Why were Jap bows retarded

Eurasian steppe horsebows
>ambidextrous
>mechanically efficient
>created some of the largest empires

English longbows
>cheap and simple to make
>very powerful
>resistant to moisture

Japanese yumi
>weird asymmetric design
>fricking humongous
>draw past your ear

What the hell were they thinking?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What the hell were they thinking?
    Apparently their wood was shit for bows, so they were just working with what they had

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >shit wood
      >shit iron
      what the frick did they have that was good?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Japanese women.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They don't have boobs or asses. I don't think that's good.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Well, they have both now these days. The country has been eating a lot more fast food in recent years. Downside is there are more fatties now, too.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        anime and JAV

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Both have mosaic censors

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        tentacle porn

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Lack of a moronic Emperor. You have no idea how good the Japs got with their shoguns and shit. In China despite having all that resources they stagnated for a fricking thousand years. Imagine that. 1000 years of stagnation. Granted Japan also stagnated but they modernized real quick when they saw Perry frick shit up.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They both stagnated but the crucial difference is that China was being ran by a woman.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It never occurred to me but you're right, the japs got super lucky that they never had any giga-moronic leaders over the centuries. Look at China, every time they became stable for a little bit the eugenic effect of conflict disappeared and the morons would come out of the woodwork and tip the land into yet another civil war and dynastic overthrow. That didn't happen in Japan even during times of peace such as the shogunate. Why?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They did have a literally moronic emperor at one time (Taisho) but they still had some separation of powers through their parliamentary system so it didn't amount to much.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Why?
            Japan was stuck in a perpetual Zhou Dynasty esque period.
            China's Zhou Dynasty which saw the King of Zhou lose control over the lords and being turned into a figurehead much like the Japanese Emperor later on. The Zhou lasted from 1046 BC –256 BC during which time it saw the rise of endless amounts of philosophers and hundreds of different warring states. Qin fricked it up by unifying the realm whereas Europe and Japan didn't really unify for real. Unification led to stagnation since theres no competition and philosophy pretty much stagnated or even regressed in China. They were ahead of their time until the realm was unified.
            Japan on the other hand, never really centralized all power into the Emperor. You had the shogun who was just whoever the frick who controlled the Emperor which was better than having moronic Eunuchs or scheming bastards control the Emperor.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Nah. The Japanese emperor/aristocracy held real power. It slowly faded in favor of the emerging samurai/bushi. But they still had real power even after the Genpei war.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              > They were ahead of their time until the realm was unified.
              Eh what about then Han? Tang? Ming?
              Yeah like all dynasty they raise and then collapse spectacularly
              And also most of the inventions and progress happened during the peaceful periods

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >also most of the inventions and progress happened during the peaceful periods
                innovation generally happens fastest during war time. Samurai culture, including armor and weapons, was almost completely ossified before the Sengoku Jidai but but the end has rapidly evolved to it's highest point, roughly equivalent to the Rennaisance period of Europe

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            every time a moron was on the throne, shogun or emperor, the other balanced them out. if both were moronic, the shogun was overthrown.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >I'm going to cut off the country from the world and kill all catholics because a Brit told me they are trouble
            Honestly you're right, even their moronic emperors were based.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The Jesuits kept on showing up in places and mysteriously, slave ships would start showing up in those same places. Then when the Jesuits got kicked out, the slavers stopped coming. Strange.
              The Catholics were welcomed until they started mistaking kindness for weakness.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >In China despite having all that resources they stagnated for a fricking thousand years.
          ITT, historylets actually believe this, jsut as they believe the myth of the european medieval "Dark Age".

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The one last shot China had was the Ming and look where they ended up. Centuries of dynastic rule and none of the problems are fixed. You still have moronic rebellions, eunuchs, corrupt officials and an overstretch army. How many times must the steppe chads teach China the same lesson?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              So you're a historylet who takes Chinese Official Dynastic histories (meant to propagate the idea that the Imperial System is permanent, no matter what happens in society, via a cyclical narrative of things) at its face value rather than looking up scholarship that into account the specific contexts under which specific dynasties ruled. Cool.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >In China despite having all that resources they stagnated for a fricking thousand years.
                ITT, historylets actually believe this, jsut as they believe the myth of the european medieval "Dark Age".

                >doesn't actually provide information in a productive manner
                >just wants to shit fling and ruin the conversation
                Banning people should be a vote, because we don't need losers like you.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                When you encounter a ching chong, just demand he post his gun.
                They never do.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Post your gun Ching Chong.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Japan was as "stagnant" as China (whatever that means) and they definitely had moronic Emperors and Shoguns. What Japan had over China was relative stability. This was largely accomplished by:

          -being isolated from upheavals in Mainland Asia geographically andby intention. Literally no invasion by Barbarians to deal with on the regular, and all wealth went directly to the state instead of other factions.
          -Having most military force monopolized by a single class (the bushi), with the commoners and any other social group/faction practically (by the 1500s, literally) disarmed. This wasn't the case in China due to its size and the inability of a premodern government to police a big realm. They didn't even try. Rebellions by factions other than the established aristocracy is near-impossible in Japan, Violence is limited to the military aristocracy. In pre 1950s China, every social stratum was armed.
          -Japs didn't believe in the Mandate of Heaven as they do in China. In China, Emperors are not divine, only favored by Heaven. If a dynasty rules well, heaven smiles over it. If the dynasty sucks, heaven shall withdraw its approval, as can be seen thru specific signs (country in chaos, poverty, barbarian invasions, diseases etc). If a dynasty loses the Mandate it was considered the sacred responsibility of everyone to find the next good rulers. A whole Dynasty needed to go. So everyone from the nobles to the peasants in China shot their shit whenever an Emperor stumbles
          -Japs believing that their Imperial Dynasty is Divine. This means that 1) the Imperial Dynasty can do no wrong and thus the people have to be totally loyal to it and 2) ambitious warlords wanting to be military dictator of Japan justified their power grabs *within* the Imperial Dynasty instead of overthrowing it, claiming that they are "safeguarding the Emperor" from "disloyal" lords. Violence AGAIN is limited among the aristocracy instead of involving all of society as it is in China.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Imagine that. 1000 years of stagnation.
          yeh, imagine...

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >themperor of (wo)mankind
            cringe lmao

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >>(wo)men
              Men of Wo?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                kinda

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Men meaning Person, literally "one who thinks".
                Women, from Wimmen, from Wifmen, literally, "Wife Person"
                Possible folk etymology merging with Wo- as in Woad, "To make crazy", possible link with "wooed".

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Thanks

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          East Asia stagnated because the power was centralized. China was supreme much like the catholic church and there was no incentive to innovate.
          Whereas in Europe, tiny states were all competing with each other to gain the smallest advantage over others. Innovations were spread due to printing presses whereas in China, the state held monopoly over both presses and technology.
          Japan was the first to modernize because its power structure was detached from China and they were prone to civil war with angey domain lords. China and Korea and also met with the West around the same time but they did not modernize.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            moronic narrative. During Europe's most fragmented era (ca. 600- 1200 A.D.), frickall innovation happened.
            What happened was:
            >introduction of gunpowder, its cost and the cost of cannons accelerating centralisation
            >at roughly the same time, invention of glasses, increasing the productive lifespan of scholars and master craftsmen by two decades. The biggest gamechanger to productivity and innovation since the invention of agriculture and until the steam engine
            >adoption of Indian numerals immediately afterwards
            >COINCIDENTALLY after the invention of glasses and the introduction of Indian numerals, modern bookkeeping and finance are invented
            >states then spend some time centralising ever more, centralisation marching in lockstep with Europe becoming the world leader in mathematics and 'inventing' physics as states now have the financial means to support scholars that'll make their cannons shoot better
            >cue world domination until the invention of liberal arts students
            It is worth noting that for all its size, China was terribly administered. The Chinese state in the early 19th century managed to have tax revenue roughly on par with 14th century England. Not 14th century Europe, just 14th century England.
            China couldn't make better cannons and everything else because it was LESS centralised than Europe. Surey it was 'United' and had an 'Emperor', but their ability to actually rule their realm was as sharply constrained as the Holy Roman Empire's during the interregnum.
            It were the financial institutions of early centralised European states, extracting dramatically higher tax revenues per capita, that had Europe jumping ahead.
            And Europe had shitall innovation while fragmented. States coalescing into entities that could actually enforce their laws on the nobility changed this.
            And a European superstate akin to China wouldn't have changed this. Europe started looking for real estate outside of Europe around 1000 A.D. It always needed better cannons.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              tl;dr: Europe invented glasses and imported gunpowder and Indian numerals. Together, these three launched the process of centralisation that made European states monsters on the global scale. Everyone else centralised less, and thus couldn't afford the armies needed to beat European states.
              Centralisation doesn't simply mean 'We all one country, hurr'.
              Centralisation means effectively ruling your country and extracting maximum value from it.
              Europe has been doing this increasingly effectively from the 16th century onwards, perfecting it in the 19th.
              China didn't even start until the 1960s.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Europe jumping ahead.
              Europe was notably inferior to the advanced Eastern civilizations (China, Japan, indo Persia) until the Enlightenment and Industrial revolution

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Japan
                No

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Chinese had battleships before Japanese.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And lost both to Japan in a battle when Japan only had cruisers.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Granted Japan also stagnated but they modernized real quick when they saw Perry frick shit up
          I think this was at least sorta intentional? (Please someone correct me if I'm wrong) the Tokugawa Shogunate basically put in place some rules to try stop another Nationwide Civil Unrest™ from happening and for the most part everyone was just happy to not be having wars. but that's just the Why. But yeah Perry finally showing how far behind they had fallen was kinda hard to ignore.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >sorta intentional
            It was an Imperial Decree(s) and the entire country focused on nothing but modernization, and did it so well that by the 1930s, Germany and Japan were the 2 epicenters of high technology in the entire world, and Japan's GDP lagged only the US and the UK in 1940 (equal to Germany). So in well under 100 years the nips not only caught up but became leaders in the modern world in every sense.
            This the completely typical for Japanese autism btw; absolutely brutal trying to get them to change anything no matter how small but once they decide to do it, it's balls out foot on the floor all the way down the track. I suspect this is one reason for the bizarre but undeniable cultural brotherhood between the nips and the burgers.
            like who else in the world would waste that much time on fricking baseball?
            >Americans: check
            >Japs: check

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              moron

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Japan was as "stagnant" as China (whatever that means) and they definitely had moronic Emperors and Shoguns. What Japan had over China was relative stability. This was largely accomplished by:

          -being isolated from upheavals in Mainland Asia geographically andby intention. Literally no invasion by Barbarians to deal with on the regular, and all wealth went directly to the state instead of other factions.
          -Having most military force monopolized by a single class (the bushi), with the commoners and any other social group/faction practically (by the 1500s, literally) disarmed. This wasn't the case in China due to its size and the inability of a premodern government to police a big realm. They didn't even try. Rebellions by factions other than the established aristocracy is near-impossible in Japan, Violence is limited to the military aristocracy. In pre 1950s China, every social stratum was armed.
          -Japs didn't believe in the Mandate of Heaven as they do in China. In China, Emperors are not divine, only favored by Heaven. If a dynasty rules well, heaven smiles over it. If the dynasty sucks, heaven shall withdraw its approval, as can be seen thru specific signs (country in chaos, poverty, barbarian invasions, diseases etc). If a dynasty loses the Mandate it was considered the sacred responsibility of everyone to find the next good rulers. A whole Dynasty needed to go. So everyone from the nobles to the peasants in China shot their shit whenever an Emperor stumbles
          -Japs believing that their Imperial Dynasty is Divine. This means that 1) the Imperial Dynasty can do no wrong and thus the people have to be totally loyal to it and 2) ambitious warlords wanting to be military dictator of Japan justified their power grabs *within* the Imperial Dynasty instead of overthrowing it, claiming that they are "safeguarding the Emperor" from "disloyal" lords. Violence AGAIN is limited among the aristocracy instead of involving all of society as it is in China.

          Even with relative stability they still had the warring states era.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Even at its peak, they never really had the kind of scorched earth apocalyptic wars that killed off 20% of their population that had been commonplace in Asia proper. Japanese Civil wars tended to be very "politics by other means," so it was easy to stay out of the fray if you were just some guy who made clay pots.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Yes and no. By the end of sengoku jidai majority of pissants were expected to show up en levy. Most of the time they didnt, or they said frick you and went full moron proto soviet ikko ikki

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Japanese archery is a sport and martial art. They've been all but defunct as weapons since they cloned Portuguese matchlocks.

        A lot of gold and silver. Which was handed over the the Chinese as "Plz don't invade us" tribute, and then the shogunate made completely moronic trade deals with Europeans which took away most their remaining precious metals and pissed off a lot of merchants who were getting forced to hand over pounds of silver for useless trinkets.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Incredibly good defensive location. They are one of the very few countries that were never really invaded and conquered. Also a lot of food.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >They are one of the very few countries that were never really invaded and conquered
          That was true until 1945.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            yes very good. i will put a smiley sticker next to your name.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Even then, the US didn't get inside the big islands until after they got a pair of nukes to drop on them.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            1945 did not require a violent ground invasion. A few easily rebuilt cities whose replacement was purely advantageous is a minor price to pay for the net gain of Westernization and enormous wealth without the burden of empire.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >net gain of Westernization
              Hmmm... So outsiders usurped their government, garrisoned soldiers there, and replaced their culture.
              Oh and they're still under foreign garrison and swear fealty to their suzerain.
              That's not being conquered?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >1945 did not require a violent ground invasion
              True, grorious nihon raid back and spread its regs quite wirringry.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >net gain of Westernization

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >They are one of the very few countries that were never really invaded and conquered.
          The Yayoi beg to differ.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >These maymays again
        The Japs used big asymmetric bows because they were manlets. Japanese bows were as long as they were so that you could draw them all the way back (because they don't stack very much) and they were asymmetrical so you didn't have to dig a trench to shoot them from.

        https://i.imgur.com/qeYwoZv.jpeg

        The Japanese did actually use smaller composite bows, they just preferred to use longbows where possible. Picrel is called a palanquin bow, and as the name suggests they were used by people traveling in palanquins for self defense, where a full sized bow would have been to big to fit into the interior. They were made out of either whalebone or whale baleen, I haven't found a definitive answer on which one was more common but Royal Armories (the people who own it) say that this one is made of whalebone.
        Also, if the Japanese climate killed smaller horsebows, then they would have killed their longbows too, since most yumis in the mod-late medieval period were composite bows consisting of wood and bamboo.

        >Also, if the Japanese climate killed smaller horsebows, then they would have killed their longbows too, since most yumis in the mod-late medieval period were composite bows consisting of wood and bamboo.
        Materials matter, though, as do the construction methods. Reflex bows are under an insane amount of tension when strung and were generally made largely with porous materials like horn and hide glue; Japanese warbows had a moderate recurve and were generally constructed with wood, bamboo and rattan and were usually lacquered.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Most of the information I can find about Yumis suggests that they used hide glue as well, and whalebone is a fairly porous material in itself. Even if the humidity was that big of a problem for composite bows, is there any reason other cultures couldn't lacquer their bows and achieve similar results?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Most of the information I can find about Yumis suggests that they used hide glue as well,
            Yes.

            >and whalebone is a fairly porous material in itself.
            Sure, but the main vulnerability of reflex bows to climate is how little wood they use. Mongol bows in particular are basically a thin core of bamboo in the middle with horn glued to the belly and sinew glued to the back.

            >Even if the humidity was that big of a problem for composite bows, is there any reason other cultures couldn't lacquer their bows and achieve similar results?
            Not really, apart from lacquer requiring specialized knowledge and skills to produce and apply and almost everyone who had access to lacquer used it to seal things against the elements. And again, it's not like if you shoot a reflex bow in the rain it'll fall apart; the issue is that over months or years of being consistently damp the most water-sensitive components are going to fail and reflex bows fail early and catastrophically because of how they're constructed. The lifespan of a horsebow in Kazakhstan (cool and arid) is going to be much longer than the lifespan of a horsebow in Kyushu (subtropical and damp).

            why were japanese ppl always wearing angry masks back then

            >why were japanese ppl always wearing angry masks back then
            First of all, that image is depicting an actor in a play so that's a theatrical mask. Second, some people like having armor on their face for practical reasons. Third, masks are psychological warfare.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              interesting, thank you.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                If you're interested in primitive and traditional archery then the Traditional Bowyer's Bible and Primitive Archer magazine are great resources. All sorts of good historical stuff and experiments in there.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Good geographic location and less corruption than most Asians. It’s not much but it their remote location saved them from being conquered while the relatively low levels of corruption allowed them to acutely modernize effectively unlike China or Korea.
        Also they dodged the bullet hard by never taking the Confucius pill.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Ironically enough guns after they made contact with Portugal until they went full isolation and fell behind for 200 years.

        They had guns since the 1500s, they were just expensive and they sucked.

        >they were just expensive and they sucked
        Compared to Europe? Yes sure but compared to other East Asians the Japanese were top tier gunmen. At the time of the Imjin War they had more guns per unit than any other army and they were proper modern arquebus style guns. Chinese and Korean armies at that time were still using Yuan dynasty style handcannons.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >modern arquebus style guns
          They were matchlocks, several generations evolved from arqebus, altho they did also us large caliber hand held cannon as well

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Humanity.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >society where a member of the warrior class is allowed to kill peasants for literally any reason
          >humanity
          no

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh boy. This myth again.
            Kirisute Gomen wasn't "lol I can kill peasants all I want." It was a big deal when it happened and a samurai who made the wrong call would be exiled or executed. Killing peasants for no reason would be moronic. Samurai were pretty much civil servants most the time. They had to do boring shit like community policing, record keeping and all that. The concept of samurai as primarily martial is a post hoc idea created in the 20th century as propaganda before the war.
            >lol let me kill the people who produce the units (koku) from which my lord derives power

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >The concept of samurai as primarily martial is a post hoc idea created in the 20th century as propaganda before the war.
              It was actually developed during the Edo period to keep those people sitting at home mastering the blade without disturbing the peace.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh boy. This myth again.
            Kirisute Gomen wasn't "lol I can kill peasants all I want." It was a big deal when it happened and a samurai who made the wrong call would be exiled or executed. Killing peasants for no reason would be moronic. Samurai were pretty much civil servants most the time. They had to do boring shit like community policing, record keeping and all that. The concept of samurai as primarily martial is a post hoc idea created in the 20th century as propaganda before the war.
            >lol let me kill the people who produce the units (koku) from which my lord derives power

            >The concept of samurai as primarily martial is a post hoc idea created in the 20th century as propaganda before the war.
            It was actually developed during the Edo period to keep those people sitting at home mastering the blade without disturbing the peace.

            Yes, but actually, peasants, and the merchant/fabricator class should have been massacred MORE.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I do not disagree, slaughtering people who actually contribute to society is a very popular asiatic pastime.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They had better men.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        pussy

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >what the frick did they have that was good?
        The best human capital in the world.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        tentacle hentai

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This is some sort of cope, Japan definitely has wood good enough for quality bows in mass production, just like it actually also has a frickton of mineral resources (as with all volcanic and mountainous regions). A better reason would be lack of innovation/knowhow and mountainous terrain causing separate feudal regions to be like a far off mystical land even though it's just 60 miles over the mountains. The extremely mountainous and extremely forested land of Japan also made bows of less importance in armed conflicts than in other more open countries. There were hunting quality conifer long bows in the Alps over 5000 years ago and over 4000 years ago China. The majority of medieval English longbows were actually sourced from the continent, so there was also trade if you didn't possess the knowledge of skill to get better weapons. Native Americans were making decent bows from shittier wood and more modern native Americans invented high quality bows (that rivaled or even surpassed typical yew longbows) from low quality wood.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >just like it actually also has a frickton of mineral resources
        Lmao what?

        About the only things they ever had going for them was copper, silver and gold and those are long gone; their mining sector has basically been a glorified jobs program for the last 50 or so years and as less and less children yearn for the mines it's been an increasingly irrelevant sector of their economy. The only significant mining left in Japan is coal in Hokkaido and copper around the Seto Inland Sea and like I said, it's basically a jobs program at this point.

        Almost all of their metal ores are small deposits of poor quality thanks to the local geology and they're in the overall second largest global importer of mineral products. They refine and export a fair amount of mineral products, certainly, but that's again done with imported raw materials. About the only subsurface resources that Japan extracts in noteworthy quantities are iodine and limestone and everything else is a trickle at best.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Volcanoes and mountains are massive reserves of mineral resources. Japan has a frickton of mineral resources. They never needed to innovate to make use of it until WW1 and WW2. Their biggest crutch was oil, which again, is not needed, Germany was running mostly on coal gas. 100% guarantee, they haven't even begun to tap into their full mineral resources post WW2, because they came across cheap imports and still had a left over factory industry that was world class (similar to Germany, despite most factories being out of commission both countries had a huge pool of advanced machine workings and industry professionals). Iron is literally everywhere, I mean everywhere, and in mountains, especially volcanic ones it is in even higher abundance. Historically Japan never needed a huge steel and iron working industry because it's houses, infrastructure, and weaponry was not under pressure to innovate until very late compared with other countries and cultures (medieval Japanese were also master wood workers like medieval Germans who were also master stone and metal workers to). This did NOT mean that Japan did not have those resources available. Just that by the time it wanted to develop them (very late), it was cheaper and easier to import, until WW2, which it still was cheaper to import from Manchuria.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Their biggest crutch was oil, which again, is not needed
            Eh, oil was pretty vital for a post-WWI navy. If you're relying on coal, and Japan's coal IIRC was piss-poor quality, you're losing a lot more space in your ship for coal bunkerage than you would for fuel oil to get the same operating range, and you're also limited in speed to how fast your black gang can physically shovel coal to the boilers as opposed to just literally piping oil into the boilers. Oil is a far better fuel for warships in every way.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Oil was not as vital as headway on the development of resources. Germany was mostly running on coal gas for the entire war, and its coal was not the super high quality stuff either, it was bottom grade coal. German autists also developed a method to extract nitrogen gas from the atmosphere in mass for weapons and fertilizer production. Both countries were also fighting in all 4 directions from their home turf against more numerous and more resourced foes, meaning the only chance was innovation and then to take and hold a more resourced area while simultaneously scaling production (and developing a new industry that they weren't previously using as much, like oil).

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Ah, you're just moronic and doubling down then. Japan has been importing the majority of its mineral resources for literally thousands of years and their paucity of local mineral resources has been reinforced by every fricking survey ever done. They don't have NOTHING, but they have very little and what they have is generally of poor quality (many deposits became unprofitable before WWII) and hard to get at. About the only possible expansion of mineral extraction in Japan is an offshore deposit of rare earth oxides in their EEZ and even then they need the extraction technology to mature before they even think of it.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Almost every single tectonically uplifted mountain and every single volcanic mountain on Earth is rich in iron (and also copper, and often gold and silver). Japan did not innovate metal resource extraction and use, it's not because Japan geographically or geologically does not have massive reserves of those minerals. Their primary medieval method of local iron working was very niche and artisanal because they did not have or act on the knowledge that we have now, and that many ancient peoples elsewhere also had regarding metal extraction and use in less obvious places. Japanese culture was not inclined to innovate metallurgy and mining for mass production until the 1800s, by which time it was so much cheaper to just buy from already industrialized countries that developing their own resources seemed foolish.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >not because Japan geographically or geologically does not have massive reserves of those minerals
                It doesn't. If you ground a few mountains down to sand and sorted it from there then yeah, you might find a fair amount of stuff but metal deposits in the strata of Japanese rocks are (generally) dispersed in small, thin veins of poor quality. They have a few decent gold and silver deposits but even their most productive mines for non-ferrous metals were marginal at best and largely folded sometime between the late 40s and early 90s. In the latter case, this was after decades of life support.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes it does. It has gigaton reserves of coal and iron, not off shore either, that's a new ballpark. Japan does not tap into this in modern times because it is much cheaper to source from elsewhere than to develop its resources at home at this point and it keeps them from having a bunch of pit mines and dredges in their backyard. Iron is everywhere, and if you wanted to arm an army of thousands of men with metal tools and weapons quickly without hard rock mining, sediments are king. The sediments themselves came from the richer rocks in the mountains that weather over thousands of years and stratified. A huge portion of Viking iron was from bog iron. Other peoples developed crushed rock and dry stratification techniques from low grade rocks and still developed an iron industry sizeable enough to arm medieval armies, which is the most difficult method in medieval times but one of the easiest in modern times for low grade mechanical, fluvial and chemical iron extraction. Modern industries are based entirely around prices and not local availability, you could have locally abundant resources in a region or country and it would be cheaper to just import it from half a world away than to take the time developing your own local industry.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Kind of relevant too, when Tokugawa Ieyasu died, most Daimyo offered lanterns at his shrine in Nikko, a lot are made of stone, and the richer Daimyo offered bronze lanterns, meanwhile Date Masamune offered pretty big fricking lanterns made of pure iron, because it was so easy to get for him and also to brag about how rich in Iron his territory is. His domain was probably the first to truly master iron casting too. There's just a shit ton of historical evidence about Japan having really good iron and some places having plenty of it. Shit some currency was even made out of iron at some point.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                before Sakoku, Japan was also a major exporter of iron and steel, both raw material and finished goods, for the entirety of Southeast Asia, although China had plenty of its own. This weird idea that it had either/and shitty steel/no ore is almost entirely a fabrication built after WWII to support a national identity of survival in the face of almost supernatural adversity, after the nukes took away its identity as a global superpower.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That's a good point, I'm always irked by the
        >Japan had shit steel so they had to fold the katana 1000 times!!!
        dumbassery that has nothing to do with the truth

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I like how you imply that this means Japan didn't have shit steel, when the actual error in your greentext is that it only takes 10 folds to get 1000 layers.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Surely the bows they used for war weren't so moronic

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      All I have is my Total War pixels and fantasies to judge with. But yeah irl the bows do look awkward. I think that's another factor why they embraced guns wholeheartedly.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They had guns since the 1500s, they were just expensive and they sucked.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >they were just expensive and they sucked.
          They were cheap: the Japs produced more guns than anywhere else in the world less than a decade after getting the design from the portoguese, and of markedly superior quality to anything other than the fanciest luxury guns produced for royalty in the west

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      All I have is my Total War pixels and fantasies to judge with. But yeah irl the bows do look awkward. I think that's another factor why they embraced guns wholeheartedly.

      Japanese bows were pretty good, modern ones suck but older ones were kinda close to English longbows with really heavy draw weights. I've seen a few Kabuto from the Azuchi Momoyama that got fricked by weapons and bows. Kato Kiyomasa's Kabuto has an impact that's likely from an arrow at the back of the helmet. I've seen 62 plates suji kabuto with arrow impacts too. These are strong helmets made for rich Samurai or for Daimyo, these arrows didn't kill them but it managed to pop rivets out of really strong helmets that would have been less damaged by bullets. The gun outpaced the bow but there were likely sharpshooters using bows still alongside guns.
      Btw not all Japanese iron is shit, some regions have really good iron, like Sendai.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >not all Japanese iron is shit,
        almost all Japanese iron, historically, was of exceptionally good quality. I suppose there had to be some shitty stuff at the bottom of a streambed or something, but by and large it was incredibly good, with ore yields from medieval Japanese approaching that of modern machine-driven extraction technology

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah. People tend to think that since it's extracted from sand it's shit but the smelting process gets rid of the sand and actually makes pretty good low carbon steel. Also, you could probably still go to the beaches in sendai with a huge magnet and walk around and extract iron that way as it's so fricking abundant there. Most of the swords made before the Edo jidai are pretty fricking good too, those made after that are the swords that created the myth of "nihonto are shit and break easily"

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah. People tend to think that since it's extracted from sand it's shit but the smelting process gets rid of the sand and actually makes pretty good low carbon steel. Also, you could probably still go to the beaches in sendai with a huge magnet and walk around and extract iron that way as it's so fricking abundant there. Most of the swords made before the Edo jidai are pretty fricking good too, those made after that are the swords that created the myth of "nihonto are shit and break easily"

          The main thing with iron sands used in japn is the presence of TiO2 with the iron oxides which does alter the reduction behaviour making it take up more heat and time but nothing catastophic; in a bloomery at least

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >in a bloomery at least
            Charcoal bloomery

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      yumi is basically just the jap word for bow, but bows used in war were similar in design. they were decently powerful because of the long draw weight and having a shorter lower limb makes it less akward to shoot from horsback and to shoot down from walls

      >What the hell were they thinking?
      Apparently their wood was shit for bows, so they were just working with what they had

      might be true, i know that they are usually partly made from bamboo. usually pretty conplex lamination, simplicity of construction definitely isnt their strong point

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >long draw weight
        i mean long draw of course

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >bows used in war were similar in design
        i should say that most were probably not as asymmetrical. if you look at historical art it looks there is a spectrum in size and asymmetry and some are completely symmetrical. the longer ones are usually more asymmetrical which makes sense if they thought a long lower limb would get in the way

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because they're folded 6 gorillion times and quenched in weeaboo tears.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why is Jap bow 5 times the size of Korean bows?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because of the materials it is made of. It doesnt offer any performance advantages, aside from maybe weather resistance.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Steppenigs and Changs had composite recurved asymmetric bows as well. Its what happens when you want a longer mor powerful bow and need to fight on horseback.

    tbf they gradually fell to disuse as people in Eurasia just decided to make stronger composite bows.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think there's an archery thread on PrepHole, maybe try asking there.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For me? It's the Mughal crab bow

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Mongols did this too moron. Along many other cultures. It's just less noticeable because composite bows were smaller. The problem is composite bows simply don't work in Japanese climate because it's too hot and humid.

    They knew this kind of bows they traded with mainland all the fricking time. They didn't use them for a reason.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Japanese did actually use smaller composite bows, they just preferred to use longbows where possible. Picrel is called a palanquin bow, and as the name suggests they were used by people traveling in palanquins for self defense, where a full sized bow would have been to big to fit into the interior. They were made out of either whalebone or whale baleen, I haven't found a definitive answer on which one was more common but Royal Armories (the people who own it) say that this one is made of whalebone.
      Also, if the Japanese climate killed smaller horsebows, then they would have killed their longbows too, since most yumis in the mod-late medieval period were composite bows consisting of wood and bamboo.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I've seen palanquin yari too. They're smol and cute.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    early bushi bows were simpler self bow designs.

    theres multiple reasons that changed. here a few.

    no real outside threat and very little foreign influence.
    specialized warrior class fighting among themselves(mostly). no real peasant revolts and before ashigaru armies.
    fighting in a very specialized and almost ritualistic way for most of history.
    comparatively small armies so no need for mass produced everything. spear/pike-tards are good enough if times get tough.
    and long stretches of relative peace time to over engineer the typically footsoldier oriented longbow concept into a horsebow.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Some of those Jap bows were beasts. I think people confuse the modern sporting ones for the actual old warbows and think they were all 30-40 pounders. There's a video on youtube where some guys string a well preserved antique from the 1600s and measure it at almost 200 pounds at full draw.

      https://i.imgur.com/VdguVHu.jpeg

      Eurasian steppe horsebows
      >ambidextrous
      >mechanically efficient
      >created some of the largest empires

      English longbows
      >cheap and simple to make
      >very powerful
      >resistant to moisture

      Japanese yumi
      >weird asymmetric design
      >fricking humongous
      >draw past your ear

      What the hell were they thinking?

      During the height of their use, the average draw weight of a Japanese bow was over 100 pounds, putting them into the category of proper warbows in power.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Some of those Jap bows were beasts. I think people confuse the modern sporting ones for the actual old warbows and think they were all 30-40 pounders. There's a video on youtube where some guys string a well preserved antique from the 1600s and measure it at almost 200 pounds at full draw.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >There's a video on youtube where some guys string a well preserved antique from the 1600s and measure it at almost 200 pounds at full draw.
      Link?

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You get the advantages of a longbow while also being able to shoot it from horseback more easily, its asymmetric design is practically as close as you can get to an arrow shelf given what they had, and they look pretty cool. Also, some (but not all) of your post is moronic.
    >ambidextrious
    why is this a point in favor of the horsebow when the longbow is also ambi? why is this even a selling point when southpaws practically didn't exist in many cultures?
    >mechanically efficient
    longer bows are better with heavier arrows than smaller bows. "mechanically efficient" is great when you want to shoot far, but their performance degrades very quickly if you try to shoot heavier arrows out of them. Longer bows are also generally easier to produce than smaller bows (even composite ones like bambo/wood yumis), and are more accurate given an equivalent level of skill.
    >created some of the largest empires
    mostly true, but if horsebow just means "small composite recurve" then it makes sense since most of the world used small composite recurves.
    >cheap and simple to make
    yea
    >very powerful
    true, but the yumi is equally powerful by the same token (modern ones don't count, warbows had a lot more draw weight)
    >resistant to moisture
    Composite bows do fine in moist environments, at worst you have to do slightly more maintenance than you would a self bow. Euros used composite prods for their crossbows with no issue, and composite recurves were owned privately throughout the continent. They weren't adopted into military service in western europe for logistical and doctrinal reasons, not because they melt in rain and moisture.
    >weird asymmetric design
    already addressed
    >fricking humongous
    already addressed
    >draw past your ear
    not a function of the bow itself, and not at all exclusive to Japan.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's basically an English longbow, but the weird grip makes it so you can fire it from horseback.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Black person homosexual those oversized asymmetric bows were for sport and flex
    Battle ones were more similar to european ones

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      why were japanese ppl always wearing angry masks back then

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        thats just how japs look.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          In your fricking dreams Tojo.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            thats a half breed

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              that could not be more pure jap

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      why were japanese ppl always wearing angry masks back then

      The real question is why is the bowstring on the wrong side of his arm?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        because the bow rotates after you fire it

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          the proper shooting technique for those bows causes the bow to rotate in your hand after the arrow leaves.

          I thought I was shitposting but I learned something new. Ty

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            kek
            Say whatever about the funny faces and proportions of japanese feudal art but they had their little details.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            here's an example of one being shot

            ?t=28

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the proper shooting technique for those bows causes the bow to rotate in your hand after the arrow leaves.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It also sets you up for a cool lookimg reloading technique. Sometimes, I feel like Kyudo was partly created as an excuse for its practitioners to look cool.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Sometimes
            The correct answer is "Always".

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Nah the answer is that libertarianism works.
    You are just a pol chud.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >libertarianism
      White man's invention, along with everything else.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >cheap and simple to make
    no they werent
    it takes 100 years for a yew to grow
    and you need a very straight grained and flawless cord of wood to make a longbow out of

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    The song dynasty had divine spark

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >ping pong kong dynasty had that!!
      Nah.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Drawing past your ear can be smart as you may get more power.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they didn't have stirrups
    so they had to be asymetrical to be used on a horse
    they weren't the only ones to do this, Hungarians did too

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >they didn't have stirrups
      They had since at least 5th century

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Given the average jap at that time would have been under four foot tall, how the frick did they use these bows?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Their average height was like 5'4 at its lowest.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That's heavily skewed by the ones that were measured, who were likely more wealthy and thus able to afford food to grow taller.
        Most would have been far smaller than that.
        The average jap in 1940 was around 5ft, however obviously before modernisation that would be significantly lower.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >That's heavily skewed by the ones that were measured, who were likely more wealthy
          Or it was mostly poor people, who'd happily let themselves be measured for a small coin. Or perhaps the researchers did their job properly and managed to get a reasonably representative sample.
          But what is absolutely clear is that you're desperate to sell the idea of them being hobbit-sized no matter what.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It wasn't 5'0 in in 1940. Find me a source that says so, because my searches haven't come up with it.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            150cm is 4'11, anon.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The male height for the general population was 160 in 1940, moron. You're reading the female heights.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              150cm is 4'11, anon.

              Oops, quoted the wrong guy.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              When did I say anything about males?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            According to this graph (And chatGPT), if we apply Linear regression to this series of plotted points, the average jap was 95.47cm tall in 1100. Or about 3'2.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Damn, so if we go back far enough, they were negative! We need to alert the scientific community.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                We truly are from the earth itself.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That's heavily skewed by the ones that were measured, who were likely more wealthy and thus able to afford food to grow taller.
      Most would have been far smaller than that.
      The average jap in 1940 was around 5ft, however obviously before modernisation that would be significantly lower.

      Ashigaru wouldn't use the bow anyways. There are a lot of accounts of genuinely huge samurai, at least more than one would expect. It wasn't THAT uncommon to see 2m tall Samurai. Not common either, and it would depend on the region too. On the other hand some regions had really small dudes. Takeda Shingen's men are usually pretty short for example. A frickton of Samurai armors from back then would fit a modern European, suggesting that a lot of Samurai were pretty tall. These are the people that would use the bow, so their size isn't an issue.
      Then you have the occasional armor that's like kid's size for us, but these aren't common.

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I dunno what you gays are fighting about but I know the first one to bring up pol is almost always a noguns gay.
    Post gun.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Blind buyer

    >Why were Jap bows moronic
    You can let yourself be shot by one of those bows, then you'll know how moronic they are.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >weird asymmetric design
    This let them be used on horseback despite being huge
    >fricking humongous
    More power.
    >draw past your ear
    Again, more power.

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What the hell were they thinking?
    those filthy ashigaru will never be able to use this

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >BUT WHAT ABOUT THE SLING, SLINGS WERE BETTER THAN BOWS LET ME COPE

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Id rather take a sling personally but bows work better innawoods

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    their bows are not moronic but you certainly are

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yumi were as powerful as English Longbows for armor defeating purposes during war time. They're practically equivalent in terms of power.

    >Source: Smithsonian Institute

    However, I think the Jap bows are better due to some features. 1. You can crouch or ride a horse with it easier due to assymmetrical design. 2. Humidity resistance. 3. Surviving Jap Kyujutsu schools and modern sport Kyudo still existing. It's just a same that britbongs don't give a crap about their heritage and kind of let the longbow culture rot.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nah, they still got English longbow archery clubs all over the country

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >English Bow Club
        >All ugly boomers
        > -_-
        >JP Bow Club
        >Cute girls
        > °○°

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Manchu style is my favorite

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *