Just finished watching Kagemusha. I'm wondering about how much of it was fact as opposed to fiction.
Was Nobunaga really that much of a westaboo?
Why do the Japanese hate Nobunaga so much? Every depiction of him in Japanese media shows him as a despot asshole.
>>362305
yeah he it was well known that he was a patron of western arts and culture. He was also quite lenient with Christian Jesuits, although that was more to balance the power of the Buddhist monks (whom he detested) than because of any appreciation of the faith itself.
Plus he loved firearms
He was a lot more internationally minded than his successors
>>362315
probably because he was a brutal fucker
>>362327
Yeah, but that's what it takes to unify a country. Besides, those monks were being cunts.
>>362305
He was a major westaboo.
>Opened trade with foreigners
>Made a black slave a retainer
>Welcomed Christians to his land despite being an atheist and never converting
>Adopted European tactics, namely pikes and firearms, revolutionizing warfare in Japan
>Wore a Western style cuirass
>>362315
He styled himself The Demon King of the Sixth Heaven. He was absolutely ruthless and notoriously hard on his retainers. It might've been slightly overblown over the years simply for story telling, similarly to Cao Cao, but he was a brutal dude.
Still he was a brilliant leader.
>>362315
He's also one of the most admired figures in Japanese history.
They don't universally hate him, but he was a selfish ambitious asshole.
>>362305
The first and only Portugalboo in history.
t. not Alberto Barbosa
>>362315
>Why do the Japanese hate Nobunaga so much?
a) Because he was ruthless and openly cultivated the image that he was the devil.
b) they don't really hate him (ala Hitler hate). He is still considered the first of the three great unifiers of Japan. The Tokugawa for example probably would still get more shit for their isolationism to the point their descendants publish propaganda defending the Shogunate.
>>362355
In much the same way Julius Caesar was. Doesn't exactly mean he was the wrong man for the job.
He laid the groundwork for the modernization of Japan.
>>362349
>>Adopted European tactics, namely pikes and firearms
No, he invented tactics. Westaboos don't like to admit Nobunaga invented volley fire with guns before they did.
>>362379
>He invented volley fire.
Come on now, son.
>>362397
volley fire for matchlocks as well as reloading drills were developed independently in japan after the mass adoption of firearms
Honestly, its fairly logical and was developed independently in other parts of the world as
>>362433
I'm not saying that they didn't come up with it on their own, but they weren't the first. The term "Invented" implies being the first to make something.
>>362467
Believe it or not, 1575 comes before 1594.
>>362480
>[Citation Needed]
>>362490
Geoffrey Parker, "The Limits to Revolutions in Military Affairs: Maurice of Nassau, the Battle of Nieuwpoort (1600), and the Legacy," Journal of Military History (2007) 71#2 pp 331–372
>>362499
>Maurice of Nassau
so the spaniards could not into synchronizing their gunmen when they had all those decades as top dog?
>>362614
>but you cant prove god doesnt exist
>i mean humans exist
>>362614
>whitey cant admit jap is superior
Japan had more guns than Europe when Nobunaga was alive.
>>362397
You do know Nobunaga died two years before Maurice of Nassau came to power, right?
He probably was the first to use volley tactics rather than deep formations with countermarching files.
>>362379
>Westaboos don't like to admit Nobunaga invented volley fire with guns before they did.
Volley firing was old as fucking fuck before Nobunaga did his shit and a lot of people came up on it before
Particularly people who used crossbows before and applied the same logic to firearms.
>Although the military historian Geoffrey Parker attributes its "invention" in Europe in an influential thesis to the Dutch rebels William Louis and Maurice of Nassau in 1594,[2] a number of instances attest that volley fire and the countermarch were already in "common use" in Europe by this time.[3] The contemporary Italian historian Jovius records how a form of volley fire was employed by Colonna's arquebusiers as early as the Battle of Bicocca (1522)
Pic related. A rotating volley in China. 1520-30's.
>>362614
I don't think you understand what "volley" means in this context. It refers to using shallow formations where all men fire simultaneously, or nearly so.
The Spanish Tercios fought in "bastioned squares", and these like other deep formations allowed very few musketeers to fire at once, usually rotating through the formation to allow a slow but steady rate of fire.
>>362365
>t. Alberto Barbosa
It's like I never left /int/
>>364134
>It's like I never left /int/
t. Alberto Barbosa or pajeet
>>364035
>we wuz first
>we have no evidence
>but trust us it couldnt be a japanese guy came up with it
>come up with random date for illustration from a revised copy of fire dragon manual
