Quote:
Originally Posted by aohige
His pirate-like raids on trade vessels and killing hundreds of citizens aboard probably didn't sit well with his foes either. Revolt was justified, but his crude, primitive methods attributed to his end.
|
The article does make reference to the raids:
Quote:
...What set Shakushain apart from other Ainu rebels is what he did with the force he had assembled. Ainu resistance hitherto had been almost entirely defensive; the odd arrogant merchant might be ambushed and killed, but the Ainu seem to have recognised the likely futility of launching an all-out attack on the Japanese.
In June 1669, however, Shakushain decided to ignore the lessons of history. He ordered an attack on all the isolated mining camps, Matsumae trading forts and Japanese merchant ships in Hokkaido. And it says much for the Ainu’s improving organisation, and his own standing as a leader, that the result was a well-coordinated assault that rained down destruction all along Hokkaido's coasts.
More than 270 Japanese died in the attacks, and 19 merchant ships were destroyed. Half the coast was devastated, and only about 20 of the Japanese living outside Matsumae’s enclave on Hokkaido survived the massacres. Once word got out, officials at Fukuyama Castle were faced with general panic among the merchants and civilians living in the enclave...
|
Of course, it's fairly apparent that the piece is skewed towards the Ainu. Presumably, it's because the author wanted Americans to be drawn towards the many similarities between the Ainu and the Native Americans. Both faced dismal historical and socio-economic fates once they were confronted by stronger rival ethnic groups that coveted their resources.