- Jan 2015
- Ontario, Canada
No, I am making the argument that I can put Oda Nobunaga up on a pedestal but I don't have to do the same for Liu Bang.You are making the counter that you can claim Liu Bang is inept because they aren't the same?
Nobunaga didn't execute any of his commanders, but he exiled people who were with him from the very beginning.
At Inogahara, from what I read from 信長公記, it had very little to do with tactics. His troops were getting pushed back, and he gave out a pretty good roar, and the enemy got confused and in the confusion, he was able to push through. They were confused because Nobunaga was the official leader of the Oda Clan, and Oda soldiers were not exactly thrilled attacking him. Did he plan that? I don't know, I don't think he did. I mean, I wouldn't bet my life on me shouting will result in enemies routing.
And you can say as many time as you want, the reality is different. You have plenty of pitch battles where matters are settled. For example, Mori at Battle of Miyajima. In fact, you can say when you can't fight decisive battles, you resort to sieges and attritions and such. Look at the Azai's defense. When the Asakura wasn't having brain farts, they took the field, why? Because that's more efficient. And when the Asakura decided that it's gona be cold and we better bail and hang our allies out to dry, Azai switch to attrition and sieges.
And aren't you just agreeing with me that Mino was a situation of diplomacy and intrigue? In the same book, it was said that the situation turned dramatically when Mino Triumvirate joined Nobunaga in Aug and Mino surrendered in Sep. Whereas in previous year, Nobunaga was just stalling at Kiso river. So realistically, you can't tell me that in 1566 June, Nobunaga pass the Kiso river (or was he stuck around there I can't really tell) and just enter a stalemate around Kiso, and then suddenly in 1567 Sep he captured everything after the Mino Triumvirate joined him because it was all military.
Not sure what your point is here. Exile is a far better punishment than execution, not to mention that in this case exile only means being removed from their fiefs and no longer serving Nobunaga. Hayashi and Sakuma were far from the most loyal. Though at least Sakuma did not outright rebel, he was removed from his position because Nobunaga accused him of ineptitude in command during the siege of the Ishiyama Honganji and neglecting his duties. Hayashi had been a problematic vassal and a constant naysayer, he was then the architect of the revolt which led to the Battle of Inogahara and the death of his brother Hayashi Mimasaka in battle.
That is far from what happened at Inogahara and you can find that out in the exact same source (Shinchokoki). Obviously that is an embellishment by Ota Gyuichi since he constantly makes statements like that, are we then to believe that Nobunaga could defeat entire armies by screaming at them? Obviously Nobunaga managed to rally his line and defeated the 1,000 men of Shibata in combat. But the Shinchokoki says a lot more than that.
The Battle of Miyajima fought by Mori Motonari was the exception not the rule. Even then it was a combined land and naval operation with greater consequences. You will find that the Mori also had to fight many more sieges than battles. As I pointed out with Shingen and Kenshin they did not fight that many pitched battles either and when they did the majority of them lacked any worthwhile repercussions (in fact the only truly brilliant tactical engagement with any strategic importance was Sezawa).
The Asakura also took to the field with the Azai, yes they were a little slow to react but they never abandoned their allies. Every engagement where they faced Nobunaga they were defeated and failed in their operational goal. Whenever they took to the field after that they were not trying to face Nobunaga in battle but rather they were attempting to outmaneuver Nobunaga, none of which actually succeeded anyway. In 1572 Nobunaga ended up trapping them in their own camp from where they barely escaped. Even if they had moved quicker the emphasis would have been on capitalizing on time in order to pull off a maneuver, not in defeating Nobunaga in a tactical engagement, which they had already given up on. That led to Nobunaga wiping them both out in 1573 and reclaiming Kyoto, which led to his abolishing the Ashikaga Shogunate and banishing Ashikaga Yoshiaki.
Nobunaga was winning in Mino province up to 1566. Grabbing the vassals that he did in 1567 only led to his taking Inabayama and Saito Tatsuoki was hard pressed even before that. What was that like the second time Nobunaga marched up to his castle with an entire army or something. Only reason it lasted so long was because *drum roll* as I said warfare was not about pitched battles, it was about attrition and sieges. If the Saito clan had the resources before then why did they simply not pull Nobunaga into a pitched battle and defeat him once and for all?