User talk:Wiki Humanities Arao
You should understand the difference between tactical victory and strategic victory.
According to the number of ships sunk, it's obviously Joseon's tactical victory. Otherwise, Japanese got strategic victory by defending its supply route.
You can find these two kinds of victory on many article for war thingy. A lot of wars cannot be defined as a victory of one side. If it should be, the battle of Mogadishu also need to be revised as total defeat of US army because the battle made a really really same result with that of the battle of Busan bay.
--- above by Kj1547
Above is comment about Battle_of_Busan_(1592).
I understand the difference. As you mentioned, the result of the battle is obviously strategic victory of Japanese forces. One the other hand, whose tactical victory cannot be judged with our information. Thus, it is enough to write strategic result of the battle.
Whether it is Joseon's tactical victory relies on the damage the both side took during the battle. In Joseon's history record, I read that Yi said that he sank 128 Japanese ships (I was not able to find out where this actually comes from. I will be appreciated if you show me some references.), and the later summary says that empty 400 ships were sank. It also says that 1 Joseon high-ranking officer and 6 soldier were killed. In Japan's history record, there were no notes of the damage. In later record, there were 400 and a little more Japanese ships there.
By comparing these, we may reach 3 results. 1. A quarter of Japanese ships were sank. These ships were empty. 2. All of Japanese ships were sank. These ships were empty. 3. Damage of Japanese ships were ignorable. In case 3. the result can be said as Japanese tactical victory, but in the other cases, judging whose tactical victory relies on the costs of empty ships and of the lives of the officer and the soldiers.
With reviewing your modification of the topic, I assume that you are standing on the case 1.. Then, how do you judge "obviously Joseon's tactical victory"? I don't think it is simple.
Wiki Humanities Arao (talk) 00:41, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I cannot find or give you exact sources. I am not a historian and hasn't been educated in Asia. It's too hard for American to find Asian sources. Anyway, I believe that Wiki is a user-friendly dictionary so that users can edit it with universal knowledge, if the universal knowledge is not partial toward one side. I think that what I learned in high school could be considered, because what high schools teach is not a personal opinion but many scholars' opinion. Now what I'm trying to say can be easily found in American textbooks. You would find it in almost world history books published in USA. I remember that the content of this invasion has been introduced between Ashikaga shogunate and Tokugawa shogunate. As I studied AP world history in my high school, the textbook mentioned Yi as an undefeated General. This mention implies that all the battles engaged by Yi were his victories. Since the battle of Busan in 1592 was a part of Yi's battles, we now know that many historians regard the battle as Yi's victory. As long as American students learn that Yi was undefeated, English Wikipedia has to give this victory to Joseon Navy. It is not an our problem to judge whose victory the battle was, because it was already judged by many scholars and has already been indirectly published as a victory of Joseon Navy ,at least, in the U.S. Almost people who learned AP world history would think Yi won the battle. Deleting Joseon's victory will remote this article from common practice and the result would intensify the confusion. It doesn't make sense that what this article says is different to what almost textbooks teach. I'm afraid that Wiki loses its source credibility because of this article which has got out of mainstream. I hope you know this.
- Kj1547, 22:33 Aug 7 2013 EST — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kj1547 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Kj1547. Thank you for those comments and letting me know that your experience of education in US. It's very interesting that textbooks in US tells much about such details about a mere general. I guess none of high school textbooks in Japan or Korea tells about Robert_Edward_Lee, right? I actually would like to read such textbooks in US, to learn how history in Asia is told in US. I will be appreciated if you tell me the titles of several textbooks you used in your high school. I would like to check the reason of "tactical victory".
As far as I have read historical records, not textbooks, although Yi won battles many times, he was defeated several times. This battle is a good example. You should check the reference 9 of the topic. That is part of Annals of the Joseon Dynasty written in Chinese character or Kanji, and clearly says that he was defeated. The history of scholarly study of Yi is short. Actually he had been forgotten till 1930s and when he was remembered, Korea was under control of Japan, thus, unfortunately, study of him was affected by circumstances. Maybe his "unwanted" career should be covered to make him a hero.
Anyway we in nowadays may reach such a primary source with the power of Internet. You and I had better check sources since we are no longer receivers but senders of information.
Wiki Humanities Arao (talk) 04:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
It was so long ago. I'm sure what you randomly select will be the textbook you want. One must be aware though, that the description of Yi was one sentence but not details; Yi was an undefeated General. I got other information on the internet few years ago, being inspired by that one sentence. By the way, I can tell you the book which was used in my world history class during my undergraduate freshman year: World (student edition), Craig A. Lockard. You would see how Asia is depicted in this book. This book narrates Japan had no control of the sea during the invasion, either. You would be disappointed. Not only you but other Chinese and Koreans also would be disappointed at their part of the book, too. Some people have so patriotic that they cannot see the history, to the exclusion of their emotion. Since I think Japanese are the most rational among Asians nowadays, you can find the key from a lot of various world history books from the U.S. All I hope now is keep the article claiming victory on both sides until it will be officially cleared by authoritative scholar in Asian History, because many scholars in the present recognize that Yi was undefeated despite a lack of evidence. This is in order to not confuse the students who have learned World History in the U.S with conflicting account for what happened in this battle.
- Kj1547, 2:52 Aug 8 2013 EST
Dear Kj1547,
Thank you for introducing an example textbook. Unfortunately, I have not been able to read the book. It is not available in libraries nearby. So my comments below are based on your words, "Yi was an undefeated General", "This book narrates Japan had no control of the sea during the invasion, either."
To tell the truth, I was disappointed.
As we have discussed, determination of tactical victory of either side in one battle is sometimes difficult. Thus, if one says "Yi was an undefeated General" in the battle, it can be. But I need to criticize the comment, "Yi was an undefeated General". He was killed in battle in 1597 during attacking the Japanese forces who were trying to retreating due to the death of Hideyoshi. How does one explain him as "undefeated"?
On the other hand, the latter sentence, "This book narrates Japan had no control of the sea during the invasion, either. " is quite inconsistent to the history. The Japanese forces had kept providing food even during the war. There was a letter among the Japanese Generals, saying that there was enough food both in Seoul and Busan in March 1593, the next year of this battle, and saying that the difficulty lay on sending food from Busan to Seoul by road. If you need the reference, let me know. In 1598, Japanese forces were able to retreat from Joseon, with very limited casualties. Who can do these with "no control of the sea"? It's almost ridiculous.
I was disappointed, not due to whether I am patriotic, but due to that a textbook for US university students tells incorrect history.
You believe textbooks. OK, usually a man does so and I cannot help that, since a textbook basically writes correct things. But you should know that everything in textbooks is not always correct. I have kept telling you that I have discussed based on the primary sources, and I also kept telling you that you should refer them if you try to “provide information with other persons". If a textbook is inconsistent to those sources, you don’t need to follow the textbook. Then I again recommend you to read "乱中日記" and "宣祖実録", both of them are the primary sources and accessible by the Internet. You will not find out that Yi was undefeated “with evidence".
I hope you are honest to the human history and that you are not bothered from wondering whether a man is patriotic when you discussing an academic thing with him.
Best Regards,
Wiki Humanities Arao (talk) 22:25, 10 August 2013 (UTC)