--- meleager_calydon <
meleager_calydon@...>
wrote:
> I disagree with a number of your assertions.
> Mitsuhide might not
> have been a master manipulator of men like Hashiba
> (later Toyotomi)
> Hideyoshi, but his revolt against Nobunaga was
> reasonably well
> planned and carried out.
The attack on the Honno-ji was masterfully carried
out, I fully grant. Everything after that smacks of a
"okay....what do I do now?" feel.
> That he miscalculated in who might be willing to
> ally with him
> subsequent to killing Nobunaga only became fully
> clear in the days
> after the Akechi rose up against the Oda.
Ah, but rather than make any attempt to garner their
support BEFORE he acted, he acted and then assumed
he'd get their support. You can argue that if he had
tried to get support first, he may have missed his
chance, or even risked being found out, but the fact
remains that he acted first, thought later.
Mitsuhide was counting on both of
> these generals
> being tied down in campaigns, and in the case of
> Katsuie (who was
> delayed due to his campaign in Etchu) he was at
> least partially
> right. However, upon learning of Nobunaga's death,
> Hideyoshi quickly
> concluded a peace treaty with the Mori and force
> marched on Kyoto.
I'm not arguing that he could have anticipated
Hideyoshi's moves--Hideyoshi's peace with the Mori and
subsequent march was nothing short of amazing.
However, even if Hideyoshi had been held up longer by
the Mori, Mitsuhide needed to get the daimyo of
central Japan under his leadership, and quickly. He
didn't. Once Nobunaga and Nobutada were dead, it was
as if he didn't know what to do next. Sacking Azuchi
appears to me like he had nothing else in mind. Azuchi
wasn't important, except possibly as a symbol. Symbols
could be dealt with later--what was important was
finding and killing Ieyasu, solidifying Hosokawa,
Tsuitsui, Takayama, and Niwa's support, and preparing
for the eventual attack of either Shibata or
Hideyoshi, whichever came first.
> But Mitsuhide's lack of success was not for lack of
> planning or
> effort. He did, in fact, court both the Mori as
> well as the Tokugawa
> clans.
It was a masterful plan to eliminate his tormentor. It
was nowhere near sufficient to take his place. Had
that been his motive, he would have made moves long
before to secure support. He didn't.
And, to tell the truth, I do find it a
> little odd that the
> Mori were content to abide by the treaty they signed
> with Hideyoshi
> when it was clear that they would very likely have
> been able to at
> the least reverse their losses over the previous
> four or five years.
Perhaps. But I think the Mori were content to keep
what they had because they were exhausted by
Hideyoshi.
> The Tokugawa would become embroiled in conflict with
> Hideyoshi
> subsequent to Mitsuhide and Katsuie's fall. Which
> again does not
> entirely make sense from a strategic point of view.
Why not? Hideyoshi's position at Nagakute wasn't
overwhelmingly commanding. With a little luck and some
exceptional diplomacy, Ieyasu could have possibly
overcome Hideyoshi. His appeals to the Chosokabe and
Mori simply didn't work out. Ieyasu was as important
to Hideyoshi's success as he was to Nobunaga's--born
out by the fact that Hideyoshi had to offer up the
Kanto to him.
Nevertheless,
> though he was never
> actually defeated by Hideyoshi, Ieyasu was, in the
> end, forced to
> make peace on the latter's terms due both to the
> ineptitude of Nobuo
> as well as Hideyoshi's sizeable advantage in
> resources and men.
I won't argue Nobuo's ineptitude.
Had
> Ieyasu allied with Katsuie or for that matter even
> with Mitsuhide he
> would likely have been able to forestall the rise of
> Hideyoshi to
> supremacy in Japan.
Now THIS is an interesting what if.
Anyways, back to the main point: it boils down to 2
options. Either Mitsuhide revolted and attacked
Nobunaga for the express purpose of killing Nobunaga
out of accumulated torment, or he attacked the most
powerful man in Japan in order to supplant him. If
it's option 1, he was wildly successful. If it's
option 2, he's a pathetic failure. Mitsuhide wasn't
incompetent (if anything at times he was TOO competent
for Nobunaga's tastes), so my opinion is that his sole
focus was revenge on Nobunaga for the hell he had been
put through. Only afterward was there thought of what
to do afterwards, and the possibility of supplanting
him.
Nate
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail