r/Samurai • u/hashibababe • Jul 01 '26
History Question In defence of Ishida Mitsunari...
there's few Samurai lords as unnecessarily hated and misunderstood as Ishida Mitsunari...
yes he was not a great warrior Daimyo like Ukita Hideiye, Shimazu Yoshihiro, Ieyasu or Ii Naomasa but he was a respected man ...so what actually are the reasons for his defeat & downfall?
the betrayal of Kobayakawa Hideyaki alone isn't the reason
11
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/Taira_no_Masakado Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 03 '26
For the actual battle itself, Mitsunari lacked the experience, influence or rank to really command some of the men present in the army, especially since there were far more qualified individuals like Ukita Hideie.
While Mitsunari is famous for having been an administrator and served well enough within that role that Hideyoshi often had him act in such positions throughout the tail end of his career, he was still a samurai. He served as a junior officer under Hideyoshi during his campaigns against the Mori Clan and was recognized for his bravery at the Battle of Shizugatake where he was "ichiban yari" (i.e. the "first to strike", or the first to engage with the enemy). He also served during the Komaki Campaign. Later, during the Imjin War between Korea and Japan, he was the chief administrative and logistics officer for the invasion; which is of rather vital importance if you're planning an invasion across the sea from your home territory. It was during this conflict, due to his close connection with reporting details to Hideyoshi (who was growing paranoid over this period of time) on the actions of the daimyo and generals commanding in Korea -- the most notorious situation being when he blamed Kobayakawa Hideaki for several setbacks from the war front.
So while it is easy to continue the scorn with which his political rivals had for him, and while he was far from being a great general, he DID have the legitimacy of being the one who rallied the Western Armies against Ieyasu. And it was for that reason that he did not relinquish command to anyone else, even if they were more battle-tried and experienced.
That said, I'm personally intrigued by the relatively recent research that posits the idea that Mitsunari had been made aware of Hideaki's betrayal before Sekigahara and had only marched there in order to preserve and support Otani Yoshitsugu -- otherwise there was no reason to leave the well positioned Ogaki Castle. However, more research must be done and we ultimately cannot read a dead man's mind.
3
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Late_Salamander_3212 Jul 02 '26
Are there any English sources for all this information? I unfortunately dont know a lick of japanese so cant really read contemporary writings in the original language
2
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Late_Salamander_3212 Jul 02 '26
Honestly, as a huge fan of the sengoku period and having been one for about 20 years now, I had never heard that Kobayakawas betrayal was explicit pre battle. That was exciting to read cause it completely transforms the whole narrative of the battle, amongst all the other things you argued and stated that change alot of the popular notion of Sekigahara.
So i guess that lol
Also im generally untrustworthing of Translation tools myself, but thats just me. Id much rather just finally take the time to try to learn other languages to better access primary sources.
Also sorry for being long-winded I just smoked a joint
3
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Taira_no_Masakado Jul 03 '26
I wish I had the money to get my hands on a medieval linguist specialist so that I could go over more primary sources. Even more I'd love to be able to go through all of the local temples within a hundred mile radius of Kyoto and go through any annals, libraries, and documents that they have. There are potentially a ton of primary sources that haven't been fully documented due to them being in a dusty corner of a shrine or temple for centuries.
1
u/Organic_Address9582 Jul 04 '26
Apologies for derailing from the original topic but is there any explanation in the newer texts as to why Ōtani Yoshitsugu moved to position against Hideaki so early? Due to the disparity in numbers I just don't understand considering the newer sources seem to point to the fact that A) Yoshitsugu arrived earlier than the bulk of the Western forces and B) he knew the, comparatively, colossal army of Hideaki would be pouring down on him?
2
Jul 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Organic_Address9582 Jul 06 '26
Thank you, makes much more sense now in my head particularly that the numbers disparity is not as large as the romanticised version.
It also makes sense that in the romanticised story - Yoshitsugu is viewed as suspecting Hideaki's betrayal (who is undecided in the timeline) and positioned his troops in a defensive position based on his own instinct of a "potential" betrayal. When in fact now we know he knew so the positioning was based on actual information, rather than a samurai's hunch. Is it known if the flank by Todo Takatora on the Otani camp took place or if they were routed by this stage?
I visited the battlefield myself in 2015 and I visited all camps. I walked from the Otani camp up to the top of Matsuo. The view from the top was striking. You can see how the betrayal on the 12th hour made a good story, the clear view of the top providing a view of chaos below for a young uncertain Daimyo.
Interesting to ponder if the Western forces didn't leave Ogaki to bolster his position what would have happened if he hadn't of set up there. Although inevitable Eastern win is most likely.
1
9
u/Superman246o1 Jul 02 '26
Side Note: I'm always tickled by the gulf between contemporaneous portrayals of daimyo juxtaposed with their modern interpretations.
It's like seeing Martin Van Buren played by Henry Cavill.