Dear James:
Fundamentally, I agree with your point.
However, when I first read the book on the Manchurian
conquest of China, I got an impression that the main
causes of the Chinese defeat was their insufficient
understanding in the use of firearms at the battle
field.
Actually, a Korean(Chosun dynasty) general, who ran
the first major counter-offensive in the land,
employed the same tactics as Manchurians' against the
Japanese leading troops.(Unlike in the Navy, Canons
were not popularly used in the ground because of
difficulty in mobility) Despite his initial success,
his troop was completely annihilated. Almost all of
20,000(?) soldiers were killed.
So, the composition of tactical units does play a role
in the battle. But, it is still a commander who
determines the fotunes of the battle.
Sincerely,
Changsub Lee
--- James Eckman <
ronin_engineer@...> wrote:
>
> > From: Lee Changsub <knorr31@...>
> >Subject: Re: The Use of Hand Guns by Samurai
> Officers in the Senkogu Jidai??
> >
> >However, Machurians who conqured Myung Dynasty used
> >archery against the firearms of China and proved
> that
> >their archery was superior weaponary than the use
> of
> >firearms. This is one of reasons why the last
> Chinese
> >empire(Manchurian's) did not show much interest in
> the
> >western weaponary.
> >
> >
> In the west, I seem to remember that Benjamin
> Franklin advocated a
> return to the long bow as late as 1776. It's easier
> to train a
> musketeer, but if you already have trained archers,
> why bother?
>
> Jim Eckman
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com