Note: This post will interest no one but me. Oda Nobunaga (1534-1582) was the first great unifier of Japan. He was most of the way there when assassinated by one of his top generals. The Sengoku era was a time of open chaos with no central authority and sixty some odd provinces left to their own devices. It was a time of pure meritocracy, when a man with the greatest mind from one of the smallest domains could rise to the very top - and did.
For better or for worse, Sengoku era warlord Oda Nobunaga is the Japanese historical figure with whom I relate the most. I have posted fictionalized accounts with supposed insights into him and do believe he embodies both what is best and worst about Japan and Japanese character. Nobunaga is often condemned by historians and his contemporaries as someone "callous and brutal", while the author of "Japonius Tyrannus, Oda Nobunaga Reconsidered" surmises at the end he was instead "pragmatic and ruthless". I agree with the author's conclusion.
Oda is still a popular figure in Japanese pop culture and oftentimes is portrayed as a demonic, power-mad figure. This is understandable because Oda's ruthlessness was at a level not understood by lesser minds. Also, Oda's abilities were such as to arouse intense hatred and jealousy and as we all know it's easier to demonize than to recognize one's own shortcomings. It's easy to parse out certain aspects of Oda's personality and claim that's all he was but as the author of this (very expensive) book points out, he was a very complex man. One thing is for sure, he was the right man at the right place at the right time in Japanese history.
But while I do agree with the author's final assessment of Oda I do find this biography to be very lacking. First off, it was first written as an academic thesis for a doctorate and therefore is hamstrung by the idea that only that which has evidentiary support can be included to appease fellow academics who will wish to tear it apart. It was later adapted to be put in book form. It should also be noted one needs a good understanding of the Sengoku period before even attempting to read this book as the author takes that for granted of the reader.
As far as sheer volume of information it's hard to fault the author. But information alone does not a biography make! One needs context and insight if we are to get into the heart and mind of a subject. The author is mostly diligent at attempting to provide contemporary context of individual items but provides very little in the way of insight of how they all fit together. He fails to connect the dots of the "what" and "why" to give us the "who" of Nobunaga. Perhaps he did not feel that was his place as is often the misplaced concern of the false god of objectivity.
The most glaring omission is a complete lack of a breakdown of the Battle of Okehazama, which gave birth to Oda's rise to power. To analyze Nobunaga's thought process in fighting an army ten times his own, to review his tactics and strategy here would be to see a pattern that will be repeated for the rest of his life. Had he turned tail in the face of superior numbers or martyred himself in a suicidal last stand or made peace to become another warlord's vassal would have relegated Oda to the dustbin of history. It's the most illuminating moment of his short life.
I expected a special emphasis on this turning point that most of Oda's vassals considered a rash decision. There is, after all, this rousing speech Oda made to his men:
"Imagawa has 40,000 men marching toward this place? I don't believe that. He 'only' has 35,000 soldiers. Yes, that is still too many. So, Sado, you want me to surrender. What if we do surrender? Will you get content with losing your life that way? Or what if we hold on like Katsuie wants me to? What if we stay here in this castle, lock it up, and wait until the Imagawas lose appetite and stop the siege and go home? We will be able to prolong our lives for five or ten days, and what we cannot defend will still be undefendable. We are at the bottom of the pit, you know. And our fate is interesting. Of course the misery is too great, too. But this is how I see it: this is a chance in a lifetime. I can't afford to miss this. Do you really want to spend your entire lives praying for longevity? We were born in order to die! Whoever is with me, come to the battlefield tomorrow morning. Whoever is not, just stay wherever you are and watch me win it!"
That most certainly gives a certain psychological insight into the man. To understand Oda from the outside one must first understand how Oda thought of himself inside. From here we can see was at the very least an opportunist, a man of the times feeling his destiny - and this outlook surely colored his remaining decisions. (Click here to read my account of this historic decision).
Another important aspect of Nobunaga that often gets shrouded in his lust for conquest and ruthless intolerance for national factions is that Oda very much considered himself a builder. The book is quite detailed on reforms instituted by Oda, the creation of infrastructure, and his giving rise to the concept of castle cities as power bases. What is not pointed out is what gave Oda an edge was he had a goal larger than himself in mind, something more than simply attaining power but rather to build and create a new Japan, united at last.
Another point that cannot be overemphasized is the pioneering nature and burden of Oda's initial strides for national unification. There was no roadmap to follow or standards to go by in taking a country with an almost nonexistent central government and building from the ground up. One might have great military prowess but not political acumen. One might be an expert at logistics but not have the wherewithal to create an opportunity for implementation. Oda had it all: battlefield tactics, economic and administrative capabilities as well as the political acumen to hold his burgeoning domain together.
I thought the author was remiss in not fully providing that insight. Oda was in a position of constantly having to adapt as his powers changed. His assassination cut short the full extant of what he had in mind as final policies for the homeland he wished to both rule and serve. Both of Oda's successors in the final unification of Japan lacked his vision and his understanding of what could be the constructs of a nation. They instead receded into a conservative path bent on retaining seized power which led to a rotting of the country in the Tokugawa era of the next 250 years. (See my posting "To Whom Can I Answer" for my take on Oda's plight.)
One of the strengths of the book, however, is what the title implies: a reconsideration of the characterization of Oda in his behavior and policies. In these closer scenarios the book is most excellent in providing context and possible bias by the authors of the day. The best example of this is the Jesuit Frois who generally lauded Nobunaga throughout the course of his campaigns (mostly because Oda was ruthless in dealing with the Buddhist warrior monks who pestered him for ten years, which the Jesuit mistook as a fight for Christianity, which couldn't be farther from the truth) but when it came time to relay the news of Oda's death was in a quandary having previously explained Oda's victories as divine providence. Had God turned on his servant?
This caused the good Jesuit to concoct a story of Oda as a man who at the end had violated God by proclaiming himself a god, demanding worship and the promise of rewards in the afterlife. Oda had no use for heaven, hell, the afterlife or anything else that did not immediately concern his affairs of state and had always made that clear. You could believe as you wish so long as your interests did not cross his. The author did an outstanding job of exposing the Jesuit and his motives in a story not corroborated by any other documenters of the time.
My print of Oda's final moments
The greatest service the book yields is in that of the strongest case yet for the motives of Akechi Mitsuhide, Oda's assassin. Popular myth has it Oda's alleged mistreatment of this inner circle member had put Akechi in the mindset he had fallen out of favor and was in a kill or be killed situation, thus leading Akechi to strike first. But while there may have been some discontented politics of the day, looking back it's hard to see it reaching the level of inducing murder. (My account of his final day)
Rather, the author contends it was a case of simple Sengoku ambition, a time of promotion through betrayal. If Oda had one blind spot it was most likely that of believing his top generals at least shared and understood to some extant his goal of building Japan for the greater good - and that to betray that was to betray oneself. Instead, Mitsuhide saw Nobunaga as having reached a point of stability by 1582 that if he betrayed his overlord now he could easily step in to rule the nation. (He was fatally wrong, killed in less than two weeks by Hideyoshi, the second of the three unifiers of Japan.)
In conclusion I'd say the author did an excellent job parsing out some individual events and aspects of Oda's career but his final epilogue was more a recap than analysis. As a research volume I'd say it's quite valuable but as a biography it most certainly is not a stand alone piece: I know much about the man but I don't end up much knowing the man. I do believe if someone were to do a more complete portrait of Oda Nobunaga this book would be a good foundation from which to begin. The ultimate Oda book has yet to be written.
No comments:
Post a Comment