Talk:Tokugawa Ieyasu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

The discussion of the use of the given name was moved to Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles.

Contents

[edit] Kowatari Castle

User:Lacrimosus changed Kwatari to Kowatari, which appears to be correct. The Japanese Wikipedia article on Oda Nobuhide contains the sentence "その後も勢力の拡大にともなって1539年に古渡城（名古屋市中区）、1548年に末森城（名古屋市千種区）を築いて居城を移している。" The text in bold could be read kowatari. (Lacrimosus wondered whether Japanese has kw; it once did, and it lives on in the occasional Kwannon, Kwansei University etc.)

[edit] Toranaga?

Could sb explain in article why Toranaga redirects here? Was it some bastard westernization of his name? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 12:16, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

It's because of James Clavell. In his Asian Saga (and most notably Shogun) he has characters with the surname Toranaga. These characters are closely based on the Tokugawas and there are many similarities between what happens in his books and what actually happened. -- MordredKLB 13:15, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
I see. I will add a note on this to the text. Oh, I see you already done it - tnx. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:27, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Monto

Should the wikilink to monto be deleted (4th paragraph of rise to power) ? The link is to an area of Ireland. I don't know if the Japanese definition (close to 'zealot'?) deserves a disambig link or not. Neier 06:26, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I changed it to Mikawa Monto. Fg2 07:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] THE ARTICLE

Did someone just wipe the entire page clean in the most recent edit? —This unsigned comment was added by Framed0000 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Tokugawa and the Korean war

How did Tokugawa manage to stay out of the Korean-war? He was a vassal of Toyotomi wasn't he? —This unsigned comment was added by 217.209.26.241 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Cat lover?

I commented out a portion of text regarding Tokugawa's love of cats. I only commented out one sentence, because the other two seem plausible. I seem to recall some story about the sleeping cat at Nikko Toshogu and its relevance to Tokugawa; but, I'm somewhat leery of the recent addition to the text, given the comparison to Hello Kitty. Does anyone have any more concrete info? Neier 15:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Even if he were a cat lover, is it important enough to include in his article in Wikipedia? (Even if the spelling of his name were modernized...) Fg2 20:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

In Civilazation games he is the leader of Japan

[edit] Popular culture details?

Removed all details that belong in the articles about the individual works. This article is about Tokugawa Ieyasu and should not have details about the works.

Is this correct? The details that used to be given in the popular culture section were about Ieyasu's portrayal in each work. These weren't just random details about works that happen to reference Ieyasu, they were all about Ieyasu within the work.

On the other hand, all of the works in the list are fiction, and so the details about Ieyasu within the works are quite possibly fictional, and so are of no value to someone aiming to study Ieyasu. In fact, the entire section about popular culture is of no value if we only want to learn about Ieyasu himself.

I find the section interesting for its own sake and anyone who finds Ieyasu fascinating in the manner that I do must appreciate seeing him in works of fiction. If you are looking to this article to learn about where Ieyasu appears in works of fiction, then not only is the popular culture section the most valuable, most of the details that have been edited out are of great importance. They explain the role that Ieyasu played in the movie, TV show, game, etc.

If we do not want to include the popular image of Ieyasu in this article, then perhaps the entire section should be moved to separate article, rather than merely crippling it by removing all the relevant details. -- Lilwik 09:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

It has been almost a month since I pointed out this issue, and no one seems to care. If I still get no response in a little while, I'm going to go back and save all that great stuff that was reverted out and put it in its own article that I think I will call Tokugawa (Fiction) where we can put information about how this classic family was represented in works of fiction. Since it is the only source that I have direct access to, I will expand the section about how Ieyasu was portrayed in the anime Basilisk and put a "main article" link in the In Popular Culture section of this article. -- Lilwik 19:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that the December edit was wonderful. If Tokugawa was important to a particular work, then, the details are more appropriately placed in that work's article. Linking to the articles with a brief description is sufficient. If Tokugawa is not important enough to be mentioned in a particular work's article, then, it definitely falls below the bar for inclusion in this article. For a new dedicated article, then, the bar for inclusion is set significantly lower, and you may be able to build an exhaustive list. But, in the interest of keeping the section of this manageable, there is also no good reason to link to every single article that has a mention of Tokugawa in it. Some references are more meaningful than others, and for the rest, google search site:wikipedia.org is sufficient (or, the link to your fiction article). I think that the references which are still in the article are a good selection. Neier 00:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello Lilwik,
Your decision to separate the two subjects (the historic person and the cultural references to him) into appropriately named and focused articles has many advantages. When the new article is in place we can, as Neier suggested, select only the most important links for this article, and refer readers via your Main Article link to the article that has the details, as well as links to the articles on the modern works. Fg2 00:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
This sounds like sufficient support so that a new article for Ieyasu in fiction will be appropriate. I should point out that almost all of the works listed in the "In popular culture" section have articles that mention Ieyasu, but the main article of a work often do not provide full details of the characters in that work, especially for a television series. Moving all the information on Ieyasu into the main article for a work where most characters are represented by links to their own articles seems inappropriate.
When one character appears briefly in as many different works as Tokugawa Ieyasu, providing an article on his portrayal in various works seems appropriate, especially when characters who appear in just one work are often given their own articles. -- Lilwik 06:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I have pared down the fiction/popular culture references again. I think that if someone can read a major work (novel or manga) and understand a bit more (context; not necessarily 100% accurate facts) about Tokugawa Ieyasu, then, it can be considered for listing here. Things like "appears in xyz game" are not helpful to gaining an understanding of the subject. There is a video game link remaining, simply because it sounds like the game is based on historical context, and might pass the most lenient of requirements along these lines. Tokugawa (fiction) might also currently need cleanup, but, that is another matter. Neier 12:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please keep Tokugawa crest image

There seems to be some discussion over whether or not to keep the Tokugawa crest in the article. This person strongly recommends keeping the crest. It is often seen in Japanese crafts such as maki-e and obi, for example. Its presence here serves an educational function. Writtenright 22:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)Writtenright

[edit] Inaccuracy of dates

The article currently states that "Tokugawa Ieyasu was born on January 31, 1543."

Later on we have:

"In 1556, Ieyasu came of age.... One year later, at the age of 16, he married his first wife...."

Can these entries be reconciled?

Markkellner 17:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

The pre-Meiji Japanese construe time and dates a little differently than we're accustomed to doing. For example:
  • 1. Consider the infant born in Amsterdam in 1555: In 1558, the mother would identify her child as being 3 years old. Simple, right?
1558 - 1555 = 3?
  • 2. Consider the infant born in Nagasaki on the very same day. The mother would identify her child as born in the first year of the Kōji nengō (or Japanese era name which corresponds to the year 1555 in the Gregorian calendar). In 1558, the Japanese mother would identify her child as being 4 years old because she construes the time a little differently than her Dutch counterpart:
Kōji 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Gregorian 1555 1556 1557 1558
Someone else could explain this better than I ... but I just wanted to give it a try. Your query actually raises an important point. Good question.--Ooperhoofd 17:36, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia has an article, East Asian age reckoning. Not sure it explains it any more clearly than what Ooperhoofd wrote. But it does place it in the context of East Asia. Fg2 20:30, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm familiar with the Japanese system, but I'm afraid I still don't understand the math: 1556 + 1 year later = 1557 - 1543 = 14 + 1 for the Japanese system = 15. Am I missing something? Markkellner 01:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Aha, you're right: that does not answer it. These would be his East Asian ages in each year:

  1. 1543
  2. 1544
  3. 1545
  4. 1546
  5. 1547
  6. 1548
  7. 1549
  8. 1550
  9. 1551
  10. 1552
  11. 1553
  12. 1554
  13. 1555
  14. 1556
  15. 1557
  16. 1558
  17. 1559

The key is that his birth year is different in the Japanese and Western systems. By the Japanese (lunar calendar) he was born at the end of the previous year. The Japanese Wikipedia gives his date of birth as the 26th day of the twelfth month of the eleventh year of Tenbun (or Tenmon). Most of Tenbun 11 was 1542, not 1543, according to the Western calendar. So at birth he was in his first year by East Asian reckoning, and within a week he entered his second year. This adds an extra year to his age. Fg2 01:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to research this :) Markkellner 17:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The hiragana spelling of Ieyasu

Why is I forbidden to put the hiragana spelling of Ieyasu's name in the article? /83.249.97.252 (talk) 20:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The kanji is in the article because it is how his name was written; and, the romaji is there to give the 99% of the population who can't read Japanese something to focus on. There is no point in listing the Hiragana, since Wikipedia is not a Japanese-language study aid. Neier (talk) 23:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't think that anybody has a good reason to remove it. You'll get, when reading it, a good picture how Ieyasu's name was written in the 17th Century with hiragana. When it takes such little place in the article, why can't it just be in the article? /83.249.97.170 (talk) 16:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
It’s not just that it’s redundant to information already supplied in the article or that the hiragana would not have been used too often in his time; the hiragana in question are incorrect, even! Still, it is NOT forbidden to put it in the article. It just doesn’t look good and doesn’t adhere to the Wikipedia style guidelines; it is not irrelevant, in fact, but the hiragana don’t need to be there, and most certainly not as a prominent part of the introductory paragraph. -BRPXQZME (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Death poem

Maybe we could include his death poem in the article:

Whether one passes on or remains is all the same.
That you can take no one with you is the only difference.
Ah, how pleasant! Two awakenings and one sleep.
This dream of a fleeing world! The roseate hues of early dawn!
[1]

--Gwern (contribs) 03:23 13 March 2008 (GMT)

[edit] When born?

The article claims that Ieyasu was born both on Jan 31 1543 and in December 1542. Could someone check this? 92.8.136.240 (talk) 00:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course, this glaring mistake was so obvious, it's a wonder that someone else didn't correct it before now. A quick check of the edit history reveals that this error was introduced in a two-step process by an anonymous editor on April 2nd; and the misinformation is easily remedied. In this context, perhaps a couple of points bear repeating:
  • 1. See Talk:Tokugawa Ieyasu#Inaccuracy of dates above -- especially the next-to-last paragraph contributed by User:Fg2.
  • 2. There are sometimes different ways of saying the same thing. In this instance, there is no discrepancy in stating that Ieyasu was born on January 31, 1543, according to the Gregorian calendar, or in stating that he was born on the 26th day of the twelfth month of the eleventh year of Tenbun, according to the Japanese calendar -- see Japanese era name.
Japanese date: 天文十一年十二月二十六日
Western date: 31.1.1543 (Wednesday)
I hope this helps to clear up any remaining misunderstanding. --Tenmei (talk) 13:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)