Yahoo奇摩 網頁搜尋

  1. Kangxi radical - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangxi_radical

    In Unicode version 3.0 (1999), a separate Kangxi Radicals block was introduced which encodes the 214 radicals in sequence, at U+2F00–2FD5. These are specific code points intended to represent the radical qua radical, as opposed to the character ...

  2. List of common Chinese surnames - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_Taiwanese_surnames

    China This list of the 100 most common Chinese surnames derives from China's Ministry of Public Security's annual report on the top 100 surnames in China, with the latest report release in January 2020 for the year 2019. When the 1982 ...

  3. Talk:Battle of Nagashino - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Battle_of_Nagashino
    • Very Long Tred
    • Cavalry Justification
    • Oyamada Nobushige
    • from The Japanese Wiki
    • Date
    • Rifles
    • Horses
    • Turnbull and Stuff
    • Defeat?
    • Dispute

    Correct me if I am wrong, but to my best knowledge, the cavalry charge at Battle of Nagashino was a fictional event created much later. Japan simply did not have the horse breeding that could perform a charge at the time. The Japanese horses at the time was not much bigger than donkeys in size and speed. It was until the 1800s was Arabian horses introduced into Japan. This was further evident in the Korean war of 1580s when Japanese forces was outmatched in by the Ming Chinese cavalry. 1. 1.1. You make a very logical and compelling argument. But every history book I've seen speaks of a cavalry charge at Nagashino. The cavalry charge was used not only here (in which case, it could be feasible to have been invented later) but was in fact the specialty of the Takeda family. I certainly do not argue that the native Japanese horses were smaller and slower, and that the way it is more recently portrayed is romanticized. But if you propose that cavalry charges never happened, what about th...

    Stephen Turnbull addresses the issue of the smaller, slower Japanese horses in his "War in Japan 1467-1615," while justifying the reality of the Takeda cavalry charge. Not "as severe as it is popularly depicted"; but it did actually happen. On the previous page, Turnbull describes the innovations in cavalry tactics introduced by the Takeda: ==Again, I would like to point out that at Mikata Ga Hara, Ieyasu's force was disorganized by the specialised Takeda stone thrower units before the so called charge. So, the cavalry charges were not as powerful as in Europe, and not exclusively using mounted warriors, but they did happen. Remember, though there was certainly more danger in sending lieutenants and the like into the front lines, there was also more honor and glory. That's a key element in feudal warfare anywhere. If King Harold Godwinson of England hadn't rode into battle alongside his knights, he would never have received an arrow in the eye and been killed by the forces of Willia...

    According to this article and the one under his own name (which was written in reference to this one, I suspect), Oyamada Nobushige appears to have died at the battle of Nagashino; however, he apparently got better, as he was the commander of the stronghold of Iwadono who refused Katsuyori entry in 1582, leading to the latter's suicide and the final defeat of the Takeda by Nobunaga and Ieyasu. According to Stephen Turnbull in the Samurai Sourcebook, Nobushige did indeed hold Iwadono castle, and while he is mentioned as having *fought* at Nagashino he isn't referred to as having *died* there (Turnbull isn't specific as to which of the 'Twenty-four Generals' did). I'd say this article, and the one on Nobushige, need to be fixed- unless there are sources supporting their version, in which case the Battle of Temmokuzan article needs to be altered... 172.188.214.1412:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC) 1. According to the Sengoku Jinmei Jiten (戦国人名辞典), Oyamada Nobushige was killed by Nobunaga in...

    http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%95%B7%E7%AF%A0%E3%81%AE%E6%88%A6%E3%81%84#.E6.AD.A6.E7.94.B0.E9.A8.8E.E9.A6.AC.E8.BB.8D.E5.9B.A3.E3.81.AF.E5.AE.9F.E5.9C.A8.E3.81.97.E3.81.9F.E3.81.AE.E3.81.8B Over 90% of the Takeda Arm force are footman. Consider the Takedas were outnumbered two to one in this battle, a charge of less than 3000 riders against a well fortifid and entrenched enemy seems rather ridiculus.Also mentioned in the article, the cavalry's main advantage was its mobility, not its ability to shock.Centralk10:34, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Not only in mobility. Its true that japanese hourses were small like "donkeys", but the samurai raiders were also "small" in those days. Smaller and lighter than an avaerage Japanese of modern times. So, it was not difficult for a "donkey"-like well-trained hourse to carry the 40-50 kg armed raider and ran at full gallop. Therefore the cavalry charge might took place in the battles of the Sengoku period. Also Jesuit missionaries recorded that on...

    Which date is correct - 28th or 29th? Japanese wiki gives 29th, while most of European - 28th....--Alex Kov11:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

    There is a lot of mention of rifles and riflemen here. I thought that most of the guns of that period were smoothbore weapons (like the arquebus). Is this just used as a generic term to mean firearms? If so it could do with a rewrite to correct this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bunker fox (talk • contribs) 20:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC). 1. 1.1. 1.1.1. I do not know that much about firearms, and if someone who knows better thinks it needs correcting, that's fine with me. I have to admit, I don't even remember if it would have been me who wrote "rifles", but if it was, I intended it not as a description of a specific type of weapon (which they obviously did not have at the time), but as a very general, broad term. They weren't handguns or pistols (or machine guns, artillery, bazookas, shotguns, etc.), thus they were rifles. Two-handed, versus one-handed. That's all. Does this need correcting, or is "rifle" good enough as a broad term that can incorporate matchlock rifl...

    The Mongols rode small, primitive shaggy horses and conquered most of Eurasia, making mincemeat of cavalry forces that rode big beautiful horses. Erudil 17:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC) 1. Hores are not depended on size but what they are bred to do. Mongolian horses were bred to have high speed and endurance, suited for horse archers swarming. That is the tactic they conquered the world with. When they went head on head and launched cavalry charges against the big and heavy Arabic "chargers" of the Middle East and European knights that were bred specifically to charge, the Mongols got the worst of it. They did not beat these heavy cavalry with heavy cavalry charge of their own, they did so by luring them into long pursuits, weakening them with endless shower of arrows, breaking up their formation and tiring their chargers (which tire easily), and then and only then would then turn around and mount fresh horses and charge. The Takeda cavalry by traditional accounts were spear-sword cava...

    People need to stop using this guy as the main source (or the only source). I'm blessed that I can read Japanese, Chinese, and English and I can tell Turnbull just takes traditional narratives of East Asian warfare and face value without digging deeper for contemporary accounts and using logical deduction to produce what is actually plausible. He's equivalent would be if an Eastern historian read Herotodus and took him in face value and said the Persians numbered 2million. He does not consult with modern native historians of the subject, but take these tales and just try to construct something "logical" from it. His arguement for the existence and innovation of Takeda cavalry does not stand up at all. First, the Sengoku Era the yari (which is just a polearm with a metal blade of any kind, not a pike) was the main weapon and there is no source or reason to suggest Shingen refitted his cavalry with spears for charge when it could very well have been their main weapon from before the e...

    So according to the WP article on the Battle of Mikatagahara Tokugawa was outnumbered three to one, and he was facing one of the most powerful warlords of the era. Then, in less than one day, he was able to drive out the attacking force and hold the castle they had come to take. How exactly is this a defeat for Tokugawa? I have noticed a tendency to downplay the life and abilities of Tokugawa in post Meiji Restoration histories, I think this article might also be suffering from that bias. Colincbn (talk) 05:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

    I don't think this section adds anything to the article, and in fact seems to muddy the waters. Nearly every standard account in English is unanimous. Everything in the "dispute" section I think is WP's definition of "original research" - until something comes along in English that really does dispute the standard story, I think we should remove this section - most of it is uncited as well. What does everyone think? Sgtkabuki (talk) 23:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC) 1. Agreed. There are a lot of unsubstantiated claims in this article. Looks like someone already went ahead and terminated that section anyway. I think there is still more fat that can be cut out. BradTraylor (talk) 03:37, 28 April 2011 (UTC) 1.1. Sorry, I was interrupted before I could post here. I deleted the section, but I do think it is worth putting in some info about the difference between Japanese horses of the time and the modern Arabian and European thoroughbreds used in movies (properly referenced of course). Colincbn...

  4. List of kanji by stroke count - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_kanji_by_stroke_count

    This Kanji index method groups together the kanji that are written with the same number of strokes. Currently, there are 2,187 individual kanji listed. Characters followed by an alternate in (parentheses) indicate a difference between the ...

  5. List of jōyō kanji - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_jōyō_kanji

    6 uncommon イ、こと i, koto 28 移 禾 11 5 shift イ、うつ-る、うつ-す i, utsu-ru, utsu-su 29 萎 艸 11 S 2010 wither イ、な-える i, na-eru 30 偉 人 12 S admirable イ、えら-い i, era-i 31 椅 木 12 S 2010 chair イ i ...

  6. List of Naruto chapters (Part II, volumes 49–72) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Naruto_chapters_(Part_II...

    Naruto was published in individual chapters by Shueisha in Weekly Shōnen Jump and later collected in tankōbon format with extra content. The manga series was first published in issue 43 of 1999, with Part II beginning in issue 19 of 2005. Volume ...

  7. List of Saint Seiya Episode.G chapters - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Saint_Seiya_Episode.G_chapters

    The manga Saint Seiya Episode.G, written and illustrated by Megumu Okada, is a spin-off's side-story and derivative work of Masami Kurumada's Saint Seiya. The story is set seven years before the events of Saint Seiya[1] and depicts the ...