Understanding Samurai Disloyalty

[John C]

A scholarly article that some may find interesting.

https://newvoices.org.au/volume-2/understanding-samurai-disloyalty/

 

John C.

@Scogg Sam: should this be in some other category?

[Scogg]

Hi John,

 

You’ve posted this in the correct category 

 

I haven’t had the opportunity to read the whole thing, but after skimming the page a bit, it seems like an interesting write-up. 

Thanks for sharing.

All the best,

-Sam 

[Robert S]

Very useful to something I'm working on currently!

[palousian]

That is an interesting paper, thanks for posting that. It takes an intriguing position and makes a very strong case. As soon as I got into it, I thought of a raft of historical examples proving the author's position.

 

The one section that didn't quite work for me was the part on zanshin, an issue that has been an essential part of my three decades of aikido training. I liked the thought-exercise of considering how zanshin could be related to the acceptance of disloyalty in samurai culture, but ultimately I wasn't convinced of its relevance. The idea of being on the lookout for betrayal is not really a component of zanshin, which is pure awareness, apart from the judgment of friend or foe. Zanshin doesn't exist because of disloyalty, it exists because it is the most effective mindset for a warrior. This problem in no way undermines the author's thesis, though, in my opinion.

 

Paul

[Guest When Necessary]

One only has to look at Sekigahara and countless other battles where samurai commanders changed sides at the last moment or stood aside when they promised to participate.

 

Even the much idolised concept of bushido was a modern construct, invented by Inazo Nitobe in 1900 and samurai would never have even used the word.

Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit

[Tcat]

11 hours ago, When Necessary said:

Even the much idolised concept of bushido was a modern construct, invented by Inazo Nitobe in 1900 and samurai would never have even used the word.

That is false. While Inazō Nitobe’s Bushido: The Soul of Japan (1899) popularized the term in the West and reframed it as a moral philosophy, the word bushidō itself long predates him. It appears, for instance, in the Kōyō Gunkan (c. 1616) and in writings by Yamaga Sokō and Daidōji Yūzan, where it already referred to the “proper way or path of the warrior”. So, it can be said that Edo-period samurai were familiar with both the term and the ethical ideals it denoted…though I can concede that its meaning evolved over time. However, Nitobe certainly did not invent the concept bushidō; he reinterpreted an existing Japanese concept for a Western audience within a Meiji-era, Christian-humanist framework.

 

Meanwhile, the groundwork for the formation of the concept of bushidō was  done in Kamakura and Muromachi periods, its ethical substance was codified under terms like kyūba no michi and shidō, and is well-attested to in period texts and chronicles eg. Heike Monogatari (平家物語, early 13th c.), Taiheiki (太平記, 14th c.), Chikubashō (竹馬抄, 1383) etc.

 

 

[Guest When Necessary]

7 hours ago, Tcat said:

That is false. While Inazō Nitobe’s Bushido: The Soul of Japan (1899) popularized the term in the West and reframed it as a moral philosophy, the word bushidō itself long predates him. It appears, for instance, in the Kōyō Gunkan (c. 1616) and in writings by Yamaga Sokō and Daidōji Yūzan, where it already referred to the “proper way or path of the warrior”. So, it can be said that Edo-period samurai were familiar with both the term and the ethical ideals it denoted…though I can concede that its meaning evolved over time. However, Nitobe certainly did not invent the concept bushidō; he reinterpreted an existing Japanese concept for a Western audience within a Meiji-era, Christian-humanist framework.

 

Meanwhile, the groundwork for the formation of the concept of bushidō was  done in Kamakura and Muromachi periods, its ethical substance was codified under terms like kyūba no michi and shidō, and is well-attested to in period texts and chronicles eg. Heike Monogatari (平家物語, early 13th c.), Taiheiki (太平記, 14th c.), Chikubashō (竹馬抄, 1383) etc.

 

 

I stand corrected (on behalf of 'Rich', the mono-monikered author of the article I linked to). 

I suppose all military fraternities inevitably need to create some idealistic, fantasised coda or credo in order to validate their vocation of sadism, rape, murder, torture, subjugation of common people, theft of land etc, etc,

Alas, we see it even today.

[Mark S.]

1 hour ago, When Necessary said:

I suppose all military fraternities inevitably need to create some idealistic, fantasised coda or credo in order to validate their vocation of sadism, rape, murder, torture, subjugation of common people, theft of land etc, etc,

 

Not “All”.  

[Guest When Necessary]

14 minutes ago, Mark S. said:

Not “All”.  

 

[Robert S]

On 10/18/2025 at 10:43 AM, Tcat said:

Meanwhile, the groundwork for the formation of the concept of bushidō was  done in Kamakura and Muromachi periods, its ethical substance was codified under terms like kyūba no michi and shidō, and is well-attested to in period texts and chronicles eg. Heike Monogatari (平家物語, early 13th c.), Taiheiki (太平記, 14th c.), Chikubashō (竹馬抄, 1383) etc.

 

 

Heike monagatori certainly tries to reinforce notions of loyalty - retainers repeatedly saying "we owe everything to you, we will never abandon you"... but it is also completely full of betrayals, clans switching sides, retainers abandoning their lords...  It also contains examples of the betrayals of the other side of the deal - lords betraying and eve hunting down those who have served them loyally.  Lots of Heike would make Machiavelli proud!

[Bruce Pennington]

It's simply a case of the Ideal giving way to the real.  Oaths and loyalty are beautiful and necessary, but humans are faulty and fallible.  One of the most recognized examples is the marriage oath.  Swearing before God and Man to be faithful, yet many fail.  Swearing "...till death do us part," yet divorce is rampant. 

 

Some people, by nature, are idealists.  Some simply pragmatic.