Bushido: The Soul of Japan, Inazo Nitobe's 1900 book from Leeds and Biddle, written in English by a Japanese Quaker convert for a foreign audience, is the book that made the word bushido a household term in the West. Its strength is that it is the primary text itself, essential for tracing the modern popular idea of bushido to its actual origin. Its limit is that it is a primary document of the modern bushido idea rather than a reliable account of what Edo period warriors actually practiced, and should be cited for what Nitobe claimed, not for historical samurai ethics.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier2
Reliability tier 2: the primary text itself, essential for tracing a modern popular idea to its actual origin though not a reliable account of the historical practice it claims to describe. NotesThe book that made bushido a household word in the West, written in English by a Japanese Quaker convert for a foreign audience. A primary document of the modern bushido idea rather than a reliable account of historical samurai ethics; cite it for what Nitobe claimed, not for what Edo-period warriors practiced.
Citation
AuthorInazo Nitobe
PublisherLeeds and Biddle
Publication Year1900
Source Typeprimary-text
Connections
Associated With
This source names Japan directly: "Bushido: The Soul of Japan, Inazo Nitobe's 1900 book from Leeds and Biddle, written in English by a Japanese Quaker convert for a foreign audience, is the book that made the word bushido a household..."
Source Bushido: The Soul of JapanInazo Nitobe
Claims Backed By This Source (71 claims)
This source backs 71 claims across the atlas. As facts: 47 well-attested. As cited relationships: 12 holds, 4 connected. Plus 8 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Virtues, 60 claims: 38 well-attested, 11 holds, 4 connected, 7 general references.
- Sources, 8 claims: 7 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Doctrines, 3 claims: 2 well-attested, 1 general references.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.