Death & Injuries In Samurai Battles

[Gordon Sanders]

HI Guys.

 

I was poking around on the 'net and found these "facts".  

 

What do you think? Do they sound reasonable?

------------

 Death & Injuries in Battle 

This information comes from Dr. Karl Friday and was originally posted on Iaido-L (an excellent source of information) Nov. 5th., 1999: 

620 Recorded Battlewound Casualties (1500-1560 A.D.) 

• 368 arrow wounds 
• 124 spear wounds 
• 96 injuries from thrown or slung rocks 
• 18 sword wounds 
• 7 combined arrow and spear wounds 
• 3 arrow and sword wounds 
• 2 rock and spear wounds 
• 2 rock and arrow wounds 

584 Recorded Battlewound Casualties (1563-1600 A.D.) 

• 263 gunshot wounds 
• 126 arrow wounds 
• 99 spear wounds 
• 40 sword wounds 
• 30 injuries from thrown or slung rocks 
• 26 injured by combinations 

This information was based on:

• 85 documents ranging from 1500-1600 A.D.
• representing 1428 casualties that resulted in only 216 deaths. 

Long range weapons accounted for:

• about 75% of wounds received in the pre-gun area
• about 72% in the post-gun era.

 

 

[almeister]

???

Perhaps in one small town ????

Am i reading your post wrong ????

There were NUMEROUS CASUALTIES/DEATHS over the feudal years ??

AlanK

[Randy McCall]

As the stats being quoted needed some context, I went back and looked up the discussion in question on Iaido-L  https://listserv.uoguelph.ca/cgi-bin/wa?A0=IAIDO-L

Dr. Friday's comment containing the information you mention appears in a discussion thread called "Battlefield Realizm".  To view the entire thread, go here:  https://listserv.uoguelph.ca/cgi-bin/wa and enter Battlefield Realizm in String, making sure Sub-String is checked.

The discussion focused on how real modern impressions of Japanese battlefield combat are.  Dr. Friday's post was in response to a section of the discussion on whether samurai primarily used their swords in battle, and on the effects of firearms on Japanese strategies. The statistics he uses are meant to show that the bow, and later the gun, were actually the main weapons of war, with other longer ranged weapons coming into play (spears and such), before swords would be used.  Data quoted wasn't total casualties for the time periods listed, but information from a select group of reports where number-and-type of wounds received were described.

While the original post by Dr. Friday seems to have been deleted from the thread, it still exists as a quote in a response from another member of Iaido-L. 
Link to full post and the quote of Dr. Friday:  https://listserv.uoguelph.ca/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9911&L=IAIDO-L&P=R4660&1=IAIDO-L&9=A&I=-3&J=on&d=No+Match%3BMatch%3BMatches&z=4

 

I've extracted the quote below, removing all the line carriage markers and other listserv items
 

On Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:39:33 +0900, Karl Fridaywrote:They lost in part because the gov't army outnumbered them, and in part because they approached the fighting with a largely traditional samurai mindset andtactics.  The main drama of the rebellion, and the principal militaryhistory lesson to come out of it, wasn't so much that machine guns candefeat swordsmen, but that the era of the hereditary, professionalwarrior was over--peasant troops could easily be more than a match for samurai.Was this plain stupidity or was it "makin' a statement"?Not the knowledge of the fact that they would be heavily outnumbered, thiswas not much to be done about...But fighting in a "traditional" way?Hadn't it been proved several times earlier in history that matchlock-meneasily could wipe out Samurai cavalry? Hadn't they learnt the lesson,didn't they have the knowledge, or was this a mass-suicide?I think you could call it a little of both plain stupidity and "makin' astatement."  As far as matchlocks vs. cavalry providing lessons, therereally isn't much relevance.First, this whole picture of Light Brigade style charges against gunners is dramatically overblown; there's a ton of new research coming out thatshows that guns didn't dramatically alter the shape of Japanese warfare, theysimply replaced the bow and arrow.  An analysis that I was just looking atthis morning, of documents reporting battle wounds, for example, shows thatbetween 1500 and 1560, out of some 620 casualties described, 368 were arrowwounds, 124 were spear wounds, 96 were injuries from rocks (thrown byslings or by hand), 18 were sword wounds, 7 were combined arrow and spearwounds, 3 were combined arrow and sword wounds, 2 were combined rock andspear wounds, and 2 were combined rock and arrow wounds.    Between 1563and 1600 (after the adoption of the gun) some 584 reported casualties breakdown as follows: there were 263 gunshot victims, 126 arrow victims, 99spear victims, 40 sword victims, 30 injured by rocks, and 26 injured bycombinations of the above (including one poor SOB who was shot by bothguns and arrows and stabbed by spears, and one who was speared, naginata-ed,and cut with a sword).  In other words, long distance weapons (arrows androcks) accounted for about 75% of the wounds received in the pre-gun era,and about 72 % (arrows + guns + rocks) during the gunpowder era.  Which isto say that "traditional fighting" does not appear to have been heavilycentered on close-quarters clashes of swords or even of spears, except inliterary sources.Second, and more to the point, what matchlocks could do to and for 16thcentury armies is pretty much irrelevant to the issue in 1877.  As I saidearlier, even Saigo's rebel army made some use of modern firearms--and ofcourse they also had matchlocks, as well as swords and such.  They evenhad some experience in modern Western tactics and drill, although they weren'tcommitted to this new paradigm to the extent that the gov't army was.  Thebig shock/drama/lesson though, was not so much tactics and/or hardware perse, as the fact that an army of samurai--hereditary, professionalfighters--could be beaten by one composed of conscripts.The whole episode was, in fact, essentially suicidal from the outset, andSaigo knew it.  It began when some of his followers took it ontothemselves to raid a gov't army, and Saigo fatalistically decided that the die hadbeen cast.  He had already decided that he was something of an anachronismanyway (which is why he had retired to Kyushu in the first place) andseems to have looked on this as an opportunity for a glorious death.Karl FridayDept. of HistoryUniversity of GeorgiaAthens, GA 30602ph. (706) 542-2537

A couple of years ago I did a blog piece covering parts of this issue, using bio-archeology research done by several scientists as a base.  If you're interested:
"The debate on Japanese swordsmanship based on skeletal trauma":  http://www.tameshigiri.ca/2014/04/25/the-debate-on-Japanese-swordsmanship-based-on-skeletal-trauma/

[Brian]

Very interesting figures. Really does seem that the sword are extremely minor in a battlefield context. Didn't realize that rocks and stones would have been so prevalent either.

Arrows and spears...yes.

[almeister]

Thanks for some clarification/explanation on the topic Randy !

Thanks for posting a relevant discussion point Gordon !

These are the type of topics we need to hear/learn more about !

Cheers , AlanK ????

[Gordon Sanders]

Thanks... I knew that there were some context points that I was missing regarding the actual totals.  But the use of the sword was surprising, even though i know that was the case.

 

certainly removes some of the romanticism

[Gordon Sanders]

i do find it funny,  HIT HIM WITH ROCK and THEN...Shoot him with an ARROW.

 

Or do you suppose it was the other way around !

[Kronos]

The rocks were most likely used in seiges of castles no?

[Randy McCall]

Stones were often used as peasant weapons... I am given to understand the post (linked below) recounts the details on monument to a 1768 battle (or an uprising) by peasant forces;  a sling and it's use is described.  My Japanese isn't up to providing anything close to a translation to be sure this is a correct reading though.  Perhaps someone with more experience can confirm.

http://ameblo.jp/no-bon/entry-11619873453.html

[Fuuten]

I can't for the life of me remember where, but I've seen some battlefield medic book some time, where it was quite clear they knew how to handle injuries and were pretty good at saving people.

[Randy McCall]

I can't for the life of me remember where, but I've seen some battlefield medic book some time, where it was quite clear they knew how to handle injuries and were pretty good at saving people.

 

There is an excellent article (sadly, the only source I know is behind a paywall):   "War and Injury: The Emergence of Wound Medicine in Medieval Japan" https://www.jstor.org/stable/25066385?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

which lists a large body of medical knowledge regarding treatments for battlefield injuries, including both surgery and Asian traditional natural medicine, from the period of the 14th and 15th centuries.

 

Much of the information in the article is drawn from two classic texts:  the Kinso Ryjisho (physical medicine) and the Kiho (natural medicine).  The following is the table of contents from both documents.

 

Kinso ryjisho

 

1. Knowing whether the wound is fatal

2. The ten good and the ten bad signs

3. Stopping the blood from a wound

4. Knowing the pain/agony of a wound

5. Stopping "blood awryness" (chiyoi, losing one's senses, going mad)

6. Putting back in viscera that have come out

7. Making blood seep from a wound that is not seeping

8. Expelling blood that has lodged in the body

9. Opening the mouth of a wound

10. Stopping delirium as a result of the wound

11. Extracting an arrowhead that has become lodged

12. Mending shins, forearms, and trunks that have been severely cut

13. Mending muscle/sinew that has been cut

14. A separate oral transmission for mending necks that have been cut

15. Where wounds are drawing away life

16. Fixing where [an arrowhead?] is lodged in the mouth of an injury

17. So that wounds are not swollen and not suppurating

18. A wound where the top [surface] is healed but the base [underneath] is not healed

19. Treating/curing wind-stroke syndrome and kakke [resulting from] the injury

20. Healing wounds that have become suppurative (kusaritaru)

21. Healing [treating] for when wounds are leading towards kakke

22. Treating for arrow-piercing where the mouth of the injury is narrow, and the base [of the injury] is deep

23. Where the mouth of the wound is rolled inwards, and [the person] will die

24. How to know the depth or shallowness of a wound

25. Special wounds that suddenly heal in a night

26. Wounds where the flesh suddenly heals and grows back

27. Healing wounds that have not healed over a long period

28. Resurgence/flaring up of old wounds as a result of improper activities

29. Insects [maggots, worms] appearing in a wound

30. Being struck with a poisoned arrow

31. Mending genitals that have been cut

32. Washing wounds

33. Healing wounds without [leaving] scars

34. Making indented scars flat

35. Regrowing [flesh] where flesh has been lost

36. Treating where the healed mouth of a wound has become raised

37. Getting rid of (otosu) the "sweet [raised?] flesh" (amaniku) on a wound

38. Making attractive a wound [scar] on the head

39. Brains protruding from a wound to the head

40. When legs are unsteady as the result of a head wound

41. When someone is bent/curled up due to the wounds

42. Blood coming from the throat as a result of a wound

43. Treating for when there are sudden changes in the eyes [due to] pain within the body [from] the injury

44. Wound medicine

45. [Foods] poisonous and medicinal for wounds

46. Treating wounds with moxibustion

47. Having been wounded, where death is certain

48. Wounds to the [toe] nails

49. Purgative medicines [to relieve constipation as a result of a wound]

50. Treating with candock

51. Making seep from an arrow-shot wound blood that is not seeping

52. Stopping life  from coming out of a wound

53. Infusions for wounds

54. Treating for when the head has been crushed and the brains are coming out

55. Ointments/salves

 

 

Kiho

 

1. Stopping bleeding

2. Medicines that are to be imbibed internally

3. Infusions

4. Stopping aching

5. Moxibustion

6. The width of a wound

7. Making blood flow/run

8. Akada powdered medicine

9. Stopping pain within the body

10. Putting back in viscera

11. Knowing the depth of a wound

12. Bruise wounds

13. Treatment for when the mouth of the wound has dried/hardened [i.e., is not moist]

14. So that a wound will not become swollen

15. Treating the pain of a wound

16. Extracting a lodged arrowhead

17. Treating [with?] dried insect

18. Treatment for wounds to the eye from an arrow

19. Healing medicines for wounds

20. Treating for when the eyes do not see

21. Putting back in brains that are protruding from the head

22. Treating with candock

23. Treating crushed/smashed bones

24. The second initiation, by medicine

25. Not causing scars from the wound

26. The mouth of a wound becoming weepy

27. Constipation resulting from the injury

28. Treating [limbs? parts?] that have been deeply cut

29. Treating bones that have been cut

30. Treating wounds that have become swollen

31. Treating old wounds where the person has damaged what had been repaired

32. Reducing where the mouth of a wound has become raised

33. Wounds [suffered] when being drunk on rice wine

34. Treating wounds from being bitten by a wild boar or deer

35. Seeing whether someone is dead or alive

36. Repairing sinews that have been cut

37. Seven Medicine compound

38. Black Medicine (kurogusuri)

39. Green Medicine (aogusuri)

40. White Medicine (shirogusuri)

41. Incense medicines

42. Decocting/broiling five incenses

43. Treating the wounds

[Fuuten]

Thank you Randy,

 

And all this after all their clever inventions to avoid getting hit. This reminds me of the arrow catcher, quite ingenious and effective:)

 

[Steve Waszak]

 "Was this plain stupidity or was it 'makin' a statement'? Not the knowledge of the fact that they would be heavily outnumbered, this was not much to be done about...But fighting in a 'traditional' way?" 

 

"The big shock/drama/lesson though, was not so much tactics and/or hardware per se, as the fact that an army of samurai--hereditary, professional fighters--could be beaten by one composed of conscripts. The whole episode was, in fact, essentially suicidal from the outset, and Saigo knew it." 

 

--Karl Friday

 

 

I find it curious that Friday reaches the conclusion he does ("shock/drama") in the second quoted passage, given the observation he makes in the first ("...heavily outnumbered...").  A pack of hyenas can drive a lion from a kill, and even kill the lion.  But one on one, the lion will kill, effortlessly, a hyena.  Does the outcome of the Battle of Thermopylae mean that the Persians were stronger fighters (individually)  than the Spartans?  Hardly.   What, exactly, were the numbers involved in Saigo's rebellion?  By what ratio was his "army" outnumbered? 

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

 

P.S.  I cannot make the shaded-quotes function work on my computer.  Doesn't matter what I try, including checking the FAQs on quote insertion.

[kissakai]

Hi

What happened to the two samurai who faced each other in single combact after declaring their lineage?

All fiction?

 

 

Grev UK