Talk:Battle of Myeongnyang

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Map of Korea WikiProject Korea invites you to join in improving Wikipedia articles related to Korea. Pavilion at Gyeongbok palace, Seoul
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Battle of Myeongnyang is part of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Japan To-do:

Contents

[edit] Number of Japanese Dead

It is probably unlikely that there were ~18,000 Japanese deaths in this battle and here is why. There were 133 Japanese warships and they were probably divided into three classes: large, medium and small. The ratio is roughly for every 4 or 3 large ships there are 2 medium ships and one small ship. I would imagine a similar ratio to logistical ships, for which there were about 200. If we assume that a large warship would have 80 sailors and 70 marines (about as many people as you can cram into a 120 foot long ship) that would be about 150 people. Of course those numbers go down when the ships get smaller. All put, I estimate the total number of Japanese in the battle, both sailors and marines, at about 18,000 to 20,000, thus 18,400 casualties cannot be right. The total number of actual Japanese that fought in the second invasion of Korea was 142,000. 18,400 casualties would be 13% of the total Japanese in Korea! To lose this many troops in a single day would cripple any invasion force. However, as history tells us, the Japanese fought pretty hard after Myeongnyang and gave ground slowly. -- WangKon936 3:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

The most important point(Essence of then naval battle):
There are a lot of people who guess the ability of the warship in this war with the ability of the same row with the modern ages navy such as steamships and sailers though whether it is verification shortage is not understood deliberate.
The mobility of then ship was basically done by human strength, and navigation was impossible only by the surface of the water of quietness in the inland sea. Moreover, the command of the sea decided the fleet which did by the suppression of the naval base by the regulations army in the naval battle.
The fleet which makes a sortie to the coast which the enemy rules can stay only for a short time.
Powers was few and in this naval battle, small-scale to turning on in Korea and Japan.
The command of the sea was not able to be taken though the naval battle was victory of the Korean navy.
Because, a Japanese army suppressed the yellow sea coast part.
Being abandon the naval base from the next day of the victory of the naval battle, retreating to Gunsan(North Jeolla Province) in about 200K north, and having advanced to the sea area of the naval battle again were later for one month and Yi was after the army and navy in Japan had left.
Moreover, the Sea of Japan army retreated by Yi, advances to the yellow sea side, and to straighten the interception system with the army, is withdrawing in premeditation according to the schedule of a prior conference.
The schedule and the charge decided at the Jeonju conference on 8/20(old calendar) are almost corresponding to the advance and the withdrawal of a Japanese army by the second campaign in 1597.
A Japanese army made the best use of the lesson of the first campaign and had the plan to resist in a Korean south coast when the Min army went in the winter of 1597.


The text is written by a one-sided South Korea aspect.
The total of the navy forces which a Japanese side turned on by the second campaign in 1597 is 7200 people or less, and the presumption of the number of the dead is overvalued. 133 ships of the Sea of Japan army are reports by the scout of Yi.
Moreover, the number of Japanese ships defeated as there is a description in the diary of Yi is 31.
The damage of a Japanese fleet is evaluated from the Korea record and damage is interpreted excessively in the text as for bright.
In record (Wakisaka-Ki, Kouzankou-Jitsuroku, etc) of a Japanese side, moved an inferior, large-scale ship was not used for the naval battle for a violent tendency . When medium ship (Seki-Fune) was about 40, having been used for the naval battle instead remains in the record.
Kurushima Michifusa is a part of a Japanese fleet killing and the injury and the fight of Todo Takatora, and after the naval battle, keeps acting in this naval battle.
Moreover, Yi was able to be used to reinforce two months to the naval battle though the warship which Yi succeeded after of the doubtful defeat of Battle of Chilchonryang was 13. Yasumi 05:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Again, I don't know why you write "The text is written by a one-sided South Korea aspect."
First of all, I'm not even a Korean citizen. Second of all, most of my sources are not even Korean in origin. Admiral Yi in his diary said that he sunk 31 ships in this battle, however Dr. Turnbull says the number of Japanese ships sunk were "probably much higher." I've actually elected to be conservative as the OFFICIAL South Korean position is that there were 18,000 casualties. If you have a problem with my casualty estimates take it up with Stephen Turnbull, don't take it up with me. You can email him at stephenturnbull@ntlworld.com. Write it in Japanese. I think he can read Japanese. WangKon936 11:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Validity of WangKon936's Rewritten Article

I have had Dr. Eric Niderost, professor of History at Chabot College and the author of several Admiral Yi articles written in Military Heritage magazine and Osprey Military Publications, read and review my work. He attests to its accuracy. I respectfully ask anyone else to please notify me next time they completely go half-cocked and change my entries. It's a pain to come back and fix them. -- WangKon936 4:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Unnecessary Rewrites and Additions of Historical Inaccuracies

Okay... I'm upset. Which nationalist changed my article and made it more inaccurate? Someone added "Bae Seol" as one of the commanders in the battle. However, that guy flaked out and deserted the day BEFORE the battle. -- WangKon936 2:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Date of Battle of Myeongnyang

Admiral Yi in his war diary gives the date of the battle as the 9th moon, 16th day, based on the Chinese lunar calendar. Converted to the western solar calendar, that would be October 26th. Most people read 9th month, 16th day in Yi's war diary and do a direct solar conversion, which is wrong. Amateurs. Anyways, still doubt me? Read Stephen Turnbull's "Samurai Invasions." He correctly converts the dates and also has October 26th, 1597 for the battle. -- WangKon936 12:55, 02 October 2005 (UTC)


The date of the Battle of Myeongnyang on the Yi Sun-sin page is 1597 September 16, but this page says it's October. Can someone familiar with this battle confirm the date, please ? -- PFHLai 14:25, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Turtle Ships?

Admiral Yi did not have any turtle ships at Myeongnyang. All 13 ships were Panokseons, the large Korean-style battleships during Joseon Dyansty. No source say that Admiral Yi had turtle ships during the battle, since all turtle ships were destroyed in Chilchonryang. Altikriti 22:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/a/t/Talk%7EBattle_of_Myeongnyang_f6f2.html"