Talk:Pechin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Okinawan Samurai: Pechin[edit]

Samurai?[edit]

While there are a number of sources cited here, I wonder if we shouldn't make a stronger effort to emphasize the fact that pechin were analogous to samurai, and not in any way actually the same as samurai, i.e. not directly related culturally nor by blood to the samurai clans.

While it's a useful comparison, and I'm sure it's used quite frequently in place of the more obscure term pechin, the pechin were not samurai, and I think it's misleading to use the word so many times in the article.

Over the weekend at some point, if I remember, I'll be bold and fix up the wording how I like it. In the meantime, though, if anyone's watching, some discussion would not be at all unwelcome. Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 00:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Peichin vs. Pechin[edit]

I've more often seen the Romaji spelling as "peichin", rather than "pechin"...I propose that "peichin" be primary with "pechin" a redirect. August, 19 2010

Article name[edit]

Why is this article named Peichin, while its content not only deals with the Peichin class, but also with the other Shizoku classes? I think that, Shizoku or Okinawan noble class would be a better name for this article. --Gyte75 (talk) 14:02, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hall of Shame[edit]

I would like to nominate the revision history of this article (and those of related articles) for Wikipedia's Hall of Shame. This demonstrates how the "enough eyeballs" principle fails at least in some areas of Wikipedia. We do not have enough eyeballs here. Even worse, we have a "noise amplifier."

  • Since its creation by Gushiken1 (talk · contribs) in 2006, this article has been placed under the title of "Pechin". This article described pēchin as a social class. However, it was actually a rank (to be precise, a colloquial umbrella term for two ranks: satunushi-pēchin and chikudun-pēchin). It was below pēkumī and above satunushi and chikudun (satunushi was higher than chikudun, but they were on different tracks). A samurai promoted to pēkumī was no longer a pēchin. Describing pēchin as a social class sounds as stupid as describing European nobility under the title of "Baron".
  • You have probably never heard of the word. The important point here is that if you completed Okinawan history 101, you would never make such a stupid mistake because it is extraordinary stupid. However, this error has been left unresolved for a decade and exported to other Wikipedias!
  • I do not remember when I noticed this error. It was lost somewhere on my ever-growing to-do list. I could hardly imagine anyone taking it seriously. However, Sturmgewehr88 (talk · contribs) does! To my great surprise, he seem to take the article at face value as he restated the error by his own words.[1] And he is incapable of realizing the mistake for years. Thanks to the diligent editor, the only-in-Wikipedia error spreads like cancer.[2][3][4][5] For me, it was still not a matter of of top priority, but yes, I finally fixed it by myself.
  • A lesson learned from this incident. We definitely need more eyeballs, but eyeballs at least with a minimum level of knowledge. Otherwise we simply end up spreading errors. We need to let experts join Wikipedia. To do so, we have to tackle the classical Randy-in-Boise problem. If someone without a minimum level of knowledge persists, they are forced to waist their time in a weariful discussion just to correct a stupid mistake.

Any suggestions? --Nanshu (talk) 02:02, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, you needs to grasp the concepts of connotations and loaded words. Also, you state that there was no warrior class until after 1609, yet later you state that the "samurai" had their weapons confiscated by Shō Shin at the turn of the 16th century, which means either your unsupported statement or the one backed by sources is wrong. The samurai called themselves bushi 武士, but maybe we should move Samurai to Knight (Japan) like you're basically attempting to do here. I'll go ahead and tag User:LordAmeth. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 21:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. Yikes. I have not edited Wikipedia in many years, and I'm afraid I'm not going to get back into it now - partially because I have completely not kept up with standards and the style guide and so forth, but also especially as I don't have my books with me (I'm sort of in-between places right now) to consult in order to get any of the complexities right. But, as Nanshu has pointed out here, pēchin (or peechin ぺーちん, not peichin ぺいちん) was a rank, above satunushi and below ueekata. It was not an all-encompassing term for the nobility as a whole. And the Ryukyuan scholar-aristocracy were Confucian civil officials, patterned after the Ming example. They were not a warrior class. At all. And while I have seen the word "samuree" used here and there, it was always as a gloss for 士, meaning a "gentleman" or a "scholar-official." The term 士 was used by Confucius to refer to the upright gentleman, and it went on to be used in China to refer to scholar-officials, or to that class as a whole - only in Japan was it appropriated by the warrior class (the samurai) to refer to themselves. So let's please not confuse the thing - samurai are a phenomenon particular to Japan. Everything about them, from the structure of their families to their martial values, is particular to the Japanese case and does not apply to Ryukyu. I am sad to see that this article is in such a state... but I'm afraid I don't have the time or resources right now to tackle the cleaning up myself. Surely there are other capable souls? Really, what I think needs to be done is to have this merged into a broader article on Scholar-aristocracy of the Ryukyu Kingdom or however people wish to title it. (Thanks for tagging me, though, and letting me know. Good luck!!) LordAmeth (talk) 11:08, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@LordAmeth: I really appreciate your time and input. Obviously this article needs to be redone, and a separate article created for Ryukyu's warrior class/military. That proposed title seems good to me. Would you happen to know any good sources for the scholar-aristocrats off the top of your head? ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 01:15, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Matsuda Mitsugu's "Government of the Ryukyu Kingdom" is probably the best source in English on all the titles and ranks and everything. Greg Smits' "Examining the Myth of Ryukyuan Pacifism" (http://apjjf.org/-Gregory-Smits/3409/article.html) is probably the best out there in English about the Ryukyu Kingdom's military, and about the myths surrounding the disarming of the people. Cheers. Best of luck! Sorry to not jump in and help out myself. m(_ _)m LordAmeth (talk) 11:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
LordAmeth, thank you for a comment, but I do oppose "scholar-official" or something as an alternative to samurai. It sounds like a bad joke unless we decide to narrow the scope of the article to a tiny fraction of what is covered now. In reality, near-bankrupt Ryūkyū could not feed so many samurai. What it did was an Okinawan version of the Down to the Countryside Movement. It sent poor samurai to rural areas of Okinawa Island while allowing them to maintain samurai membership. A substantial portion of samurai in Ryukyu was those yadui farmers. How can they be qualified as scholar-officials? --Nanshu (talk) 14:44, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Scholar-official is much better than "samurai", since you obviously have no comprehension of connotations. In English, "samurai" means it is "Japanese". They were no more samurai than samurai were Korean Hwarang. If you disagree with scholar-official, then "nobility" is the only other alternative. I'm sure your aversion to "scholar-official" stems from its use in China and Korea. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 01:34, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Samurai" were Japanese warriors. The entire class grew out of warrior lineages, warrior accomplishments, warrior notions of loyalty and honor and so forth. Ryukyuan scholar-officials were neither warriors, nor Japanese. Ryukyu did not have to "feed so many samurai," because they had none. The only samurai who were ever in Ryukyu were from Satsuma han. They also did not "send poor samurai to rural areas" - the only samurai who were ever in Ryukyu remained in Naha & Shuri, attached to the Satsuma han zaiban bugyo office. The officials, or nobles, or whatever we want to call them, who were sent to the countryside, were not samurai. They were not related to any Japanese samurai house, and were simply put, not Japanese people at all. Just as there were no Chinese or Korean samurai, so too there were no Ryukyuan samurai. The Ryukyuan aristocracy was an aristocracy or nobility that one was born into, yes, so it was not truly quite a total meritocracy as the ideal of the Confucian scholar-exam system claimed to aspire to, but, still, it was based very much on the Ming Chinese system of Confucian exams and of a bureaucratic/official class made up of scholars, not of warriors. Thus, the term "scholar-officials," or "scholar-aristocracy," is quite appropriate in my opinion, and "samurai," decidedly less so. LordAmeth (talk) 03:45, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@LordAmeth: Sorry to ping you again. I read Mitsugu and Smits' works, and coming back to Wikipedia I found the Yukatchu article, which you created along with the other articles for these ranks. If I'm not mistaken, you intended the Pechin article to be like the Ueekata article, but it has basically become an alternate version of the Yukatchu article. Would it not be better to cut this article down to only talk about Pechin and/or Pekumi and move most of the information to Yukatchu? We already have the Aji (Ryukyu) and List of monarchs of Ryukyu Islands articles for the nobility and royalty, so all that would be left is a Military of the Ryukyu Kingdom article, which SamuraiWiki already has. I would like your opinion on this. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 19:17, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am deeply sorry for any mess I created years and years ago, as a result in part of my relative ignorance at that time, having only read a few things, and perhaps come to some rather mistaken conclusions - e.g. whether "yukatchu" is the best catch-all phrase for the Ryukyuan aristocracy. But as for what has come since, I wasn't even watching, let alone participating, to be honest. I am focusing my energies on the SamuraiWiki now, and have not edited Wikipedia in any serious way for a long time. It's in your hands. Do whatever you think best. I would say probably what's best is to merge the Yukatchu article into this one, under Scholar-officials of the Ryukyu Kingdom or Scholar-aristocracy of the Ryukyu Kingdom, and have a Pechin or Peechin article discuss only that rank (and Peekumi, I guess). Military is a whole separate matter. Best of luck!! LordAmeth (talk) 03:45, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, you answered my questions. Although I am surprised, I thought SamuraiWiki was dead? But I'll do my best and probably enlist some help! ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 04:44, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you are still willing to have a civil and constructive discussion, then the first thing to do is to answer the question. Do you understand the simple and clear fact that pēchin was NOT a social class?
Making activities in Wikipedia as unproductive as possible by behaving stupidly is proven to be an effective tactic here in Wikipedia. But for now, I follow Hanlon's razor and attribute the disturbance to stupidity, not to malice.
This time, it is revealed that he doesn't even know what samurai literally means. Needless to say, it is a nominal form of a verb "to serve nearby." Whether armed or not is only a secondary development. And certainly, he does not know where words like daimyō and bugyō came from.
I don't think I'm obliged to give a lecture on Japanese history 101 every time we move things forward. We have to admit the ugly truth that there exists a minium literacy level. If his literacy level is far below the standard, he cannot achieve a successful discussion. That's the Randy-in-Boise problem. --Nanshu (talk) 03:55, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For one, your patronizing attitude and personal attacks are pathetic, and your hypocrisy tenfold. I've offered to work constructively with you many times, but instead of doing so, you'd rather "give a lecture" and do as you please. That's not how Wikipedia works. Besides, this is in fact English Wikipedia, and since your grasp of English is questionable at times, perhaps I should give you a lecture or two. I've been less active here recently due to my research on Japanese Imperialist policy, and I'm actually curious if you ascribe to the ideal of 君民同祖? I would say that if I were just an idiot then you're a Nationalist POV-pusher, but that isn't an equal equation. I remember you once proclaiming that Wikipedia should only be edited by "experts", yet according to your Japanese user page you are or were an engineering student, so what expertise do you have in the fields of history or linguistics? I'm surprised that you don't edit more there, but that whole site is already aligned to your POV, so there'd be no point in changing any of it except to break a few templates you don't like, right?
Now that that's out of the way, I'll answer your question: Pechin was a rank and not a social class. However, they were not Japanese, therefore you cannot call them "samurai". ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 01:34, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pechin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:39, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pechin&oldid=1204565371"