I was on the swordfourum and happened to click on a thread pertaining to the samurai armor.
As I read with growing horror the information given there was horrendous and grossly incorrect.
As luck would have it our very own TFS had posted and laid the smackdown on the dolts.
lmao @ laminated bamboo armor...
"It's not that people are so dumb, it's just that they know so much stuff that just ain't so!" - Mark Twain.
B_i_c,As luck would have it our very own TFS had posted and laid the smackdown on the dolts.LOL...I was actually a bit surprised that there are still folks who buy into this whole "samurai bamboo armor" deal--I dunno, maybe the fact that most Japanese armor was coated in a tinted laquer makes it look less metallic.In any case, I did my best to set the record straight (as did a couple of other knowledgable folks there).Peace,TFS
since we're on the topic..
TFS, What was the major cause of the Meiji Restoration?
I was under the assumption that it started with Perry's arrival and suddenly the Japanese found their ships woefully inadequate vs. the battleships. this prompted them to examine themselves and realize that the isolation had caused stagnation..
Where, specifically is this thread in question?
YL, oddly enough, I cannot find it now...
B_i_c,
In regards to the Meiji Restoration, I'd venture that you've answered your own question. Tactical Grappler would be able to elaborate on it much further, though.
YL,
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27666&perpage=&pagenumber=1
Peace,
TFS
Oh yeah--YL, one more thing...
You're gonna love the references to "plate mail" on that thread.
Have Fun,
TFS
Thumbnail sketch of Meiji Restoration:
http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/japan/japanworkbook/modernhist/meiji.html
Eeeew.
I can't believe all the misinformation on that thread. About 90% of the people on that thread have no idea what they are talking about.
TFS, your post definitely cleared things up on that thread. J.Dunstan Warren also posted right before you with some correct info.
This "plate mail" thing has to stop. Role playing games (while fun at times) are responsible for a HEAP of misinformation regarding arms and armor. I believe they are resonsible (besides America's horrible education system) for myths and misunderstandings in general History as well.
Those guys should ask their questions on the armor forum where they have guys like Eric Schmidt (museum quality, professional maille maker) answering questions.
It's hard to believe that thread exists on the same site.
Jupp, like any other forum, not all members on SFI know what theyre talking about. (I belived the bamboo thing to be true myself, until I read that post.) Luckily, the ones that do (like TFS) usually step in.
YL, youre right. Roleplaying games (and the fantasy genre in general) have a lot to do with peoples misconceptions about history in general, and weaponry in particular. I cant believe how many times I have heard the old myths about 30 lbs swords, knights not able to get up if they fall, samurai swords cutting rocks, gun barrels and what have you. It almost makes me ashamed to be a gamer myself. There, I said it. I'm a geek...
Well Antijockrider, you can thank shows and movies like Highlander for setting the record straight (I guess...)
Anyways, in regards to RPGs, keep in mind that the "research" they do when writing up these handbooks uses a lot of information written back in the early 20th century (or earlier). One handbook I had in mind is the "Oriental Adventures" for AD&D (1st edition). Most of the stuff that was used as reference is not what I would regard as authoritative today (too many misinformation). I would hope that anyone writing these handbooks would be wise to use current, updated information as reference (provided that the current sources aren't repeating the same misinformation of the past).
What about FIELD plate?! (Snicker!)
"I was actually a bit surprised that there are still folks who buy into this whole "samurai bamboo armor" deal"
IIRC that's straight out of the "Oriental Adventures"
handbook. There's a little chapter in the back where
they were trying to describe differences and said
something along the lines of heavy metal armour would
rust in the mists of the East.
lol and of course there is no precipitation in
ENGLAND !
lmao!
heh, that book was fun though
"Oriental Adventures"
While an impressionable youngster, I was taught that some of the Okinawan hard arts had their roots in unarmed peasants having to throw punches that could crack through the "lacquered wooden armor" worn by the warriors. What's the real story? Were the peasants simply throwing punches strong enough, say, to knock the wind out of a warrior wearing something like metal scale armor or whatever it was? Or is the whole thing about peasants effectively punching armored warriors a bunch of hooey?
"While an impressionable youngster, I was taught that some of the Okinawan hard arts had their roots in unarmed peasants having to throw punches that could crack through the "lacquered wooden armor" worn by the warriors. What's the real story?"
Okinawan martial arts were developed primarily as defense against other peasants--NOT armored samurai.
"Were the peasants simply throwing punches strong enough, say, to knock the wind out of a warrior wearing something like metal scale armor or whatever it was?"
No, they were throwing punches strong enough to knock down other commoners (who often had little training).
"Or is the whole thing about peasants effectively punching armored warriors a bunch of hooey?"A huge load of unresearched hooey.
Not to take the thread off on too much of a tangent, but I think the myth of punching holes through wooden armor grew out of a need to justify the tameshiwari that is praciticed (and sensationalized) by many karateka. There are several problems with the assumption that a punch that breaks a board will damage an armor-wearing opponent:
1. Samurai (as far as I know) did not wear wooden armor. There may have been certain periods in history where wooden armor was experimented with, but, make no mistake, it was NEVER the norm.
2. When boards are broken, the ends are typically held stationary and the board itself is struck so that it is able to break *with* the grain. For such a break to occur, the middle of the board must be accelerated a certain distance relative to the ends of the board (this is true of an unsupported "speed break" as well). Wooden armor, on the other hand, would be situated flush on the wearer's body, and as such, would require significantly greater force to break (assuming similar materials, size, tensile strength, and thickness). Because of the drastic differences between board positioning in a demonstration and board positioning for armor (that is *if* anyone ever used it), one's ability to break a typical 3/4" pine board does NOT mean they would necessarily be able to break through a section of wooden armor.
3. Even if the samurai did wear wooden armor, and even if you could conceivably break it with a punch, the wood itself would still absorb a tremendous amount of kinetic energy. So, in effect, the whole situation becomes analogous to the typical demonstration of having someone break (usually with a sledge hammer) a cement block placed on your stomach. With a cement block on my stomach, even *I* can take a hit from a sledge hammer.
Regards,
Richard
Oh no Richard, it's not way too off tangent. If you hadn't said it first, I probably would have said the same thing myself (after indulging myself in the "Oriental Adventure" handbook again! I still can't believe Ashida Kim is one of the references for that book).
Speaking of the references in that book, one of them is that massive book entitled "Secrets of the Samurai." I'm not terribly sure myself (since it has been a long time since I glanced at that book), but I have a suspicion that the myth of the samurai's wooden armor may have came out of that book. Does anyone know?