Bibliographic Citation.
Osterkamp, S. (2015). *A Sketch History of Pre-Chamberlainian Western Studies of Ryukyuan*. [Online]
Available at: https://www.academia.edu/39017980/Was_hat_Bodhidharma_im_Karate_d%25C5%258Dj%25C5%258D_verloren [Accessed 29 August 2024].

Summary of Findings and Assertions
Sven Osterkamp's article, A Sketch History of Pre-Chamberlainian Western Studies of Ryukyuan, provides an in-depth look at Western linguistic studies concerning the Ryukyuan language before Basil Hall Chamberlain's contributions in the late 19th century. Osterkamp explores the evolution of Western knowledge about the Ryukyus, beginning with the first records of Ryukyuan by Westerners in the 17th century and concluding with Chamberlain's pivotal 1895 work, *Essay in Aid of a Grammar and Dictionary of the Luchuan Language*. Osterkamp argues that while Chamberlain's work was significant, it did not emerge from a vacuum but was built on earlier efforts from various Western scholars and missionaries.

The article outlines the critical contributions of several notable figures, such as William Adams and Julius Klaproth, who recorded early observations about the Ryukyuan language. Osterkamp discusses how these scholars laid the groundwork for a more formalised study of Ryukyuan by providing glossaries, word lists, and linguistic insights, albeit often through the lens of their Eurocentric biases.

Osterkamp also emphasises that Chamberlain's perception of Ryukyuan as the first significant Western language study overlooks earlier contributions. The gap between early Ryukyuan studies and Chamberlain's publication was far from void; it was marked by numerous attempts, particularly by missionaries, to record and analyse the Ryukyuan language.


Situating the Article within the Field

Osterkamp's work is a significant addition to the field of Ryukyuan studies, as it contributes to the history of Western linguistic scholarship and the specific research of the Ryukyuan language. His article is part of a larger body of work that aims to recontextualise historical narratives by highlighting the contributions of overlooked scholars and traditions. Osterkamp critiques the overly Eurocentric perspectives of early Western scholars, who often viewed non-Western languages like Ryukyuan through a limited lens.

This article enriches the growing academic interest in Okinawan and Ryukyuan studies, aligning with research that examines how Western powers encountered and studied non-European languages. It also complements the historiography of Japanese language studies by providing a parallel narrative of Ryukyuan linguistic history.


Assessing its Contribution to the Field

Osterkamp's work is a significant contribution to the field, providing a critical reassessment of the historical trajectory of Ryukyuan studies. It fills a significant gap by shedding light on the underappreciated contributions of pre-Chamberlain Western scholars. His meticulous compilation of sources and figures from the 17th to the 19th centuries demonstrates the depth and complexity of early Ryukyuan linguistic research. By connecting these early studies to Chamberlain's later work, Osterkamp helps deconstruct the perception that Chamberlain's grammar and dictionary were unprecedented breakthroughs.

The article's interdisciplinary approach, combining linguistic history with cultural and colonial studies, gives it significant value for scholars in both fields. Osterkamp's work not only contributes to the history of Western linguistic scholarship and the specific research of the Ryukyuan language but also draws attention to the role of Christian missionaries in advancing Ryukyuan studies. This comprehensive approach highlights a recurring theme in colonial linguistic studies, where missionary work frequently played a dual role in cultural exchange and colonisation.


Future Considerations

Osterkamp's analysis suggests several directions for future research. One area that could be further explored is the comparative linguistic analysis between Ryukyuan and other East Asian languages, particularly within the context of historical relationships between Japan, China, and Korea. While Osterkamp touches upon these cultural interactions, there is room for a more focused study on how Ryukyuan fits into the broader linguistic landscape of the region.

Moreover, future research could delve deeper into the contributions of lesser-known missionaries and scholars, particularly those whose works remain unpublished or incomplete. By uncovering more manuscripts or conducting comparative studies with other historical linguistics projects, scholars can better understand the evolution of Western knowledge about Ryukyuan before Chamberlain's time.

In summary, Osterkamp's article is a valuable corrective to the study of Ryukyuan linguistic history, providing a more accurate historical narrative and a foundation for future research. By examining the works of early Western scholars in detail, Osterkamp demonstrates the complexity and richness of pre-Chamberlainian studies of Ryukyuan, offering scholars a nuanced view of this vital period in linguistic history.

Japanese Translation:

レビューと結論の概要「Friday Academic Review Thoughts: Tracing Early Western Studies of Ryukyuan Language」というタイトルのレビューでは、スヴェン・オスターカンプの論文『A Sketch History of Pre-Chamberlainian Western Studies of Ryukyuan』を取り上げています。この論文では、19世紀末のバジル・ホール・チェンバレン以前の西洋における琉球語学研究の歴史に焦点を当てています。
オスターカンプは、西洋学者たちが17世紀から琉球語に関心を持ち始めた経緯を探り、彼らが提供した初期の言語リストや単語集が、チェンバレンの後の業績の基盤となっていたことを示しています。また、チェンバレンの研究が革新的であったことは認めつつ、それ以前の学者や宣教師たちの貢献を見落としてはならないと指摘しています。
レビューの結論として、オスターカンプの論文は、琉球語学研究におけるチェンバレン以前の貢献を再評価し、琉球語が西洋においてどのように理解されてきたかの歴史を豊かにするものとされています。

Bibliographic Citation:Fukushima, S. (1965). The Building of a National Army. The Developing Economies. 
As I am one to point out often, the dire lack of understanding of BIG HISTORY, a term that encompasses the broad historical context of human civilisation, into which that of budo, and specifically karate, fit this week, I want to explore Fukushima's The Building of a National Army for it explore the militarisation and modernisation process into which modern budo and indeed karate fit. Despite what is often written, karate, as we know it today, is directly connected, shaped and propagated due to the militarization of Japan during the Meiji process. Before that, karate had fallen into disuse and, for many, disregard - a purposeless practice lacking relevance to the modern age. Regardless of what you have read or been told, modern karate (sometimes referenced as 'traditional ') is undoubtedly the product of mindsets, ideals, and body mechanics that trace large swaths of what they are to the Meiji period! Fukushima's article highlights that it was one of the driving forces that drove the "modernisation" of what, ironically, has become known as "traditional" karate.

Summary of Findings and Assertions
In The Building of a National Army, Shingo Fukushima offers an in-depth analysis of Japan's military modernisation, concentrating on the pivotal changes in the armed forces from the Tokugawa period to the Meiji Restoration. Fukushima posits that Japan's shift from a system of feudal retainers to a nationalised military force was central to its efforts to defend against Western colonial powers. He traces how the samurai class, once the primary military force, was progressively replaced by a conscripted national army, reflecting Western models, particularly those of France and Prussia. The article discusses critical military reforms, including disbanding feudal armies and forming a centralised military under the Meiji government.

Fukushima asserts that Japan's military modernisation was not solely a defensive measure but also served the broader aims of national sovereignty and prestige. The article underscores the crucial role of leaders from the samurai class in shaping the modern military while also noting that the Meiji government's adoption of Western military technologies, such as firearms and artillery, was driven by Japan's desire to resist Western imperialism. This shift to modernisation, particularly the introduction of conscription, faced resistance from the lower classes and triggered political conflict within the ruling elite.

Situating the Article within the Field
Fukushima's work stands out in military history and political modernisation, offering unique insights into Japan's distinctive process of Westernisation. His analysis aligns with broader academic discourse on the comparative modernisation of military institutions in non-European nations. Scholars like C. E. Black and A. S. Banks, who have categorised Japan's modernisation as self-directed, have argued that Japan's approach diverged from Western tutelage models. Fukushima critiques this classification, suggesting that while Western models influenced Japan's modernisation, it retained distinct characteristics shaped by internal social dynamics and the ideological influence of the samurai class.

The article also illuminates the strategic thinking behind Japan's military modernisation. Focusing on the motivations of Meiji leaders, particularly their goal of preventing Japan from being colonised, Fukushima's work provides a framework for understanding Japan's imperial ambitions and the militaristic path it later pursued. His examination of Japan's military modernisation also contributes to broader discussions about how military institutions preserve and transform national identity.

Assessing its Contribution to the Field
Fukushima's article significantly contributes to studying Japan's military history, offering a detailed analysis of the internal and external forces that shaped its modernisation. One of the article's key strengths is its focus on the intersection between military reform and socio-political change. Fukushima delves into the complexities of Japan's feudal society, exploring the tensions between the samurai class and the government's efforts to nationalise military power. His critique of the Meiji government's reliance on former samurai leaders to lead military reforms provides a nuanced perspective on modernisation as a top-down initiative.

Additionally, Fukushima's use of primary sources, including government documents and military ordinances, enhances the scholarly rigour of his analysis. His work offers crucial context for understanding the broader geopolitical landscape of 19th-century East Asia, particularly Japan's relationship with Western powers and its strategic responses to foreign military pressure【16†source】.

Future Considerations
Fukushima's analysis opens several avenues for future research on Japan's military modernisation. One area ripe for further exploration is the role of military modernisation in shaping Japan's domestic political structure. While Fukushima touches on the influence of the samurai class in the new national army, further research could examine how this class's integration into the modern state contributed to Japan's later military expansionism.
Moreover, as the article highlights the influence of Western military models on Japan, future studies could investigate the long-term impact of this Westernisation on Japan's military culture, particularly in the context of its imperial ambitions. The question of how Japanese leaders adapted or resisted Western models could provide valuable insights into Japan's military trajectory in the 20th century.

Finally, Fukushima's work raises pertinent questions regarding the relationship between military modernisation and national identity. As Japan's military became more centralised and nationalised, the role of the common soldier—drawn primarily from the peasantry—grew increasingly important. Future research could examine how this shift affected Japan's class structure and the relationship between military and civilian governance.
In conclusion, Fukushima's article is essential to understanding Japan's military transformation during a crucial historical period. It offers a detailed, well-researched analysis of the Meiji government's efforts to modernise the military while safeguarding Japan's sovereignty. Focusing on this process's social, political, and military dimensions, Fukushima provides a comprehensive view of how national identity and geopolitical forces can shape and shape military modernisation.

Japanese Language Summary
福島晋吾の『国軍の建設』についての要約
福島晋吾の論文「国軍の建設」は、江戸時代から明治維新にかけての日本の軍事近代化についての詳細な分析を提供しています。福島は、日本が封建的な軍事制度から国民軍へと移行したことが、西洋の植民地主義に対抗するために不可欠であったと主張しています。特に、武士階級がかつての主な軍事力から、西洋の軍事モデル（フランスやプロイセンの例）に基づいた徴兵制の国民軍へと徐々に取って代わられていく過程が描かれています。

福島は、日本の軍事近代化が単なる防御的な動きに留まらず、国家主権や国威の向上を目指したものであるとしています。また、明治政府が火器や大砲などの西洋の軍事技術を採用したことが、西洋帝国主義に対抗するための現実的な選択であったことも指摘されています。この変革は、特に徴兵制の導入により、下層階級からの抵抗や政治的対立を引き起こしました。

論文の位置付け
福島の研究は、日本の独特な西洋化のプロセスに関する洞察を提供し、軍事史や政治的近代化の分野において重要な位置を占めています。彼の分析は、非西欧諸国における軍事制度の比較近代化に関する広範な学術的議論と一致しており、C.E.ブラックやA.S.バンクスのような学者が分類した日本の「自律的近代化」という見解を批判的に再検討しています。

さらに、福島の論文は、軍事改革と国家建設の関係を明らかにしており、日本の指導者たちが西洋列強による植民地化を防ぐことを目指していたことを強調しています。彼の研究は、軍事制度がどのようにして国民のアイデンティティを保持し、変容させたかを理解するための重要な枠組みを提供しています。

論文の貢献と将来の研究の可能性
福島の論文は、日本の軍事史研究において重要な貢献をしています。特に、軍事改革が政治的・社会的変化とどのように交差したかに焦点を当てた点が評価されています。武士階級と政府の緊張関係に対する彼の分析は、トップダウン的な近代化の物語に新たな視点を提供しています。

福島の分析は、今後の研究においても多くの方向性を示唆しています。例えば、軍事近代化が日本の国内政治構造にどのような影響を与えたかや、西洋の軍事モデルが日本の軍事文化にどのような影響を与えたかなどが、さらに探求されるべきテーマとして挙げられます。

OpenAI. (2024). ChatGPT (4o) [Large language model]. https://chatgpt.com/c/15243f03-db43-4f1b-91ef-026a88d757d8​

Bibliographic Citation
Herbert, W. (2020). What did Bodhidharma do in karate-dō? OAG Notizen. [Online] Available at: https://www.academia.edu/39017980/Was_hat_Bodhidharma_im_Karate_d%25C5%258Dj%25C5%258D_verloren [Accessed 29 August 2024].

Summary of Findings and Assertions
Wolfgang Herbert’s article, What did Bodhidharma do in karate-dō? Explores the historical and mythological connections between Bodhidharma and karate. Herbert contends that the widespread belief linking Bodhidharma, the first patriarch of Zen Buddhism, to the establishment of martial arts in the Shaolin Temple—and, by extension, to karate—is primarily grounded in constructed legends rather than historical facts. He identifies several significant phases of transformation that karate has undergone, from its origins in mainland China to its contemporary form as an Olympic sport. Herbert asserts that each transformation has resulted in gains and losses, with the recent trend towards sports karate leading to a narrowed focus that obscures the art’s deeper spiritual and philosophical dimensions. This call for a more nuanced understanding of martial arts can inspire a deeper appreciation and enlightenment among practitioners and scholars.

Herbert meticulously traces the historical roots of Bodhidharma, noting that while he was a pivotal figure in the spread of Zen Buddhism, his direct involvement with martial arts remains speculative at best. The article also examines the broader cultural exchanges between India, China, and Okinawa, which contributed to the development of martial arts. Herbert critiques the oversimplification and commercialisation of karate, especially in the context of its inclusion in the Olympics, arguing that this trend risks eroding the rich, multifaceted nature of the art form.

Situating the Article within the Field
Herbert’s work is critical to martial arts studies, particularly examining the intersection between myth, history, and modern practice. The article aligns with scholarly efforts to demythologise the origins of martial arts, offering a more nuanced understanding of how cultural narratives are constructed and perpetuated. Herbert engages with existing literature on the subject, referencing historical texts and contemporary studies to support his analysis. His work is situated within a broader discourse that questions the authenticity of widely accepted martial arts legends, challenging practitioners and scholars to reconsider the origins and evolution of these traditions.

This article contributes to a growing body of work that seeks to preserve the integrity of martial arts by emphasising their historical and cultural contexts. By examining the myth of Bodhidharma and its impact on the perception of karate, Herbert adds depth to the understanding of how religious, artistic, and socio-political forces have shaped martial arts. His focus on karate's historical and philosophical dimensions serves as a counterpoint to the prevailing emphasis on its physical and competitive aspects, particularly in the context of its Olympic inclusion.

Assessing its Contribution to the Field
Herbert’s article is a valuable resource for martial arts practitioners and scholars. It offers a well-researched critique of the myths surrounding Bodhidharma and their influence on the development of karate. The article’s interdisciplinary approach, drawing on religious studies, cultural history, and martial arts scholarship, provides a comprehensive analysis that challenges the reader to think critically about the narratives that shape our understanding of martial arts. It urges a return to the roots of these practices to preserve their original intent and meaning, stimulating intellectual engagement and debate.

One of Herbert’s critical contributions is its emphasis on balancing the various dimensions of karate—physical, mental, and spiritual. By highlighting the dangers of focusing too narrowly on karate certification, Herbert calls for a more holistic approach that honours the art’s rich history and philosophical underpinnings. His analysis is particularly relevant in the current context, where the globalisation and commercialisation of martial arts threaten to dilute their traditional values.

Future Considerations
Looking ahead, Herbert’s article suggests several trajectories for future research and practice in martial arts. Scholars could further investigate the historical connections between different martial arts traditions, exploring how cultural exchanges have shaped the evolution of these practices. There is also a need for more critical studies that examine the impact of globalisation and commercialisation on martial arts, particularly concerning their spiritual and philosophical dimensions.

In terms of practice, Herbert’s work encourages martial artists to engage more deeply with their disciplines' historical and cultural roots. This could involve integrating traditional practices such as meditation and philosophical study into modern training regimes, thereby preserving the holistic nature of martial arts. Additionally, as karate evolves, it will be essential to balance its competitive aspects with its more profound, reflective elements, ensuring that the art remains true to its origins even as it adapts to contemporary demands.

In summary, Herbert’s article significantly contributes to the study of martial arts, offering academically rigorous and practically relevant insights. His work challenges prevailing narratives, inviting deeper reflection and setting the stage for future research and practice that honours the full scope of what martial arts can offer. This emphasis on deeper reflection can make the audience feel more reflective and contemplative about their understanding and practice of martial arts.
Japanese:
​ヘルベルト・ウルフガングの論文「ボーディダルマは空手道に何をもたらしたか？」は、ボーディダルマと空手との歴史的および神話的な関連性を探求しています。ヘルベルトは、禅仏教の初代祖であるボーディダルマが少林寺で武術を確立し、それが空手に発展したという広く信じられている説が、歴史的事実よりも作られた伝説に基づいていると主張しています。また、空手が中国本土から現代のオリンピック競技に至るまでに経た変遷を明らかにし、その過程で得られたものと失われたものについても論じています。特に、スポーツとしての空手が強調されることで、武術の深い精神的・哲学的側面が見過ごされていると警鐘を鳴らしています。

ヘルベルトは、ボーディダルマが禅仏教の普及において重要な役割を果たしたものの、武術との直接的な関与は非常に推測的なものであるとしています。さらに、インド、中国、沖縄の文化的交流が武術の発展に寄与したことを探りながら、空手がオリンピックに含まれる過程での単純化や商業化を批判しています。

この論文は、武術の神話と歴史、そして現代の実践との交差点を検討する上で重要であり、武術の起源と進化に関する神話を見直す学術的な取り組みに貢献しています。特に、武術が持つ歴史的・文化的文脈を強調し、ボーディダルマの神話が空手の認識に与えた影響を通じて、宗教的、芸術的、社会政治的な力が武術にどのように影響を与えたかについての理解を深めています。

ヘルベルトの研究は、武術の学問的理解を促進し、特に空手の認定に過度に集中することの危険性を指摘しつつ、空手の身体的、精神的、そして哲学的側面のバランスを取ることを提唱しています。この論文は、武術の伝統的価値がグローバル化と商業化によって希薄化する危機に直面している現状において、非常に重要な意義を持っています。

​OpenAI. (2024). ChatGPT (4o) [Large language model]. https://chatgpt.com/c/3d332991-a8c8-4ba0-bfff-6c83e06b8950

I have said it before and I will say it again. There is no ONE Code of Bushido! So despite all the "bullshido" you see on the net - trust me - it does not exists!  I looked and searched for years! OH, I live in Japan so looking and search is pretty easy! 
Amidst the rich lines of Japanese myth and history, the concept of Bushidō emerges as a multifaceted term; each facet imbued with its unique cultural significance. While popular belief often simplifies Bushidō as a uniform code followed by all samurai, a deeper exploration reveals a more complex reality. As Alex Bennett's research elucidates, Bushidō is not a singular, rigid set of principles but a diverse collection of codes that evolved uniquely within each clan, each with its distinct characteristics. When fully understood, this diversity enlightens us about the rich complexity of Japanese history and culture.
Bushidō, often translated as the "way of the warrior", initially emerged during the Kamakura period (1185–1333). It was more of a loose assemblage of values than a rigid, codified system. Far from being a universal code, it was subject to the profound influence of regional customs, clan traditions, and the shifting tides of historical events. Bennett's research sheds light on this variability and challenges the oversimplified notion of a single Bushidō code, highlighting the significant impact of these factors on Japanese history and culture.
As Bennett highlights, one striking example of the diversity within 'Bushidō' is the contrast between the Takeda and Tokugawa clans' codes. Under Takeda Shingen's leadership, the Takeda clan's 'Bushidō' was centred on military prowess and the warrior's role in battle, characterised by a fierce commitment to combat excellence and strategic insight. In contrast, the Tokugawa shogunate, ruling during the Edo period (1603–1868), prioritised stability and governance over martial skill, incorporating Confucian principles into their 'Bushidō'.
Another significant divergence is seen in the 'Bushidō' of the Oda clan versus that of the Uesugi clan. Oda Nobunaga, known for his ambitious unification efforts during the Sengoku period, had a code heavily influenced by pragmatic considerations and a ruthless approach to achieving his goals. His 'Bushidō' was flexible and adapted to the exigencies of warfare and political manoeuvring. Conversely, Uesugi Kenshin's 'Bushidō' was deeply rooted in a more romantic and honour-bound approach, strongly emphasising personal honour and ethical conduct, reflecting his values and regional influences.
Bennett's exploration also uncovers the evolution of Bushidō over time. By the Edo period, Bushidō became more formalised and influenced by Neo-Confucian philosophy, shifting away from its earlier, more fluid nature. With intriguing twists and turns, this evolution reflects how Bushidō adapted to changing social and political landscapes, demonstrating its lack of a singular, unchanging essence.
In summary, the notion of a single, unifying Code of Bushidō is a misconception. As Bennett's research reveals, the reality is that Bushidō was, and remains a dynamic and multifaceted concept. It evolved and was interpreted differently by various clans, each adapting it to their needs and circumstances. Understanding this complexity enriches our appreciation of Japanese history and dispels the oversimplified narratives that have long dominated popular culture. More importantly, it underscores the diversity and richness of Japanese culture and the need to approach it with a nuanced understanding. Thus, the next time one hears of the "Bushidō code", it is essential to remember that it is not a one-size-fits-all garment but rather a cobbled road of diverse and evolving ideals.

​日本の歴史の豊かなタペストリーの中で、武士道という概念は、多面的な用語として浮かび上がり、それぞれの側面が独自の文化的意義を持っています。一般的な認識では、武士道はすべての侍が従った統一された規範であると簡略化されがちですが、より深く探ると、より複雑な現実が浮かび上がってきます。アレックス・ベネットの研究によると、武士道は単一の厳格な原則ではなく、それぞれの氏族内で独自に進化した多様な規範の集合体であることが明らかになっています。
武士道は「武士の道」としてしばしば訳されますが、これは鎌倉時代（1185年〜1333年）に最初に登場しました。それは厳密な制度化されたシステムというよりも、むしろ価値観のゆるやかな集合体でした。普遍的な規範というよりも、地域の習慣、氏族の伝統、歴史的な出来事に左右されていました。ベネットの研究は、この多様性に光を当て、単一の武士道規範という誤った認識に挑戦しています。
ベネットが強調するように、武士道の多様性の顕著な例の一つとして、武田氏と徳川氏の規範の対比があります。武田信玄の指導の下で、武田氏の武士道は軍事的な腕前と戦場での武士の役割に焦点を当て、戦闘技術の卓越性と戦略的洞察への激しい献身が特徴でした。一方、江戸時代（1603年〜1868年）に支配した徳川幕府は、武術よりも安定と統治を優先し、儒教の原則を取り入れた武士道を持っていました。
また、織田氏と上杉氏の武士道の大きな違いも見られます。戦国時代に野心的な統一を目指した織田信長は、現実的な考慮に影響された規範を持ち、目標を達成するための冷酷なアプローチを取りました。彼の武士道は柔軟で、戦争や政治的駆け引きの要請に適応していました。対照的に、上杉謙信の武士道は、より浪漫的で名誉に重きを置いたアプローチに根ざしており、個人的な名誉と倫理的行動を強調していました。
さらに、ベネットの探求は、武士道の時間と共に進化していく様子も明らかにしています。江戸時代までに、武士道はより制度化され、儒教哲学の影響を受け、初期のより流動的な性質から離れていきました。この進化は、武士道が社会的および政治的な風景の変化にどのように適応したかを反映しており、それが単一の不変の本質を持っていないことを示しています。
まとめると、単一の統一された武士道規範という考え方は誤解です。ベネットの研究が示すように、武士道は動的で多面的な概念であり、それぞれの氏族が自分たちのニーズや状況に合わせて進化させ、解釈してきたものです。この複雑さを理解することで、日本の歴史への理解が深まり、長い間大衆文化を支配してきた単純化された物語が払拭されます。そのため、次に「武士道規範」について耳にする時は、それが万人に適した一つの規範ではなく、多様で進化し続ける理想の寄せ集めであることを忘れないようにしましょう。