Sengoku Komachi Kuroutan - Ch. 101 - Adherence

[d_a_renoir]

Oh sorry i already double check but in the japanese raw its says 従父弟
View attachment 54063
I don't know why but in the manga they change it to cousin

I know, I said it's the Japanese original publisher's fault. And I'm confused how the editor didn't catch this.

 

[maddery]

@chinfo

You are confusing Oichi (Nagamasa's wife and Nobunaga's sister) with Nene (Hideyoshi's wife) lol.

 

[Someguy]

Sadly there is no pride in death by killing yourself while hiding from the enemy onslaught and leaving the soldiers fighting for your cause to die a dog's death.
Valhalla will reject him.

I agree with you completely, but that's not how people from Feudal Japan sees it. In their mind, committing Seppuku and buying time for your lord to gut himself like tuna being prepared for sushi are honorable as fuck and the pride of their people. Valhalla is a European concept. Japanese heaven, or rather, Hinomoto heaven will gladly accept him. Or whatever their equivalent of heaven is.
I don't make rules, but that's what they literally believed in back in the old days.

 

[Someguy]

It is not uncommon to kill and die for pride in ancester sacrifice.

That doesn't mean it is not a stupid thing to do.

Killing is one thing, but dying? That's stupid. If your whole family dies, then sacrifices would have been for nought. History can be erased and deeds can be forgotten. Nobody's going to care what your ancestors did in a mere few decades if you're gone.

But as long as you survive, there will always be a chance to take back what is yours and then you can forcibly ensure your ancestors are remembered.

 

[panzerkampfwagyu]

In real history the reason Azai fell had nothing to do with holding on to Oumi. They had simply chosen the honorable path of supporting their ancient allies against the aggressive newcomer Nobunaga. For that matter, it was Nobunaga who had technically betrayed the Azai by deliberately keeping them in the dark when he triggered his invasion of the Asakura. The Azai were simply behind the times and unprepared for the rapid changes of their changing political landscape. They were too honorable to survive the end stage of the sengoku.

Also, there may be a misunderstanding about the way these battles to the death were fought, and the manga is making this mistake as well. In general, the suicide would have been done BEFORE the defending grunts were forced into a last stand. The purpose was to give them the excuse to surrender. The historical Azai Nagamasa did this. He allowed his final loyalist samurai to satisfy their honor by fighting to the death, killed himself, his death was announced, and the remaining grunts surrendered.

The problem was that Nobunaga IRL was a pretty evil asshole and he killed them all anyway. Nobunaga even tricked his own sister Oichi into revealing the hiding place of Azai's son and had Hideyoshi kill him. This behavior by Nobunaga was actually the historical reason why last stands became so common in the sengoku end stage. Everyone who fought the Oda knew they couldn't expect mercy from Nobunaga and since the Oda were on the verge of unifying Japan, that "everyone" meant EVERYONE not of the Oda.

By the time of the fall of the Takeda, the Takeda final loyalists already well understood Nobunaga's tendencies and everyone killed their own wives and children then fought to the death. The Takeda were the final major clan destroyed by Nobunaga. He himself and his heir would follow their fate half a year later.

Kinda feels like the mangaka slandered him just to make Oda look better. Or because Shizuku would probably not play along if he slaughtered the surrendered goons and the author didn't want to write that conflict

 

[d_a_renoir]

In real history the reason Azai fell had nothing to do with holding on to Oumi. They had simply chosen the honorable path of supporting their ancient allies against the aggressive newcomer Nobunaga. For that matter, it was Nobunaga who had technically betrayed the Azai by deliberately keeping them in the dark when he triggered his invasion of the Asakura. The Azai were simply behind the times and unprepared for the rapid changes of their changing political landscape. They were too honorable to survive the end stage of the sengoku.

Also, there may be a misunderstanding about the way these battles to the death were fought, and the manga is making this mistake as well. In general, the suicide would have been done BEFORE the defending grunts were forced into a last stand. The purpose was to give them the excuse to surrender. The historical Azai Nagamasa did this. He allowed his final loyalist samurai to satisfy their honor by fighting to the death, killed himself, his death was announced, and the remaining grunts surrendered.

The problem was that Nobunaga IRL was a pretty evil asshole and he killed them all anyway. Nobunaga even tricked his own sister Oichi into revealing the hiding place of Azai's son and had Hideyoshi kill him. This behavior by Nobunaga was actually the historical reason why last stands became so common in the sengoku end stage. Everyone who fought the Oda knew they couldn't expect mercy from Nobunaga and since the Oda were on the verge of unifying Japan, that "everyone" meant EVERYONE not of the Oda.

By the time of the fall of the Takeda, the Takeda final loyalists already well understood Nobunaga's tendencies and everyone killed their own wives and children then fought to the death. The Takeda were the final major clan destroyed by Nobunaga. He himself and his heir would follow their fate half a year later.

Kinda feels like the mangaka slandered him just to make Oda look better. Or because Shizuku would probably not play along if he slaughtered the surrendered goons and the author didn't want to write that conflict

A lot of the "Nobunaga always kills everyone" and the "evil Nobunaga" narrative are false, or at least extremely exaggerated. He does too accept surrenders and let people live, like Suzuki/Saika Magoichi and the Sanada clan. When you really dig into the accounts, a lot of the so-called evil things Nobunaga did are just the standard practice of what most samurai lord does. Like, Sengoku lords killing all the combatants in a defeated enemy castle is not a rare occurrence, Nobunaga isn't the only person doing this. He just looked terrible because he was successful in his conquest. People keep harping about how bad Hieizan was, but not many people talks about Date Masamune supposedly telling everyone about how he killed 1000 people in a castle he defeated plus the pet dogs too.

The tale of "honourable Azai prioritising their Asakura alliance", "Nobunaga tricks Oichi into revealing the son's location", and "Nobunaga kills everyone" are narratives that originated in accounts written in the Edo period (decades or even hundreds of years after the fact). Historians consider those to be not entirely reliable, and needs corroboration from sources closer to the actual time of incident. The real reason for why the alliance fell apart is still debated by experts. The rest of the stuff are possibly embellished and nobody can be 100% sure what happened. There's no clear accounting of what happened to the common soldiers and the only concrete documentation were that the top commanders and Azai family members die. Maybe the people recording just didn't bother specifying, since killing all the random mooks were fairly common occurrence, or they really were spared. Still, maybe the mangaka just wanted to err on the positive since there's uncertainty there.

The other side of the argument is that Nobunaga dealt with the Azai so harshly because he felt betrayed. There were accounts that said since the Oda's target were just the Asakura, they didn't know why the supposedly-uninvolved Azai turned against them. Again, since we do not have a clear concrete documentation of the relationship between Azai and Asakura, it's hard to really judge who is actually "in the wrong" in this situation.

 

[Kalamel]

Killing is one thing, but dying? That's stupid. If your whole family dies, then sacrifices would have been for nought. History can be erased and deeds can be forgotten. Nobody's going to care what your ancestors did in a mere few decades if you're gone.

But as long as you survive, there will always be a chance to take back what is yours and then you can forcibly ensure your ancestors are remembered.

I used double negative. I meant, both killing and dying for pride are stupid things to do, logically.

 

[asteconn]

Thank™ for translation!