Talk:Miyao Castle

References

Have added more references and sources in appropriate places. Please re-assess and/or advise. Thanks. Boneyard90 (talk) 06:38, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Hill Fort Question

The article descibes Miyao as a hill fort, is this meant in the technical sense (Bronze and Iron Age enclosures) or as in it is a fort on a hill? Nev1 (talk) 17:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Technically? The reference indicates that the Miyao Castle complex contained features, structural materials, and design layout to conform with the definition of the Medievel fortification labelled or identified as "hill fort". Boneyard90 (talk) 20:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

So it means a fort on a hill, in that case I'd recommend delinking hill fort as the article is not relevant. Nev1 (talk) 20:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Not quite seeing the logic there, but your concern is noted. I will study the hill fort article and the referenced source (Kenyon 1991), as I take your recommendation under consideration. Boneyard90 (talk) 20:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Miyao has a fascinating story. Are there any more details available? For example I wonder if the first small garrison knew they were being used as sacrificial lambs. Did Sue wonder why the castle was so easily taken? How do we know 1,000 labourers built the castle? Are there any estimates on the cost? Do we know what size forces were involved in the various battles around the castle? Also, as this is an article on a building I think to satisfy criterion two of the Milhist B-class assessment it really needs something on the layout, and possily the architecture (I understand the latter may be tricky given the state of the site). The only mention of the castle's condition is that it's in ruins; could this be expanded, what bits are still standing? Have there been any archaeological investigations on the site? Is the site protected by the state? Nev1 (talk) 13:21, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree, that's why I'm surprised that more of my Japanese friends don't know the story. As for your questions:

• I doubt the first garrison, other than the commanding officers, was privy to Motonari's plans. After all a samurai's job was to obey and/or die without question. But then, it had to be kind of clear to even the dullest guy among them.
• I'd say that whatever Sue thought went with him to his grave.
• The source I read listed the 1,000 laborers without mention of how he got them. As a high-ranking samurai lord, he would have had little problem conscripting that many people for a short-term project, and it would have been even easier if he paid them. In theory, the commoners were similar to the serfs of Europe; they generally weren't permitted to leave the land, had to work for the nobility, etc. In reality, although the commoners were supposed to work without complaint, quality would suffer with morale, and laborers were known to run away when the work became too onerous. Some kind of extra incentive would have gone a long way.
• Cost. This is rarely reported in historical sources, that I've seen, except maybe for the largest and grandest projects. They had gold coins, though it was supposed to be a rice-based economy, so I think conversion to modern currency is problematic.
• Size of forces after main battle. I haven't read specific numbers. What I have read makes it sound like mopping-up operations, which in modern tactics means small units rapidly pursuing enemy elements, killing or capturing along the way.
• Layout and architecture. That would be great, but I haven't seen any images of plans yet.
• On the ruins. I'll think on how to expand it, but while using the term "ruins" is technically accurate, it's also a little generous. The stone walls are not prominently featured, and I think some of the original stones were mortared together some time ago, probably for stability.
• Archaeology. While I haven't read anything that specifically mentions excavations, I am familiar enough with the Japanese system of historical preservation that I am 99+% positive that the governement had the site surveyed and excavated. It's pretty much standard procedure with any known site, no matter how small or obscure. It's probably how they confirmed that that was the site of Miyao Castle. Archaeological excavations are usually surveyed and overseen by a state-employed archaeologist, and they often get local volunteers to help. If artifacts were recovered, they are curated, and may or may not be displayed in a local museum, depending on their quality.
• I'm not sure if it's a state-protected site; it might have been in the past. I know at the present time it's under the administration of the city of Hatsukaichi. All feudal properties were turned over to the state (being the national governemnt) in the late 19th century. During the 20th century, when it was shown that a site was of a local historical interest, the state might fund its development, and then turn it over to a local government for maintenance, etc. The local government is usually happy to do this as a point of local pride, and it would benefit from any tourist revenue.

Thank you for your interest! You've given me some specific points to remember as I review the literature and consider how to improve the article. Boneyard90 (talk) 15:00, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

It's a shame there's not more detail on the events at the castle; I suppose that's just the way the sources survive. The cost was a long shot, I know that in England royal records survive for expenditure but this doesn't really extend to the aristocracy or barons. The survival of sources is variable. I'm not familiar with Japan's conservation programmes so wouldn't know where to look, but if you can find a source it might be worth mentioning state administration of the site from when feudal properties were handed over to the state. Nev1 (talk) 15:39, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

There's a little more detail about the background and strategy in the article about the Battle of Miyajima, but for the present article, about Miyao castle, I didn't want to get too redundant. Nearly every town in Japan has an official history book, based on official documents, family histories, archaeological findings, and other source materials compiled by the local board of education. Next time I'm in the country, I'll try to see if the local library has something relevant. Boneyard90 (talk) 22:38, 26 December 2010 (UTC)