Reseña De" Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko" De

Home , Battle of Nagashino, Tanegashima, Tanegashima (gun), Wang Zhi (pirate)

Bulletin of Portuguese - Japanese Studies ISSN: 0874-8438 [email protected] Universidade Nova de Lisboa Portugal

Correia, Pedro Reseña de "Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko" de Murai Shósuke y "Tanegashima. The Arrival of Europe in Japan" de Olof G. Lidin Bulletin of Portuguese - Japanese Studies, núm. 8, june, 2004, pp. 93-106 Universidade Nova de Lisboa Lisboa, Portugal

Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=36100805

How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative BPJS, 2004, 8, 93-106 Review Essay 93

REVIEW ESSAY

Murai Shósuke ‘A Reconsideration of the Introduction of Firearms to Japan’ in Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko, nº 60, 2002, pp. 19-38.

Olof G. Lidin Tanegashima. The Arrival of Europe in Japan, Copenhagen, Nordic Institute of Asian Studies, 2002.

The common element between these works by Murai Shósuke and Olof Lidin is an analysis of the arrival of the first Portuguese in Japan and the consequent expansion of firearms in the Japanese archipelago. However, both authors frame this theme in different contexts. Murai limits his study to events that took place in a short period of time (1542- 1545), but seeks to understand the arrival of firearms in Japan within the scope of the integration of the Portuguese into the trade routes of East Asia. Lidin, on the contrary, reduces the geographical area under study to the Japanese archipelago and extends the chronological period under analysis (1542-1549). Lidin’s objective is to study the genesis of the European presence in Japan that, according to the author, began in 1543 with the arrival of the first Portuguese in Tanegashima and ended in 1549 with the arrival of St. Francis Xavier. Likewise, this historian seeks to understand the importance of Tanegashima in the expansion of the teppó in Japan. Despite the fact that their studies have different objectives, both authors have structured their works around an analysis of diverse documental sources. In these two studies, a presentation of ideas or theories about the subjects dealt with therein is accompanied by a rigorous critique of the documental sources. Thus, an analysis of the theses presented by both authors must also be accompanied by an analysis of the way in which Lidin and Murai study and evaluate the information provided by this source material. As both these studies are the result of research that was structured around sources, the documents used were conditioned by the objectives of each author. Murai seeks to analyse the arrival of the Portuguese and the introduction of firearms in Japan in an Asiatic context. He presents us with two groups of sources, European and Asian, respectively, that converge in 94 Pedro Lage Reis Correia his re-examination of the date of the arrival of the teppó on Japanese soil. The group of European documents consists of the Tratado dos diversos e des- vayrados caminhos (1563?) by António Galvão and Garcia Escalante’s Rel- ación (1548). Furthermore, the Japanese author also refers to the História da Igreja no Japão by João Rodrigues Tçuzu. Amongst Asian sources, Murai uses the Japanese documents Teppóki and Tanegashima kafu. As a matter of fact, both authors consider these two sources to be the main Japanese documents for any study of the arrival of the Portuguese and firearms in Japan. The Teppóki narrates the arrival of the Portuguese and firearms in Tanegashima and is integrated into an anthology of works authored by the Zen monk Nanpo Bunshi (1555-1620), of Satsuma. This account was written in 1606 at the request of Tanegashima Hisatoki, the son of Tanegashima Tokitaka, the ruler of Tanegashima at the time when firearms arrived on the island of Tanegashima. The Tanegashima kafu is an account of the History of the Tanegashima family from the 12th century to the 19th century, based on diverse documents. This source was begun by Kózuma Takanao, commis- sioned by another Tanegashima Hisatoki (1639-1710), and had already been completed in the Meiji period. Murai considers the Teppóki to be the main Japanese source for information about the arrival of the Portuguese in Japan, relegating the Tanegashima kafu to a secondary role. However, Murai does not limit his selection of Asiatic sources to Japanese documents and extends his analysis to some Chinese sources as well. This utilisation of Chinese documents is linked with his objective of understanding the arrival of the Portuguese, and the firearms they brought with them, within an Asiatic context. Murai highlights the reference to a Chi- nese element in the account of the Teppóki, which would enable one to integrate the arrival of the Portuguese within the dynamics of Asian relationships. According to the Teppóki, there was a Chinese man by the name of Gohó, or Wufeng, aboard the ship that brought the Portuguese to Tanegashima in 1543. The Teppóki affirms that Wufeng was the man who explained to the Japanese who these newly arrived foreigners were. According to Murai, we can consider this Wufeng to be Wang Zhi, the famous Chinese pirate. Based on this notion, the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima could never be interpreted as an accidental occurrence but, rather, as a consequence of the integration of Portuguese merchants into the trade networks and commercial traffic of East Asia. For Murai, Wang Zhi is the key that enables one to place the “adventure” of these Portuguese within an Asiatic dimension. Con- sequently, Murai selects Chinese sources that relate Wang Zhi’s activities and confer a new meaning to his appearance in Tanegashima. These sources are the Chouhai tubian (1562), authored by Zheng Ruozeng and the Riben yijian (1565) by Zheng Shugong. Review Essay 95

For Murai, there is yet another situation that justifies an interpretation of the arrival of the Portuguese and the introduction of firearms within an Asian context. Both the Teppóki as well as the Tanegashima kafu refer to the existence of Japanese ships that travelled between Japan and China. These vessels were the so-called ‘tribute ships’. According to Murai, an analysis of Chinese sources that refer to these ships could help us to understand the activities of Wang Zhi and the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima. It is with this view in mind that Murai turns to another Chinese source, the Ming Shizong shilu. Likewise, Lidin presents European and Asian sources, although the Asiatic documents are limited to Japanese sources. In much the same way as with Murai, the selection of source material was conditioned by the objectives of the study in question. Lidin seeks to analyse the beginning of the European presence in Japan, owing to which the set of European sources is broader than those presented by Murai. On the other hand, Lidin also seeks to study the importance of Tanegashima in the expansion of the teppó within the Japanese archipelago. For this, Lidin does not turn to Chinese sources, but only presents Japanese documents. This author refers to diverse European sources, such as the description by Jorge Álvares, the account by Garcia Escalante, the Suma Oriental by Tomé Pires, the Tratado by António Galvão and the Década V da Ásia by Diogo do Couto. Furthermore, he also mentions Fróis and João Rodrigues Tçuzu as important authors. However, for Lidin, the most important European source for a study of the period in question is, without doubt, the Peregrinação by Fernão Mendes Pinto. In fact, on Lidin’s part, this source merits a privileged treatment and he has dedicated several chapters of his book to this work. As we shall see, this is a clear contrast to the work by Murai, who relegates this narrative work by Fernão Mendes Pinto to a secondary level in terms of its historic value. Just like in the case of Murai, Lidin also uses the Teppóki and the Tanegashima kafu, but also adds the work known as the Kunitomo teppóki to the list. This work was written in Kunitomo in 1633 and seeks to demonstrate the importance of local blacksmiths of this area in the manufacture of muskets. Lidin refers to this document within the scope of his objective of analysing the expansion of firearms in Japan after the arrival of the Portu- guese in Tanegashima. As the works by Lidin and Murai are studies structured around the information contained in certain sources, one must mention the care with which both authors present these documents. Lidin does not limit himself to merely mentioning Japanese sources. In his work, this author presents us with chapters dedicated to the translation of excerpts from the Teppóki and Tanegashima kafu as well as a translation of the complete text of the 96 Pedro Lage Reis Correia

Kunitomo teppóki. One must further add that Lidin also presents the sources in their original Japanese, in an appendix. Murai, keeping in mind the fact that he has published his study in the form of an article, presents us with excerpts from the sources that he mentions and which serve as the basis for his analysis. As has already been mentioned, Lidin and Murai have different objectives, but also broach common themes, such as the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima and the advent of firearms in Japan. Thus, it is important to analyse the way in which these authors interpret the same sources and approach the same issues. The question of the date of the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima and the way in which this arrival was decisive for the expansion of the teppó in the Japanese archipelago has been investigated by many historians. A con- sensus has been reached around the year 1543 as the year of the Portuguese arrival in Tanegashima and their primacy in the introduction of firearms. However, a debate has always existed around this theme, which reveals a lack of a unanimous opinion amongst historians. Recent proof of this is the way in which Murai and Lidin approach this issue.1 For Murai, the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima only makes sense when placed within an Asiatic context. As has been mentioned, the figure of Wang Zhi, the ‘Captain Wufeng’ of the Teppóki, is one of the elements that enables one to interpret the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima within an Asian dimension. It is in this regard that Murai turns to the Chinese sources Chouhai tubian and Riben yijian. Murai places Wang Zhi’s activities within the framework of the illicit commerce practiced along the Zhejiang coast. According to the information contained in the Riben yijian, this illegal trade in Zhejiang began with Deng Liao of Fujian who, in 1526, would have “induced barbarians to trade

1 Amongst various studies, one can highlight the following works: Kóda Shigetomo, ‘Nichió tsúkó shi’ [The History of Contacts between Japan and Europe] in Kóda Shigetomo chosakushú [Collected Works of Kóda Shigetomo], Vol. III, Chúó Kóron Sha, 1971 [1st ed. 1942], pp. 11-12; Georg Schurhammer, ‘O descobrimento do Japão pelos Portugueses no ano de 1543’ in Anais da Academia Portuguesa de História, 2nd series, Vol. I, Lisbon, 1946; Li Xianzhang, ‘Kasei nenkan ni okeru Sekkai no shishó oyobi hakushu Ó Choku gyóseki kó’ [A Study of Illicit Trade along the Zhejiang Seaboard and the Exploits of Captain Wang Zhi during the Jiajing Era], 1 & 2, Shigaku 34, nº 1 & 2, 1961; Charles R. Boxer, ‘Asian Potentates and European Artillery in the 16th-18th Centuries: A Footnote to Gibson-Hill’, in Charles R. Boxer, Portuguese Conquest and Commerce in Southern Asia 1500-1700, VII, London, 1985, pp. 156-172; Tokoro Sókichi, ‘Teppó denrai ronkó’ [A Study of the Introduction of Firearms] in Teppóshi Kenkyu, 63-64, 1974, Idem, ‘Teppó denrai o megutte – sono tadashii rikai no tame ni’ [On the Introduction of Firearms: Towards an Accurate Understanding] in M. Izuka and K. Iida, Teppó denrai zengo – Tanegashima o meguru gijutsu to bunka [Before and After the Introduction of Firearms: Technology and Culture Relat- ing to Tanegashima], 1986; João Paulo Oliveira e Costa, A Descoberta da Civilização Japonesa pelos Portugueses, Lisbon, Instituto Cultural de Macau/Instituto de História de Além-Mar, 1995. Review Essay 97 illicitly at Shuangxu anchorage on the coast of Zhejiang […]” (Murai, p. 23). In 1540, the Xu brothers (Xu Song, Xu Nan, Xu Dong and Xu Zi) entered into contact with the Portuguese in Malacca and enticed them into commercial activities on the Zhejiang coast. It so happens, according to the Chouhai tubian, that Xu Dong was Wang Zhi’s mentor and it was the latter who, since 1540, traded in contraband goods with Japan and Siam. As this source mentions, “Wang Zhi went to Guandong together with Ye Zongman and others, where they built a large ship, loaded it with contraband goods such as saltpetre, sulphur, raw silk, and cotton, and visited the lands of Japan, Siam, and the Western Ocean.” (Murai, pp. 24-25). The information contained in the Chouhai tubian further reveals that “the barbarians had great confidence in him and called him Captain Wufeng.” (Murai, p. 25). Murai seeks to understand the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima within the ambit of the Wang Zhi’s mercantile activities. Thus, he proceeds to re-read other sources, seeking to analyse the Portuguese presence in Japan within the context of Wang Zhi’s activities. This Japanese author takes us to the Teppóki and to António Galvão’s Tratado and to the clear signs of part- nership between the Portuguese and Wang Zhi. In the Teppóki, he points out the presence of Captain Wufeng, at the time of the arrival of the Portuguese, while in António Galvão’s Tratado he highlights the departure of a junk with three Portuguese from Siam on board bound for China, areas where Wang Zhi carried out his mercantile activities. In the so-called ‘tribute ships’, Murai finds the second element that enables one to integrate the arrival of the Portuguese and the introduction of firearms within an Asiatic context. Using the information obtained from the Teppóki, the Tanegashima kafu and the Ming Shizong shilu, Murai affirms that, in 1542 or 1543, three tribute ships set sail from Tanegashima bound for Ming China. The first was lost in a storm and the third vessel was obliged to return to Tanegashima. The Japanese author then highlights the second ship, known as the nigósen. This nigósen, that set sail in 1542/1543 (Teppóki) or in 1544 (Tanegashima kafu), transported the envoy Shaku Jukó and arrived in Ningbo in August of 1544. Murai draws our attention to the Ming Shizong shilu and the information that the Ministry of Rites ordered Jukó to return, alleging that the tribute had come at an improper time: “because the time had not yet come, they were not permitted [to engage in tribute trade] and were urged to return home. But the foreigners were partial to Chinese goods and engaged in trade, extending their stay for more than a year without leaving (…)” (Murai, p. 29). Moreover, according to the sources consulted, this nigósen went to Shuangxu, leaving for Tanegashima in April or May 1545. Murai affirms that the incidents involving the nigósen reveal a change in the axis of commercial relations between Japan and China. From a legal 98 Pedro Lage Reis Correia trade, one of tribute, carried out from Ningbo, it now became an illegal trade based in Shuangxu. In this context, Wang Zhi is a key figure in order to understand this situation. As the Chouhai tubian relates, Shuangxu was the base of Xu Dong and Wang Zhi and this same source allows one to conclude that Wang Zhi travelled to Tanegashima from Shuangxu on the return voyage of this nigósen. Within the scope of a comparative study of sources, Murai also turns to the Relación authored by Garcia Escalante. For the Japanese historian, this document is of fundamental importance in order to redefine the date of the arrival of the Portuguese in Japan. Garcia Escalante, a Spanish mer- chant, travelled in a fleet commanded by Ruy Lopez Villalobos that, following orders from the Viceroy of Mexico, was sent to Asia in 1542. He arrived in Mindanao, in February of 1543, but was unable to return to Mexico and handed himself over to the Portuguese in Tidore, in November 1545. Escalante describes what would have been two visits by Portuguese to the Ryukyu Islands, i.e. to the Léquios. Murai accepts the interpretation of the historian Kóda Shigetomo with regard to this account by Escalante. According to Kóda, it is possible to put forth dates for these two visits to Ryukyu. If Escalante received this information in 1544, probably these two visits would have taken place in 1542 and in 1543. For Murai, this supposi- tion fits in with António Galvão’s account. In his Tratado, this Portuguese author writes that, in that same year of 1542, three Portuguese who were subordinates under the command of Diogo de Freitas (António da Mota, Fran- cisco Zeimoto and António Peixoto) fled Siam in a junk bound for Liampo. Caught by a storm, these Portuguese ended up by stopping at the Sipangas Islands, located at 32 degrees. Murai further invokes the interpretation of another historian, Tokoro Sókichi, according to whom the dates of 1542 and 1543 put forth by Kóda are correct, but correspond to two visits to the island of Tanegashima. In this regard, the date of 1542 would correspond to the first visit by the Portuguese to Tanegashima, but the firearms would only be introduced at the time of their second visit, in 1543. According to Murai, the fact that Galvão does not allude to the introduction of these firearms would confirm the theory propounded by Tokoro. In his re-evaluation of the dates of the two visits by the Portuguese, Murai points out the apparent incompatibility of the dates to be found in European and Japanese sources. This Japanese historian mentions that the European sources indicate the years 1542 and 1543, while the Teppóki mentions the years 1543 and 1544. Murai affirms that, based on an analysis by the Taiwanese historian Li Xianzhang, it is possible to harmonise the information contained in different sources. For Murai and Li Xianzhang, the solution for the dates of the two visits by the Portuguese can be found in the Teppóki Review Essay 99 itself and in the information concerning the ‘third tribute ship’. This ship left from Tanegashima in 1544 and, after returning from China, in that same year or in 1545, it was caught by a storm and was obliged to cast anchor in the province of Izu. According to the Teppóki, on board this ship there was a man named Matsushita Gorósaburó, a retainer from Tanegashima who, upon arrival in Izu, displayed a harquebus, showing the local people how it worked. This information fits in with other data provided by the Teppóki. According to this Japanese source, the ‘foreign merchants’ returned to Tanegashima in the year after their first visit. During this second visit, they informed Tanegashima Tokitaka of the way in which the barrel of the teppó was to be sealed, on account of which, after about a year, Tanegashima managed to produce a few dozen harquebuses. According to Murai, the historian Li Xianzhang’s interpretation of these facts is correct. Thus, the first visit of the Portuguese and the introduction of firearms would have taken place in 1542. They would have returned to Tanegashima in the following year, with the information necessary to enable the Japanese to successfully manufacture harquebuses. The fact that a year elapsed until the production of the harquebuses coincides with the date of 1544, the year in which Matsushita Gorósaburó set sail from Tanegashima aboard the ‘third tribute ship’ with several harquebuses. As one can observe, Murai gives great value to the Teppóki, despite using other documents. The Chinese and European sources end up by helping him to find an answer that had always existed in the Teppóki. For Murai, the Teppóki, despite presenting chronological inconsistencies allows one to understand the sequence of related events. Murai concludes that the date of Wang Zhi’s arrival in Tanegashima has to be brought forward by a year. The year 1542 would thus be the year in which firearms were introduced into Japan and also the year in which the Portuguese first arrived in Tanegashima, from Siam, on board one of Wang Zhi’s ships. The following year, in 1543, they returned to Tanegashima, once again aboard one of Wang Zhi’s vessels, and taught the inhabitants of Tanegashima how to correctly manufacture the harquebus. Let us now see how Lidin approaches these very same events. Just like Murai, we have a careful analysis of the sources. European documents are also studied, but the Teppóki and the Tanegashima kafu are presented as the main sources of information for the date of the arrival of the Portuguese and the introduction of the teppó. Lidin affirms that these two sources should serve as a guide for an interpretation of events, given that they reveal a natural attention to and vigilance of the foreigners. With regard to the Portu- guese who introduced firearms into Japan, these two documents mention the names of Murashukusha and Kirishita da Móta. On the other hand, 100 Pedro Lage Reis Correia

Portuguese documents such as the Peregrinação by Fernão Mendes Pinto and António Galvão’s Tratado indicate three names. Pinto, apart from his own name, mentions those of Cristóvão Borralho and Diogo Zeimoto, while Galvão speaks of António da Mota, Francisco Zeimoto and António Peixoto. Lidin concludes that Pinto could not have been a part of the group that introduced firearms into Japan because his name is one that could easily have been adapted to the Japanese language and, without doubt, would have been recorded in the Japanese sources. In the same way, one must exclude the name of Cristovão Borralho, given that there is no mention of this name in other sources. Thus, we are left with the names of António da Mota, Fran- cisco/Diogo Zeimoto and António Peixoto. With regard to Zeimoto’s first name, Lidin affirms that we should take Galvão’s information to be correct. António Galvão’s account is more faithful to events than Fernão Mendes Pinto’s narrative and, thus, it is but natural that the author erred when mentioning Zeimoto’s first name in the Peregrinação. In this context, a com- parison of sources enables Lidin to conclude that the Portuguese who first set foot in Japan and introduced firearms in the archipelago were António da Mota, the Kirishita da Mota of the Japanese sources, and Francisco Zeimoto, who could correspond to ‘Murashukusha’. As for António Peixoto, Lidin turns to another Japanese source in order to justify the appearance of this name. According to a document that relates the arrival of the musket at the temple of Negoro in Kii, the name of a Portuguese called Peitaro, who was responsible for teaching them how to handle the musket in Kii, is mentioned. Lidin concludes that this Peitaro could be the Peixoto of António Galvão’s account. In this case, Peixoto would have arrived in Kii aboard another ship, which was not the same one that anchored in Tanegashima. Likewise, Lidin analyses the theories of Japanese historians who place the two visits of the Portuguese in 1542/1543 and not 1543/1544. For scholars who have advocated the theory of 1542/1543, such as Tokoro Sókichi, there is no incompatibility between the Japanese sources and Galvão’s account. Thus, the year 1542 is not wrong because it corresponds to the first visit. In the same way, the discrepancy between the number and the names of the Portuguese who visited Tanegashima is resolved, as Galvão refers to the first voyage, while the Teppóki and the Tanegashima kafu only refer to the second arrival, in 1543. Lidin affirms that Tokoro’s theory is credible. According to this Japanese historian, the first voyage, in 1542, took place with purely commercial intentions and without the introduction of firearms. Tokoro affirms that the Teppóki was written with the objective of glorifying Tokitata and the island of Tanegashima as the genesis of the production of teppó in Japan. The fact that the Teppóki does not relate the first visit is justified by the fact that this was irrelevant for the History of the arrival of firearms in Japan. Review Essay 101

However, it is likewise based on a careful analysis of the Teppóki that Lidin regards the year 1543 as being the date of the first arrival of the Portu- guese and of the introduction of firearms in Tanegashima. Lidin concurs with the idea that the account of events is conditioned by the apologetic objective of the work, nevertheless, he affirms that the Teppóki is correct in its presentation of the dates involved. In this regard, Lidin takes a stance that is in opposition to Murai’s interpretation. According to Murai, the Teppóki is correct in its account of events, but errs with regard to the date, giving 1543 as the year of an event that took place in 1542. Lidin reminds one that the author of the Teppóki was Nanpo Bunshi, a monk from Satsuma. Lidin states that the Teppóki reveals influences of neo-Confucianism and Chinese historiography, such as precision in presenting dates. These influences, evident in the way in which the monk Nanpo Bunshi wrote the Teppóki, allows one to conclude that the account is accurate in its presentation of the dates but distorts a narration of the events. For Lidin, there is no reason not to believe in the date of 1543. Precision in presenting dates is a characteristic of Chinese historiography, owing to which, according to Lidin, one should not doubt the date presented in the Teppóki. On the other hand, the neo-Confucionist training of Nanpo Bunshi results in what Lidin calls distortions of reality. Amongst other examples, this historian refers to the dialogue between the Portuguese and Tokitaka. The words exchanged between them are punctu- ated with Confucian, and even Taoist, concepts, something that could not have occurred in the dialogue between the Portuguese and Tokitaka. Lidin also refutes the idea that the year 1543 marks the second arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima. For this scholar, the importance of the account of the arrival of firearms given in the Teppóki does not justify the omission of a supposed first voyage in 1542. According to Lidin’s interpretation of the Teppóki, the recollection of the arrival of the Portuguese was not made exclusively on account of the fact that, in that year, they would have brought firearms with them. Rather, it was the singularity of their appearance and their manners that aroused interest and resulted in a subsequent account of the arrival of the Portuguese, instead of merely the fact that they carried firearms. Thus, in contrast to Murai, Lidin affirms that the first visit of the Portuguese took place in 1543 and the second in 1544. However, Lidin does allow the hypothesis that the Portuguese arrived in Ryukyu in 1542. In fact, this author emphasises the importance of the Ryukyu Islands in the context of Portuguese navigation in East Asia. Lidin reminds one of the Relacion by Escalante and the reference to the arrival of Portuguese in Ryukyu in 1542. In this regard, one can conclude that this voyage of 1542 described by Escalante is the same voyage that is mentioned by Galvão. Contrary to what various researchers have advocated, this reference by 102 Pedro Lage Reis Correia

Galvão is not a chronologically incorrect version of the arrival of the Portu- guese in Japan in 1543, nor is it, as Murai defends, an allusion to the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima in 1542. Galvão mentions that, in 1542, Portuguese who set sail from Siam reached the Sipangas Islands, at 32 degrees, which does not exclude contact with the Ryukyu Islands. Lidin also points out the importance of the inhabitants of the Ryukyu Islands who were the main intermediaries in trade between China and Japan, prior to the arrival of the Portuguese. Nevertheless, Japanese maritime enterprises, such as the aforementioned ‘tribute ships’, gradually began attacking Ryukyu’s commercial hegemony. From the moment in which the Portuguese sought to occupy these very same channels of commerce, it is but natural that they should enter into contact with the Ryukyu Islands, as could have happened in 1542. For Lidin, the Suma Oriental is another source that enables us to perceive the importance of Ryukyu in Sino-Japanese trade. According to this author, the work by Tomé Pires shows that the Portuguese were in contact with the inhabitants of Ryukyu shortly after the Portuguese established themselves in Malacca. By means of this communication with the inhabitants of Ryukyu, the Portuguese managed to obtain important information about the Japanese archipelago. Lidin, continuing the discussion of the date of the arrival of the Portu- guese in Japan, also mentions an account from Bungo called the Ótomo kóhai-ki. This document refers to the arrival of a Portuguese ship in Bungo in 1541. However, no other source confirms this information, owing to which Lidin affirms that it cannot be considered to be reliable. The Peregrinação, by Fernão Mendes Pinto is one of the sources that is considered to be of fundamental importance for an analysis of the arrival of the Portuguese in Japan. Lidin’s approach to this work enables one to reflect upon the validity of this account by Fernão Mendes Pinto as a historical document. This discussion with regard to the importance of this work is even more important insofar as it is practically omitted by Murai and is absolutely indispensable for Lidin. It is clear that Murai does not find relevant information in this work by Fernão Mendes Pinto that would permit a re-examination of the date of the introduction of firearms in Japan, which is, after all, the sole objective of Murai’s work. However, this author could have presented this work as one of the European sources that are indispensable for a study of the arrival and introduction of firearms in the Japanese archipelago. One can allege that Pinto’s accounts are far from being a historical chronicle with an exemplary exactitude, an idea that, even so, must be suitably debated. However, the truth is that the Peregrinação should not be excluded on account of the criteria of exigencies of credibility. If this were the case, one could also question Galvão’s Tratado, which has so often been accused Review Essay 103 of being inaccurate with regard to the situations it relates. As has been mentioned, Murai’s objective is to demonstrate that the Portuguese arrived in and introduced firearms into Japan in 1542, something that is possible by means of citations from the accounts by Galvão and Escalante. However, Fernão Mendes Pinto should not be excluded as a source for an analysis of this issue solely because his account does not enable one to conclude that the Portuguese arrived in 1542. In Lidin’s study, the Peregrinação by Fernão Mendes Pinto assumes an unquestionable importance. Lidin seeks to analyse the early years of the European presence in Japan and, in this context, the Peregrinação by Fernão Mendes Pinto assumes considerable relevance. Lidin dedicates a chapter to the four voyages by Fernão Mendes Pinto to Japan that are described in the Peregrinação, seeking to verify the authenticity of the abundant information contained therein. As a matter of fact, the question of the veracity of the accounts by Fernão Mendes Pinto is one of the themes Lidin reflects upon. This author affirms that one can question many facts described by Pinto, but one cannot disregard this document as a source of information. In Lidin’s own words: “One can have doubts about the veracity of much, especially the exaggerated facts, in Pinto’s account, but one is also reminded again and again that there is a certain amount of truth in his fascinating narrative”. He even goes so far as to state: “The more one reads him, the more one finds, surprisingly, that he is rather close to the truth” (Lidin, 104). Lidin states that when a source is fundamental, it always has to be examined, it being necessary to subject it to a critical analysis that includes a comparative reading of other sources. The way in which Lidin analyses Pinto’s alleged four visits to Japan is an example of this methodology, which is followed throughout the work in question. Lidin confers a greater credibility to Fernão Mendes Pinto’s fourth visit, which ended on 14 November 1556. According to this historian, this date of Pinto’s departure is given credibility by other sources, such as a chronicle of Bungo that mentions the presence of a Portuguese ship in that year and a reference by Luís Fróis to a ship owned by Francisco de Mascarenhas, that set sail from the Sancian Island for Bungo in June 1556. Lidin declares that one cannot have an unambiguous vision of all the information that is provided by the sources. It is erroneous to state that almost all of Pinto’s accounts are reliable, just as it is incorrect to state that the majority of the facts described do not correspond to the truth. According to Lidin, there exist different levels of information and different degrees of credibility. Thus, Lidin affirms that the geographical references are trust- worthy. The majority of the places mentioned by Pinto can be located, and there is no mention of either imaginary lands or islands. The same credibility 104 Pedro Lage Reis Correia should be given to his descriptions of maritime navigation and conditions of navigation. Lidin says it is but natural that Fernão Mendes Pinto would confuse names and places, but the truth is that the greater part of the Japa- nese names that were transcribed into Portuguese are close to the Japanese pronunciation. On the other hand, the great problem of Pinto’s credibility occurs when he narrates events that took place on land. Many of his accounts contain contradictions and, especially, exaggerations of the facts described. According to Lidin it is, above all, these excesses that cast doubts about the veracity of Fernão Mendes Pinto’s descriptions, a fact that does not, however, nullify an analysis of this source as an indispensable document for a study of the arrival of the Portuguese in Japan. One of Lidin’s objectives, apart from an analysis of the arrival of the first Europeans in Japan, is a study of the expansion of firearms in the Japa- nese archipelago and the importance that the island of Tanegashima had in this course of events. The importance of the Teppóki and Tanegashima kafu as sources has already been mentioned. But these documents do not describe the expansion of the teppó to Kyúshú and, subsequently, to the rest of the Japanese archipelago. Lidin presents us with another document, considered important for a study of the genesis of firearms in Japan. This author dedicates two chapters to the Kunitomo teppóki, a work that describes the introduction and subsequent expansion of the musket in Japan. This work was written by the Kunitomo Elders in 1633, with a view to establishing the importance of the blacksmiths of Kunitomo in the production of firearms in Japan. In an initial chapter, Lidin presents us with a complete translation of this source, and also provides us with an appendix where he reproduces the original text in Japanese. In a second chapter, Lidin analyses the information provided by this document. With regard to the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima, the account given in the Kunitomo teppóki is in conform- ance with the information provided by the Teppóki and the Tanegashima kafu, from which one can deduce that the authors of the Kunitomo teppóki read these documents from Tanegashima. Apparently, the production of the teppó in Kunitomo began in 1553/1555. However, Lidin affirms that one can question the dates of the manufacture of firearms in Kunitomo prior to 1571, the year in which Oda Nobunaga received two cannons that he had ordered. This order took place after 1570, subsequent to the Battle of Anegawa and the submission of the province of Ómi and the city of Kunitomo to Oda Nobunaga. In his analysis of the expansion of firearms in Japan, Lidin affirms that one cannot be certain if the firearms arrived in Kyúshú solely from Tanegashima or if they entered from Hirado or Bungo, regions where a Por- tuguese presence existed. As Lidin states, what is certain is that the firearms Review Essay 105 quickly entered Kagoshima, due to the vassalage that the Tanegashima family rendered to the Shimazu. Likewise, there exists the possibility that the teppó was introduced into Japan by other means, through the wakó pirates, who must have known the musket before the Portuguese arrival in Tanegashima. However, as Lidin concludes, until proven to the contrary, the island of Tanegashima must be considered to be the place where the first Portuguese arrived and where firearms were introduced into Japan for the first time. Lidin stresses Tanegashima’s primacy in the manufacture of firearms, affirm- ing that the island itself, apart from producing steel, had sufficient material to produce gunpowder. With the exception of saltpetre, which was imported from China and Siam, it was possible to find sulphur and charcoal on this island, owing to which Tanegashima had all the necessary conditions to be the first region in Japan to begin production of the teppó. Lidin states that the musket did not immediately assume the status of a dominant weapon in Japanese battles. Despite the fact that it was rapidly reproduced, several decades would pass until firearms constituted a fundamental element in Japanese strategies of war. This being the case, Lidin establishes a chronology, in three parts, that traces the integration of the teppó into Japanese war efforts. During an initial period, which corresponds to the 1550s, the musket would have been used only as an auxiliary weapon. The importance of firearms in the context of the sengoku jidai grew during the 1560s and, during the 1570s, the musket was already the main weapon on Japanese battlefields. This chronological evolution of the importance of firearms also corresponds to a geographical change in the preponderance of the teppó in Japanese warfare, from the island of Kyúshú, in an initial phase, to the region of Kansai. This change was of fundamental importance for the unification of Japan. According to Lidin, Shimazu Takahisa could have used the musket as early as 1549, but this would undoubtedly have taken place on a very limited scale. The 1560s witnessed a generalisation of the use of firearms by the daimyó of Kyúshú and, during the 1570s, the musket was already a fundamental weapon in the region of Kansai. Lidin highlights the Battle of Anegawa, in 1570, as the first situation in which the musket played a fundamental role. From then on, production of firearms was begun on a large scale in the centre of Japan, a process that culminated in the strategic use of the teppó, on the part of Oda Nobunaga, in the Battle of Nagashino in 1575. Lidin concludes his study with an analysis of the end of what he calls the first phase of the European presence in Japan. In Lidin’s opinion, if this began in 1543, with the arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima, it ended with the arrival of St. Francis Xavier, in 1549. In this way, the last chapter of Lidin’s book is exclusively dedicated to the presence of this Jesuit missionary in Japan (1549-1551). Lidin affirms 106 Pedro Lage Reis Correia that the arrival of St. Francis Xavier, even though it corresponded to this period of initial contact between Europeans and Japanese, inaugurated a new phase in relations between the European continent and the Japanese archipelago. As the author states, the letter that Xavier wrote on 5 Novem- ber 1549, immediately after his arrival, represents a new level of awareness about Japan. According to Lidin, with the Jesuit evangelical activities, a new period would begin in European knowledge about Japanese society, based on the personal experience of the missionaries. Lidin delineates different moments of St. Francis Xavier’s presence in Japan, from his initial contacts with Shimazu Takahisa, to his sojourns in Bungo and Hirado, mentioning his important experiences in Kyoto and Yamaguchi. However, Lidin’s prime concern, while describing Xavier’s presence in Japan, is to highlight a process of awareness about Japanese culture and society on the part of the Jesuit missionary, with a view to exercising a style of evangelical activity that was suitable for the Japanese world. The way in which Lidin narrates and analyses all the vicissitudes of St. Francis Xavi- er’s stay in Japan ends up by prefiguring this first experience as a paradigm of the challenges that would be faced by all the missionaries who would set foot on Japanese soil during subsequent decades. A perusal of these studies by Murai and Lidin enables us to conclude that we are in the presence of two works of undeniable quality. The work that both these authors have realised around these documents, especially the Asian sources, is truly remarkable. The presentation of ideas about a certain issue is always supported by a constant reference to documental sources and by the presentation of other theses that deal with the same subject. The care taken in interpreting the documents is particularly evident in the article by Murai. At the conclusion of his study, the Japanese historian presents a series of doubts that were not entirely answered by his analysis. The problem of the date of the arrival of the Portuguese and of the introduction of firearms in Japan is one of the central themes of these two works. The debate on this question is still open, as has been demonstrated by the care with which both these authors approach this issue and analyse the sources related to this matter. However, as Lidin demonstrates, until there exists proof that unequivocally proves otherwise, the year 1543 must be accepted as being the date of the first arrival of the Portuguese in Tanegashima and of the advent of firearms in Japan.

Pedro Lage Reis Correia CHAM, New University of Lisbon Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia scholarship holder