this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2025
46 points (100.0% liked)
History
23873 readers
8 users here now
Welcome to c/history! History is written by the posters.
c/history is a comm for discussion about history so feel free to talk and post about articles, books, videos, events or historical figures you find interesting
Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember...we're all comrades here.
Do not post reactionary or imperialist takes (criticism is fine, but don't pull nonsense from whatever chud author is out there).
When sharing historical facts, remember to provide credible souces or citations.
Historical Disinformation will be removed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nitpick:
This is as stated: a modern depiction, mostly by Imperial Japan during WWII elevating the katana to an almost mythical status. In actuality, the samurai immediately adopted firearms and replaced their bows when possible. Due to issues with Japanese steel making guns expensive and rare, samurai still used bows because it was cheaper. They'd happily take a carbine to use on horseback over a bow any day.
None of the actual samurai saw firearms as dishonorable. Samurai were some of the first adopters of guns as they spread out from China, often importing European ones due to their sturdiness and reliability over locally made weapons. By the time of the Satsuma Rebellion (where the samurai used guns lmao), they had been using firearms for hundreds of years.
Not sure why the author decided to phrase things this way.
But yeah, otherwise a good read dispelling the notion of bushido versus what the samurai were actually like. They were little more than paid goons who terrorized the peasantry. It's no surprise many of them eventually became what we now know as the Yakuza. They had more in common with Ralph Cifaretto from The Sopranos than they did with Katsumoto from The Last Samurai.
much like how samurai adopted guns when they started to come out, so too did western knights and men-at-arms. because it's fucking war efficiency. Life isn't a hollywood movie, contrary to the petite bourgeoise reactionary romanticists tend to believe. These were soldiers, warriors, bandits, people. all with agency and a drive to survive whatever conflict they find themselves in. There is no "masculine urge to bleed out in the snow" that shit fucking hurts fuck that.
Yeah I could rant about this forever. Hollywood (and films in general) have really fucked with people's understanding of military history. Some peeves:
People wore 50+ pounds of armor because it stopped things from killing you. When plate armor was developed, people stopped using shields because their armor could protect their whole body. The only way to hurt someone was to get between the joints or areas like slits on a visor. Hollywood depicts swords like they're fucking lightsabres that cut through solid steel.
Soldiers fought in formations because it was the easiest way to get a bunch of people working in unison when there were no radios, night vision goggles, etc. Battles kick up a lot of dust so you can't see anything. People are shouting and screaming. Most importantly? Knowing who was by your sides and behind you was how you avoided getting literally stabbed in the back. Charging one another at full speed doing backflips over shield walls is a good way to have your side panic when people realize they're alone. People fought this way even after rifles were developed because it was more effective than running around on your own or spread out.
Oh yeah, charges? Good way to wear yourself out before the fighting even starts. Formations would run to get in position when they saw openings. Otherwise, they're walking. Ain't nobody going to run into a wall of knives because that's a good way to die.
No really, people don't like dying. They do a lot of stuff to avoid it.
Fire arrows
Swords in general are over represented. Polearms were king on every battlefield across the world for millennia. The Romans were rather unique in their use of the Gladius. Legionaries still carried javelins, however. Otherwise, swords are a sidearm, a last ditch "Oh shit my spear snapped in half when it got stuck" weapon. It would be like if every modern war film had troops using only pistols and no rifles or machine guns.
Anywho. This is probably too long of a comment. I just wish filmmakers did the bare minimum of understanding why our ancestors did what they did. Like you'll spend $500 billion and 3 years making a 4 hour historical epic but won't look up why there was a guy whose entire job was holding up a flag?
an addition to this:
hollywood also depicts arrows as if they punch straight through a breastplate
and also holding a 100+ lb war bow at full draw for like a minute straight without screaming and loosing the arrow wildly as your muscles give out
PEOPLE ENJOYED WEARING GARISH COLORS AND IT HELPED IDENTIFY FRIEND FROM FOE! NOT DIFFERENT SHADES OF BLACK CHRISTOPHER NOLAN YOU STICK IN THE MUD FUCKER!