The Man Named Sakuma Nobumori—Told by Nobunaga, "You Have Done Nothing for 30 Years"
Imagine if, after working at a company for 30 years, you were handed a document with 19 points on it by your boss one day.
How would you feel if it said this?
"In these 30 years, you have never once done work worth boasting about to others."
In the Sengoku period, there was a man who actually received such a document. It was Sakuma Nobumori, the chief senior retainer of Oda Nobunaga.
He was a man who had served since the time of Nobunaga's father.
The Sakuma family served the Oda family for generations. Nobumori served since the time of Nobunaga's father, Nobuhide, and was one of those who supported the young Nobunaga.
In the second year of Koji (1556), when Nobunaga clashed with his younger brother Nobukatsu, Nobumori sided with Nobunaga. At this time, it was Shibata Katsuie and Hayashi Hidesada who sided with Nobukatsu. Nobumori was one of those who chose Nobunaga during a dangerous situation.
Even after that, his name appears in almost all of the major battles of the Oda family, such as Okehazama, Anegawa, and Nagashino.
He had a nickname: "Retreating Sakuma". He would serve as the rearguard in retreat battles, pulling the army back without letting it collapse. It is said that his skill was so highly regarded that it was even sung about in folk songs of the time.
He was not flashy. But he was someone you would be in trouble without. Don't you have someone like that in your own workplace?
And then, in the eighth year of Tensho, the 19 points arrived.
August of the eighth year of Tensho (1580). Nobumori was confronted by Nobunaga with a letter of reprimand containing 19 points. It was a letter written in Nobunaga's own hand.
The content was merciless.
There were no results. While Akechi Mitsuhide, Hashiba Hideyoshi, and Shibata Katsuie had achieved so much, what had he been doing? He had not nurtured people. He had not increased the stipends of his subordinates. Moreover, old failures were brought up again, and even his son's shortcomings were listed.
And finally, two paths were presented.
Either pacify the enemy or die in battle. If you cannot do that, shave your head and go to Mount Koya.
Nobumori went up to Mount Koya. He shaved his head and changed his name to Munemori. Then, in the New Year of the tenth year of Tensho (1582), he passed away in despair.
He was 55 years old according to records.
Had he really not been working?
This is the point that caught my attention.
Nobumori's methods had been consistently valued up until that point. To hold one's ground without taking unnecessary risks, without suffering losses, and without letting the formation collapse. The very nickname "Retreating Sakuma" seems to be proof of this.
However, in the 8th year of Tensho, that same approach was judged as "not working." Did he change? Or was it something else that had changed?
In this article, I would like to consider that question while tracing what Sakuma Nobumori did and what he did not do.
I should state in advance that he is not just a person to be sympathized with. While he was on the side that was cut, he was also on the side that cut others. I will write about that as well, without omitting it.
And one more thing. It was not only Nobumori who disappeared in August of that year.
1. Conclusion: Perhaps it was not him who changed
I will give you the conclusion first.
I believe that Sakuma Nobumori was dismissed not because his performance had declined, but because what the Oda family required of people had changed.
There are three reasons for this.
Nobumori's methods were those that had been valued until then. To hold one's ground without taking risks and without letting the army collapse. That skill earned him the nickname "Retreating Sakuma."
The Oda family in the 8th year of Tensho had entered a stage where they required a different type of talent. To conquer new lands and create and manage one's own vassal group. Akechi Mitsuhide and Hashiba Hideyoshi, who were compared to him in the letter of reprimand, are exactly that type of person.
Other veterans also disappeared in the same month. If it were a matter of Nobumori's performance alone, it would be difficult to explain.
The same work is sometimes called "stability" and at other times called "stagnation." I believe that shift occurred.
However, I will write this honestly: this is my perspective, not something explicitly stated in historical documents. There is no record left that notes Nobunaga's true intentions regarding why he dismissed Nobumori.
2. For 30 years, he was certainly working
First, let's look at what he had done.
The Sakuma family served the Oda family for generations, and Nobumori had served since the time of Nobunaga's father, Nobuhide.
In the 2nd year of Koji (1556), Nobunaga and his younger brother Nobukatsu came into conflict, and the Battle of Ino occurred. It is said that Nobunaga's side had about 700 soldiers at this time. In contrast, Nobukatsu's side had about 1,700, centered around Shibata Katsuie and Hayashi Hidesada. Nobumori was on the side that chose the one with fewer numbers.
I think this choice was significant. In a situation where a young head of the family might lose to his brother, which side does one stand on? He chose Nobunaga there, and Nobunaga won.
His subsequent military record is also quite long. He defended Zenshoji Fortress at Okehazama in 1560, participated in the Battle of Anegawa and the Siege of Shiga in 1570, and also joined the Battle of Ichijodani Castle in 1573 and the Battle of Nagashino in 1575.
Then, from 1576 onwards, he was appointed as the commander-in-chief of the siege of Ishiyama Hongan-ji. He held the position of a regional military commander in the Kinai area, overseeing auxiliary forces from seven provinces. It was as heavy a responsibility as one could have within the Oda clan.
His nickname, 'Retreating Sakuma,' is said to have originated from his skill in serving as the rearguard during retreat battles. It is said that it was even sung about in popular songs of the time.
There are not many military commanders who leave their names behind for retreating. Stories of attacking and conquering are easy to tell, but stories of retreating without collapsing are hard to quantify. Even so, those around him were watching, and they even turned it into a song. I believe that shows just how highly he was regarded.
He wasn't flashy, but you'd be in trouble if he weren't there. I imagine there are people like that in your workplace, too.
3. However, he was also on the side that cuts others off
Here, there is a story I do not want to omit.
In December 1575, Nobumori reported to Nobunaga regarding Nobumoto Mizuno, who was one of his auxiliary commanders. The content was that he was secretly communicating with Torashige Akiyama of the Takeda side and was secretly funneling provisions to Iwamura Castle.
Nobunaga was enraged and ordered Tokugawa Ieyasu to kill Nobumoto. Nobumoto and his adopted son Nobumasa were lured out and killed. Then, Kariya Castle, which was Nobumoto's home castle, and his territory in western Mikawa were incorporated into Nobumori's direct territory.
Whether the secret communication was true or not is unclear. However, as a result, Nobumori obtained the territory of the person he had accused.
Five years later, he himself would be cut off in the same way. Moreover, in the letter of reprimand, the poor personnel management at Kariya was written as a charge against him. The things he had obtained became the very material used to cut him off.
When you are in an organization, the side that cuts and the side that is cut may swap places. I think that reading Nobumori simply as a pitiable person probably only shows half the picture.
4. In August of the 8th year of Tensho, the 19 articles arrived
In 1580, the 10-year war with Ishiyama Hongan-ji came to an end. A peace agreement was reached in the intercalary third month, and in August, the Hongan-ji temple evacuated Osaka.
A long mission had finally come to an end.
It was immediately after that. Nobumori, along with his heir Nobuhide, was presented with a 19-article letter of reprimand from Nobunaga. It was a letter written in Nobunaga's own hand. The 'Shinchō Kōki' specifically notes that it was extremely rare for Nobunaga to write a document himself.
Let's translate the content written there into modern language.
Even though you have been at Tennoji for five years, you have neither fought nor negotiated, and there is not a single achievement that would satisfy the public
You did not discern the opportunities for victory or defeat and wasted time in vain
Mitsuhide Akechi, Hideyoshi Hashiba, and Tsuneoki Ikeda have achieved this much. Katsuie Shibata has pacified Echizen
Despite being entrusted with yoriki (auxiliary forces) from seven provinces, you have produced no results.
You have not recruited men, granted increases to your subordinates, or made any personnel changes.
In the past, when reprimanded during the battle against the Asakura, you kicked your seat and stood up without even showing contrition.
At Mikatagahara, despite being reinforcements, you did not suffer a single casualty and left Hirate Hirohide to die.
The charges against your son, Jinkuro (Nobuhide), are too numerous to list.
Both father and son are greedy, difficult, fail to retain good talent, and handle matters carelessly.
And it is said that it was written as follows:
In these 30 years, there has not been a single achievement that could be called "unparalleled."
Reading this, there are a few things one notices.
One is that he is being compared side-by-side with his colleagues. Mitsuhide, Hideyoshi, Tsuneoki, Katsuie. They are named specifically.
Another is that past events are being brought up again. Mikatagahara was eight years ago, and the battle against the Asakura was even further back. He was not punished for them at the time. Yet now, they are listed in the column of charges.
And, the fact that he did not cultivate people is repeatedly blamed. He relied on auxiliary forces, did not increase his own retainers, and did not grant increases to his subordinates. This is a standard of evaluation separate from winning or losing battles.
The final two articles were a presentation of choices. To clear your name, either pacify the enemy or die in battle. If you cannot do that, shave your head, seclude yourself on Mount Koya, and beg for forgiveness.
Nobumori chose the latter. Father and son went up to Mount Koya, shaved their heads, and took the names Somori.
After that, it is said that he could no longer stay on Mount Koya and moved south. The retainers following him decreased, and it is said that by the time he moved to Kumano, he was alone.
On January 16, 1582 (Tensho 10), he died in Kii. He was 55 years old. It was about a year and a half after his exile.
He does not know that the Honno-ji Incident will occur five months later.
5. He was not the only one who disappeared
There is something that cannot be overlooked.
In this same month, other veteran retainers also left the Oda clan.
One is Hayashi Hidesada. He was a senior vassal who served as Nobunaga's guardian. The reason given in the "Shinchō Kōki" is that he had plotted a rebellion when Nobunaga was in a tight spot in the past. This refers to the Battle of Inō 24 years ago.
That was 24 years ago. Throughout that time, Hidesada had served as a senior vassal.
Around the same time, Andō Morinari of the Mino Triumvirate, as well as Niwa Ujikatsu, were also exiled.
If one person were dismissed, it might be a matter of their performance. But when three or four long-serving veterans disappear all at once in the same month, isn't it more natural to view this as a move to restructure the organization rather than individual evaluations?
In fact, the locations they controlled had something in common. Hayashi held Owari, Andō held Mino, and Sakuma held Ōmi. All of these lie on the line connecting the Oda clan's base to Kyoto and Azuchi. There is a view that the goal was to either turn these into directly controlled territories or incorporate them under the heir, Nobutada.
After Nobumori, the position of chief senior vassal was taken by Shibata Katsuie. He was someone who had sided with Nobukatsu during the Battle of Inō.
6. Was he really not working?
So, was Nobunaga's claim correct?
The evaluations of researchers do not necessarily side with Nobunaga.
Katsuhiro Taniguchi points out that the stalemate in the siege of Hongan-ji was a strategy to avoid casualties from a direct assault, and that Nobunaga should have understood this. In other words, it is possible that Nobumori was acting according to the policy he was instructed to follow.
Yūko Ikegami takes a more structural view. At the time, the Oda clan lacked quantitative assessment through land surveys, and there were no regulations on how much military service each vassal was required to provide. Consequently, Nobunaga's demands became limitless, and the vassals had no way of knowing "how much was enough." She points out that there was a problem with the system itself.
This might be a story that hits a little close to home. Being told your "work is insufficient" when goals are not defined by numbers. Even if you wanted to argue back, there is no standard, so there is no way to do so.
People at the time also seemed unconvinced. The "Sakuma Gunki" suspects that there might have been slander by someone. The Edo-period "Kansei Chōshū Shokafu" even goes so far as to write that it was slander by Akechi Mitsuhide. However, no source is provided for this, so it is difficult to accept it at face value.
In the end, all that is certain is that "Nobunaga wrote it that way." Whether Nobumori was truly not working, or whether the standards themselves had shifted, the historical records do not tell us that much.
7. Conclusion
His heir, Nobuhide, was allowed to return to service after Nobumori passed away. However, it seems his treatment was different from before. It is said that he was a hatamoto attached to Oda Nobutada and was not treated as a senior vassal.
The family remained. But he could not return to the position his father had spent 30 years climbing to.
This is a story from over 400 years ago where lives were at stake. The weight of it is completely different from our daily lives. Exile is incomparable to being fired.
Even so, if there is one thing we can take away from this, I think it is this.
Perhaps evaluation is not determined solely by performance.
Nobumori likely did not cut corners. His methods were the correct ones for over 20 years. He did not let things collapse. He did not incur losses. He held his ground. Because of this, he earned a nickname and even became the subject of songs.
However, when the organization entered its next phase, the meaning of those same actions changed. The "man who does not let things collapse" became the "man who does not move," and "not incurring losses" became "not producing results."
It was not he who changed, but the yardstick used to measure him. That is how I interpret it.
When you have worked for a long time, I imagine you may have encountered such situations. Even though you haven't changed your methods, your evaluation changes from a certain point in time. Your superiors change. Policies change. What is required of you has, before you know it, become something else entirely.
At such times, we tend to blame ourselves, but the cause is not always within us alone. I feel that the story of Nobumori teaches us this.
However, I do not think there was nothing he could have done. Nurturing people, rewarding subordinates, and preparing the next generation—that was what the letter of reprimand repeatedly criticized him for. I cannot say for certain that all of Nobunaga's claims were unreasonable.
In your workplace, has there ever been a moment when the criteria for evaluation changed? What happened at that time?
I would like to shine a light on figures placed in the corners of history. I plan to continue writing about people who got the short end of the stick within their organizations. If you enjoyed reading this article, a "like" or a follow would be very encouraging.
I am writing about others who were cut off due to circumstances beyond their control in a similar way. Please take a look at that as well.
"The Man Named Oda Nobuzumi—Killed in the Honno-ji Incident despite having done nothing"
Akechi Mitsuhide, who was compared to Nobumori in the letter of reprimand, would strike down Nobunaga two years later. I have organized five theories regarding his motives.
"Why Did Akechi Mitsuhide Betray Him?—I Fairly Organized 5 Theories on the 'Honno-ji Incident'"
Main References
This article refers to descriptions based on the following historical materials and research. Since there are parts I could not access the original sources for, I have noted them in the text as "it is said that..." The content of the letter of reprimand does not quote the original text, but rather states the gist in the author's own words.
"Shinchō Kōki" (The 19-article letter of reprimand, reasons for Hayashi Hidesada's exile)
"Sakuma Gunki" (Descriptions regarding slander)
"Kansei Chōshū Shokafu" (Description attributing it to Mitsuhide's slander. No source is indicated)
Katsuhiro Taniguchi, "Dictionary of Oda Nobunaga's Retainers" (Yoshikawa Kobunkan, 1995)
Yuko Ikegami, "Oda Nobunaga" (Yoshikawa Kobunkan, 2012)
Note that since the date on which the letter of reprimand was delivered varies depending on the source, the main text only specifies it as being by "August of the 8th year of Tensho." There are also various theories regarding Nobumori's birth year and the place of his death (whether it was Mount Koya or Kumano).