MovieChat Forums > The Last Samurai (2003) Discussion > Samurai were the only warriors?

Samurai were the only warriors?


While I understand from previous posts and my own research why the Samurai were rebelling, were they the ONLY warriors in Japanese history? It seems they were a type of "special forces" for Japan. I ask this because I'm confused as to why Emperor Meiji just didn't keep them as an elite fighting unit.

Historically speaking, Japan has never solely used Samurai during wars. They used a combination of peasants and Samurai.

So, what's the problem? (sorry if I missed a few history lessons)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_invasions_of_Korea_%281592%E2%80%9398%29

reply

I am not a Japanese history major but I do believe that the notion of Samurai being noble warriors is largely a myth. The reality is that Samurai had lordship over others, they did NOT kill themselves over the loss of honor, they pursued money and possessions like no tomorrow and constantly went from one master to another(based on who paid the most). They were men who lived off of the feudal system and their way was threatened as Japan became a more open and equal society. They wanted to keep their way of life and consolidate power so hiring them as elite fighting units that would answer to a state was never an option. Another thing to point out is that despite being known as expert swordsmen, all Samurai were first and foremost archers who regarded their sword as a last option in defense. This is something about the Samurai that is largely ignored because it was just easier to show Samurai fighting with swords in film and on television that it would have been shooting sequences of them firing arrows on horseback. Unfortunately, media depictions stick and become fact as we know it. I hope this answers your question a bit

reply

The Samurai had to be abolished, because they were a social class, not just warriors. Once you could train conscripts in how to use a rifle, they were no longer necessary, and having them would do more harm than good if you wanted to bring Japan into the 20th century. They had to go the way of the cotton plantation slave-owner or the French Knight.

reply

I think you're making the mistake a lot of people do.

Samurai is a title, not a job description. Bushi is a job description. Not all Samurai were bushi (at least not in reality even though they probably thought they were).

Ok, so to explain further.

Bushi means warrior... hence Bushido meaning 'the way of the warrior'.
Samurai meant 'those who serve', but as time went by (and especially during the Edo period) the Samurai were a class that could include everything from warriors to court dignitaries, much the same as a knight today could include someone who fights as a soldier, but could equally be like Elton John.

Many of the warrior type Samurai did indeed transfer over to the Imperial Japanese army, but many did not as they had duties elsewhere (running the country for example).

SpiltPersonality

reply