:57, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy Dispute 

message: It states in this article that "The samurai's weapon of choice was the yumi (bow) and it was unchanged for centuries until the introduction of gunpowder and the rifle in the 16th century. The Japanese style compound bow was not as powerful as the Eurasian reflex composite bow, having an effective range of 50 metres or less (100 metres if accuracy was not an issue)."  It states in the Longbow article that " In ancient Japan, very distinctive bamboo and wood composite longbows, known as Yumi, became important to mounted samurai warfare."
So is the yumi a compound bow, a composite bow or both at different times?  Or should the article say something other than "compound" in describing the yumi?
Irrevenant 10:53, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, compound is deffinately the wrong word.  A compound bow is an invention of the twentieth century with pulleys at the ends.  --Staple 23:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bow inconsistency 

message: I do not know much about the "art" of shudo, but I have done some studies on Japanese culture. It seems to me that the existence of Shudo is over exaggerated to a point where it becomes less about what actually happened and more about romanticizing the practice. It doesn’t matter to me what the sexual preference of any specific samurai was, but this article makes it seem like shudo was an important aspect to being a samurai. Like I said, I don’t know much about the topic of shudo, but I question to whether or not it is important to have on this page. 
Another thing that is bothering me is the information on the weapons of the samurai. About halfway down the article, it become very vague, and even claims that there is controversy about samurai using horses (which I have never heard of being a "controversy"). This seems to be an opinion about how much weight a horse native to Japan could carry on its back, rather than an issue about samurai. Also, the talk about other weapons leaves me to think that whoever edited the article did not get their information from a source. Its vagueness makes it seem like it was made up. The descriptions of the weapons should be broken up into period, because what a samurai used in battle varied on the age, and the situation he was in. All that’s needed is some cleaning up by someone with the time to consult a credible source. Frank Aggro 19:20, 22 Febuary 2006 (UTC)
:Native sources, such as Watanabe and Iwata, seem to think shudo was of the essence of the practice. As anecdotal evidence, take the movie Kagemusha. It depicts the conflict between three famous daimyo, Takeda Shingen, Oda Nobunaga and Tokugawa Ieyasu. It is not mere coincidence that for each of them we know the name of at least one male lover, and Kurosawa, the director, shows on screen two of Shingen's beloveds (his pages) as well as Nobunaga's famous beloved, Mori Ranmaru. At the same time I am not surprised that you should not have run across this in your studies - there is much that has been swept under the carpet by modern historians, both Eastern and Western. Haiduc 02:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hardly swept under the carpet, if you are capable of reading history in Japanese. Homosexuality was viewed largely as a matter of taste in pre-Meiji Japan. Some people thought it was exquisite. Others thought it was sickening. Some glorified it (as in Motorori Norinaga). Others ridiculed it (as in rakugo comedies). Overall, it was taken with a "whatever rings your bell" attitude (as explained by Sugiura Hinako).Tsumugi 09:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shudo and Weapons of the Samurai 

message: due to guns from the west
Samurai coexisted with firearms for about three hundred years.  They were more so done in by societal changes than by guns.
Knightblazer 00:29, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  why were samurais removed from japan 

message: sad sentence - "pederast samurai"... I hope it is another falsification of the militant "homosexuels": such an accusation  towards japanese history and culture, which were recently much admired by me, seems horrible. posted by User:82.66.157.228
:::Sorry.  It's true.  Exploding Boy 18:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Shudo" 

message: Japanese "samurau" means to serve or guard (for the noble) and Hebrew "shamar" means to guard (Genesis 2:15). In Japanese, from "samurau" came a word "samurai" which means Japanese ancient warrior or guard. Also in Hebrew, if we attach a Hebrew suffix "ai" meaning profession to "shamar", it would be "shamarai" which sounds close to the Japanese guard "samurai". [This is the same case as "banai" which is a Hebrew word for builder and is a combination of "banah" (to build) and "ai" (suffix meaning profession) . Modern Hebrew does not have the word "Shamurai" but it fully satisfies the grammar of Hebrew.]
samuarais are very cool and will always be remebered as FUCKING IDIOTS
: Whoever left this last message really has something to say - shame that we had to hear it. Thanks for contributing in such a useful way--OzzieB 12:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: worth noting

message: Taking on the task of getting some serious editing done in this section, I would like to pose the question - what are people using for their reference material (as there is scant few included on this page).
Has anyone other references to add to this section - my principle reference in researching this were:
*"Heavenly Warriors - William Wayne Farris, Harvard University Press, 1995"
*"Samurai, Mitsuo Kure, Compendium Publishing, 2001" (pretty light reference)
*"Bushido - The Soul of Japan, Inazo Nitobe, ICG Muse Inc, 2001"
*"Legends of the Samurai, Hiroaki Sato, Overlook Press, 1995"
*"The Last Samurai - The Life and Battles of Saigō Takamori, Mark Ravina, John Wiley, 2004"
*"A History of Japan, Mason & Caiger, Tuttle Publishing, 2004"
*"A History of Japan, Vol 1-3", George Samson, Tuttle Publishing, 2000"
These are a pretty small sample of the number of authoratative references out there - and I would be happy for people to post their own reference materials - so that we can start having a discussion about specific points in the whole page. It would be also good to find some good on-line references....
To start the process, I would like to discuss the origins of samurai. Is there anything about the "Heien" period text that has any basis? It would seem to me that there is siginificant contention about the origin of samurai, and whether they were derived from the mounted warriors, or local strongmen, or whether they sprang from fuedal aristocracy. It should be remembered however that the samurai formed a particular strata in the Japanese society, or class system. When did this first manifest itself? Furthermore, samurai should be better discriminated from the lords or daimyo they served.--OzzieB 08:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With some references and a longer leading it could go to FAC. Great article! NCurse work 15:18, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References Required - Origins of Samurai 

message: This section seems to enforce a certain POV on the samurai.  The samurai had a codified code of conduct that was well established. Even if some didn't follow them to the tee, it was an ideal.  It is just like saying that some Catholic priests are hyprocties because they molest little kids. True, but it doesn't belong on the top of the Catholicism article. To put speculation like this on the top of the page to me is a violation of NPOV.  The section is still useful, but not at the top of the article.  Starting the page with the history section is much more professional and fitting. Thanks.Noodle boy 11:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the samurai code was anything but well established. Miyamoto Musashi wrote in his "Book of Five Rings" "Believe yourself to be already dead and you shall know no fear". Yamamoto Tsunetomo wrote in his "Hagakure" "The essence of Bushido is death...When faced with a choice, choose the path most likely to lead to your death for in death, even in failure, you shall not be called a coward". Nitobe Inazo wrote in "Bushido" "To hasten death or to court it is alike cowardice". Tokugawa Ieyasu wrote in his will to his children "Never speak of death as long as you breathe". So the code of the samurai spanned one extreme to the other.Tsumugi 08:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved the Myth and Reality section 

message: Where does the phrase "the Way of Death and Desperateness" come from?  The capitalization suggests that it refers to something specific, but it just reads like a non sequitur to my untrained eyes... 69.22.252.38 02:30, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to know more about this as well. I see that it still stands in the article, and still uncited. Either it was never removed (perhaps it should?), or someone keeps editing it back in. "Way of Death and Desperateness", indeed. Tsuka 19:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Way of Death and Desperateness"? 

message: 日本語と英語で失礼します。本項目の名称はSamuraiですが、歴史学的見地からするとBushiとすべきではないでしょうか。日本史学において武装した在地領主層は武士と専ら呼ばれており、「サムライ」と呼ばれることはほとんどありません。
The title of this article should be Bushi, not Samurai. In Japanese historical academy, they are always called "bushi", very rarely "samurai".--Shimoxx 17:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  title of this article 

message: I was reading what I thought was a very well writted and organised article about Samurai, when I came across this paragraph which sticks out like a sore thumb:
"In 1592, and again in 1598, Japan invaded Korea with an army of 160,000 samurai in the Seven-Year War, taking great advantage of its mastery of the arquebus and Korea's poorly organized army. Though the samurai had widespread success at first, the navy of the Joseon dynasty led by Admiral Yi Sun Shin and his ingenious Turtle ship (the world's first ironclad ships) eventually repelled Hideyoshi's invasion."
What the hell is this? I'll tell you what it is. Koreans who are hellbent on vandalising wikipedia and distorting history. Can someone please delete this crap.
If you wish to have it changed, offer up a reference to prove your view. --OrbitOne  [Talk|Babel] 05:07, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not vandalism. It does seem tad bit out of place... or maybe just poorly stated (I agree that it does sound biased), but it's pretty much true. It should be rewritten, maybe by a third party. --Atlasia 09:41:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats not vandalism... that is what did actually happen User:FLJuJitsu 00:34 02 Oct 07  —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 04:35, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Koreans trying to rewrite history 

message: The most famous book of kenjutsu, or sword fighting, dates from this period (Miyamoto Musashi's The Book of Five Rings, 1643). However, the larger part of the book is focused on the mentality of fighting.  In an attempt to help develop the character needed to cope with moral demands that the practice of kenjutsu required many kenjutsu books from the Edo period also focused on spiritual issues.
----
I grabbed that from the article. I think it is a little too short currently and would like to see it expanded. It doesn't give a strong relation as to how it adds or affects the philosophy of a Samurai and I think it can be improved on. I would like it improved on in here on the talk page before it is included again in the article. --OrbitOne  [Talk|Babel] 22:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion on a part of Philosophy section 

message: I'm sorry, why was that YouTube thing on "Simulated combat between a Samurai and an armored knight" even there? It's a bit funny, but, it really has nothing to do with this and it's not even realistic. It's just a bunch of Japanese college students fooling around. --Atlasia 09:41:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube Simulated Combat (Why was it even there?) 

message: "It is believed that mounted warriors, archers, and foot-soldiers in the sixth century may have formed a proto-samurai. [1] Following a disastrous military engagement with Tang China and Silla, Japan underwent widespread reforms. One of the most important was that of the Taika Reform, issued by Emperor Kōtoku in 646 AD. This edict introduced Chinese cultural practices and administrative techniques throughout the Japanese aristocracy and bureaucracy[1]. As part of the Yōrō Code,[2] and the later Taihō Code, of 702 AD, the population was required to report regularly for census, which was used as a precursor for national conscription. With an understanding of how the population was distributed, Emperor Mommu introduced the law whereby 1 in 3-4 adult males were drafted into the national military. These soldiers were required to supply their own weapons, and in return were exempted from duties and taxes.[1]"
This passage is about the origins of Japanese gundan-system (軍団制) and has no relation to samuraіs. Samurais emered 200-300 years later as the result of abandance of this system. The passage should be deleted or reduced.--Alex Kov 09:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Also, the first paragraph gives the impression that the samurai is somehow an offshoot of the imperial aristocracy, the kugeh. The kugeh and samurai are completely different castes of Japanese social hierarchy and should be clearly identified as such. Tsumugi 09:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just added the following to the first paragraph, "This was one of the first attempts by the Imperial government to form an organized army modelled after the Chinese system. It was called gundan-sei(軍団制) by later historians and is believed to have been short lived."Tsumugi 01:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Also added this from ja:武士. "The Taiho Code classified Imperial bureaucrats into 12 ranks, each divided into two sub-ranks, 1st rank being the highest advisor to the emperor. Those of 6th rank and below were refered to as "samurai" and dealt with day-to-day affairs. Although these "samurai" were civillian public servants, the name is believed to have derived from this term. Military men, however, would not be reffered to as "samurai" for many more centuries."Tsumugi 01:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin 

message: In my source it says that Gembuku occurred at 15 not 13 like it says in the article. Which is correct? -- Lord Airen 12:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 15 is correct. 13 is the age in which girls were allowed to marry. One interesting offshoot of this historical fact is the legal age of consent in Japan. A girl under 13 is illegal by federal law, while a girl between ages 13 up to 18 is illegal by municipal law. At the start of the Meiji era, immediately following the Tokugawa era, the age of consent was 13 following samurai custom. But not many people actually married at 13 even then. So the actual age of consent was left to the individual municipalities (prefectures). That age has been been raised gradually to 18 all over Japan. The last holdout was the district of Tokyo where the age of consent was 16 as late as 1985. If you have ever heard the urban legend that the age of consent in Japan is 13, this is where it came from. If you look only at the federal law, it is 13 to this day. (But if you fool around with a 13yo girl, it will land you in jail all the same.) Off topic, but still interesting.Tsumugi 08:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Gembuku

message: This article badly misrepresnts the power wielded by the wives of samurai. Toyotomi Hideyoshi's wife Nene was said to over-rule her husbands decisions at times, even though she never produced an heir. Hideyoshi's concubine Yodo was the master of Osaka castle after Hideyoshi's death and became one of the most powerful figures in Japan. The wife of Yamauchi Kazutoyo, often regarded as the ideal Japanese wife, was not only the defacto second-in-command during her husband's reign, but also held considerable power as a widow and was referred to as the "female daimyo". She, too, did not produce an heir. Keishoin, a daughter of a vegitable merchant who became mistress to the third Tokugawa shogun Iemitsu and mother to the fifth shogun Tokugawa Tsunayoshi, has a reputation as an unstoppable tyrant, who, through a combination of abuse of power and misplaced piousness, nearly ran the Tokugawa shogunate into the ground.
One of the reasons that the women held so much power is that matters concerning money were considered below the samurai, so the men left all financial matters to their wives. This was coupled with the pre-Confuciasim customs of Japan which was a decidedly maternal, rather than paternal, society.Tsumugi 04:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and the maternal aspects, including the relatively high status and mobility of women in Japanese culture may have not died out to this day.  But this section starts with the opposite sense, reflecting perhaps a common American bias that Japanese women are chattel.Vendrov 14:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Women 

message: I'm taking issue with one part of the make up of the Samurai.  Speaking in specific terms the Japanese sword, although made up of many parts, it is is still in fact one sword.  This is similar to the Christian concept of the tripartite soul, and even though it is made up of three separate parts, it is in fact still one God.  Consequently, when one makes reference to the daisho, without a specific and distinct understanding of the kantana, you run the risk (perhaps inevitably) of loosing the essential essence of the concept.  My worry is that slight variations in connotation will lead alterations in denotation.  To prove my point please use Noam Chomsky's "Language in Time and Space" as reference. shimano--75.60.22.60 23:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Samurai Problem  

message: When did the samurai first show up in battle?--Kenshin -Himura 13:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. --Georgethedecider 22:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  start 

message: is there any information on tamagashiri and it's history? 
especially if it was practiced on prisoners at any time, its development etc.
thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Maffc (talk • contribs) 18:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  tamagashiri 

message: To what extent can samurai descendents be distinguished in Japanese society today?  Are they likely to be wealthy and in positions of authority, or is it just a point of interest on one's family tree?  Ewan carmichael 14:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Who the (descendants of) samurai today can be just about anyone, I suppose. I'm not sure it's either relevant or interesting, though, but what can be interesting is how conscious they are of their heritage to this day. Will a descendant of samurai want his children to associate with the descendants of hinin, that sort of thing. In other words, do the social castes of yesterday affect society today? Tsuka 17:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you.  But I still wonder who and where the Tokugawas are today!Vendrov 14:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea about the social interactions, but many people today carry famous samurai names: Miyamoto, Minamoto, Fujiwara, Hojo etc. are all pretty commonplace. Given the malleable nature of family records over time, a large number of those probably claim, rightly or wrongly, descent from a samurai or higher family. As I understand it, however, the cadet line system means any such claims ought to be irrelevant. Leushenko 19:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: what about now?

message: Surprisingly, if you read this article you'll find that there are no actual sources for the text, only footnotes to some of the information.  "External Links" is not the same as a list of sources used in writing this article.  --Kuuzo 08:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of sources