OceanoNox

Is that a bridle bit?

To look SEXY when you take it off? Joke aside, it seems to have been taken from Croatian mercenaries in France who had scarves and were copied for fashion.

Kuroda Tetsuzan sensei seems to use the sageo like that. In the All Japan Kendo Federation iai, and many old schools, the saya is thrust between the first and second outer layers of the obi, and is supported by the lower hakama cords. Kuroda sensei has his saya through a rope around his hips, so it makes very different to draw as there little resistance and friction from the obi.

I usually treat what he says with a pinch of salt, however, there are documents (although I conveniently do not have them) concerning the sageo for tying people hands. I think you could use it to tie your kimono sleeve, like a tasuki. My issue is that if the sageo was short (and there are pictures with short sageo just set behind the saya, not tied anywhere on the obi or hakama), the uses he proposes would not be possible, it seems to me. Nowadays, the sageo is also used to tie the sword to its scabbard, to avoid it rattling in the saya. In terms of iaido, it has become a matter of decorum and can differentiate schools to an extent.

Maybe you could try Nosyudo (Igarashi-san), they also provide high-grade iaido swords, and MAYBE can help you.

I have read recently that the tousougu are usually one of the following: 1- 揃い　all the same "image" (e.g. fans) but with different executions (different numbers, orientations, shapes, etc.); 2- 尽くし　same theme (e.g. seasons), with different tousougu showing different aspects of a theme; 3- 語り　a "story", with the story unfolding as the tousougu are looked at around the sword. Now, this is a reading, likely imperfect, from a Japanese article that I have read quickly, called: 刀装具のかざりの構成 by 宮崎　友見子

Micro hardness testing through the thickness would allow to see if any decarburization occurred to be followed by some detail work.

For iai, as taught by the All Japan Kendo Federation (ZNKR), the tsuka should be long enough to put both hands (not square with the tsuka, so a bit wider than palm width), with about 2 fingers width in between, without touching the fuchi nor the kashira (basically the left hand's little finger should be at the last or last but one hishi).

Thank you, Peter, it is much appreciated. Yes, I have found it is called "丸に隅立て角". A dojo friend has this kamon (and has it on his saya in a kuroishime/kuroro contrast).

Not being familiar with this, what is better with den than kodai? This is written 古代? Does it mean it's too old to be sure about the origin?

Exactly! There is an anecdote of Rikyu attending a tea gathering with some of his students. The host was either not a veteran, or very nervous, but he missed some steps, spilled some water, etc. Apparently some of Rikyu's students snickered or exchanged looks of embarrassment, but at the end, Rikyu said "your temae was supreme". On the way back, the students were astonished, but Rikyu replied that the intent and honesty of the host were more important than doing everything perfectly.

I have read the previous forum discussion and the page from M. Nagayama's book. The article by M. Martin, while interesting, does not provide more information. It is still not clear to me (apart from M. Nagayama's book, which I haven't seen anywhere else) that there were two distinct swords at the same time: the long katana and short uchigatana. It still seems to me that the uchigatana or katana started one-handed and became two-handed. (I am trying to find the plenty available, but to little avail, what with video game and sword store stuff cluttering the net, but I did find this: https://markussesko....08/11/the-wakizashi/: still no idea if katana and uchigatana were different things during mid-Muromachi).

He says what you wrote above, and the sources I cited say what I wrote above (katana were initially short swords, and became longswords referred to as uchigatana). I can also cite Prof. K. Friday (K. Friday, Samurai, warfare and the state in early medieval Japan, Routledge (2004)), who never mentions the uchigatana as being different from the katana in the way M. Nagayama does. It may be that my sources are simplifying things, it may be that the (katate) uchigatana was a fringe phenomenon that did not remain. We can argue about this ad vitam aeternam, unless there is clear evidence why one publication should be believed above another.

Jean, I understand that swords evolved tremendously in Europe in particular, but I still think my point stands. This is getting quite off topic, but here goes. A two-handed sword of the 15th century: 1560g: https://www.metmuseu...lection/search/27966 A one-handed sword, the rapier: 1500g. Supposedly a very nimble weapon: https://www.metmuseu...lection/search/22367 I believe the whole issue is balance. The myth of heavy blunt medieval swords is said to have come from the 19th century, from people who were not used to such swords. From personal experience, I have had people carry my shinken, and everyone who doesn't do iai thinks it's like a crowbar, while people who do iai think it's like a feather (it's about 930g for 79cm). If you look at sources about fighting in Europe, half-swording and wrestling is used when fighting an opponent in armour. There is no need to bludgeon with a sword: you use the point to get in the gaps (visor, armpits, etc.: https://www.youtube..../watch?v=49TBEhDtSc4) (although it seems you can bludgeon by holding the sword by the blade and hit with the crossguard or pommel, but then again, armored gloves).

It was unclear in his message. Unless specified, uchigatana is the two-handed sword. By the way, nowhere in the academical papers have I seen the word katate uchi (although I have only read a limited number).

There is a paper by Murakami et al. (Journal of the Japan Society for Precision Engineering, 88, 2022) where they took the measurements of the swords that were ranked in shinsakuto competitions for the past 10 years, and used neural networks to get the most pleasing sword shape based on the judges' criteria. They then had a smith make a sword to those dimensions. Reference: https://www.jstage.j...1/_article/-char/ja/ From a purely practical point of view, the suguha is best, because it's least likely to have sudden failure, being uniform and having less stress concentrators.

From what I have read (sources below), the weapon that was used alongside the tachi, and was called katana, was closer to what we call wakizashi now, and it had no tsuba. It then became the uchigatana that changed slightly over time to us. I forgot where exactly I got the information, but the consensus across several papers seems to be as follows: - The katana was a short sword without tsuba thrust through the belt, alongside the tachi which was hanging. It is said to have been used during close-combat and to cut off heads; - The katana became longer and replaced the tachi, when fighting on foot became more important; - It was called alternatively koshigatana, uchigatana, tsubagatana. 生田享子, 刀装具 新・解体新書, 天夢人 (2022) 笹間良彦, 棟方武城, すぐわかる日本の甲冑・武具, 改訂版, 東京美術 (2012) 廣井雄一, 刀姿・刀装具の様式変化―直刀から日本刀発生にいたるまで, 月刊 考古学ジャーナル (The Archeological Journal), 532 (2005) 5-9 鈴木友也, 刀装具の美と鍔, 月刊文化財, 8, No. 311 (1989) 21-29

I think this is a misconception, that European weapons were heavy and blunt (if we are talking about swords). Indeed, I think in terms of weight, they are similar to our beloved Japanese weapons (in 1~2kg range, unless we get into zweihanders). It can certainly be argued that many swords used along with plate armour were not as hard as the edge of tachi or uchigatana, and the smiths may have preferred producing blades that were closer to springs. Now if we talk about maces and warhammers, they certainly aimed at a lot of blunt damage, but they were not that heavy, rather balanced towards the head. About Japanese armour, there is a video or the Tokyo National Museum where they do try an armour, but alas, they do not seem used to wearing it. It has now been deleted, but a branch of the sosuishi ryu did upload a video of paired kata in tosei gusoku: the interesting part to me was that even when kicking a fully armored opponent to a wooden floor, there was almost NO noise, compared to the clink clank from European plate armour. It is also my understanding that Japanese armour never uses purely flat plates (especially for the kote, suneate, and kabuto) where the strength of the cold-worked metal is further enhanced by the reinforced structure of the metal (I think "u" cross-section for arms and legs and "L" for the helmet?).

Do you know what is the reason for the laminates? Is it like the making of knives: have the minimum of strong steel required to be efficient and back that up with low-C steel or iron? I personally find that many analyses lack in one way or another. The whole "well forged iron" that I keep mentioning about tsuba is one of them. But even some papers with more advanced methods (neutron diffraction) appear to give very clear cut interpretation of the data, while I would deem them more murky. In the image you uploaded, the pure iron is deemed to have been forged at around 500℃, but I don't understand how they came to that conclusion.

Nodachi and tachi were shortened into uchigatana, but uchigatana and katana should be the same thing (if anything, katana is so broad a term that depending on the era, it's either closer to a long tanto or the longer sword we think of). There is a lot of variation, but I have seen the width being about 7~9mm and the height about 27~32mm. Also, you can always use copper sekigane to fit precisely to a specific sword, if the nakago ana is too big.

Concerning potters (and watching Marcus Sesko's lecture, this was the case for tousougu, and many more crafted items), items can be a group effort: someone prepares the clay, another the shape, another the coating, and another fires them all. Or the master makes everything himself. When looking at the Takatoriyaki tradition, workshop items made by students or not to the standard of the master (but still to the standard of the workshop) will have a specific stamp at the bottom, while the masters have their own. The price, then, varies accordingly: if the item carries the name of a contemporary head of a tradition or a recognized artist, even second hand items would be expensive. A recent book on new pieces showed price going from about 20,000 yen to more than 10 times that (the styles varied very much: rough clay with pebbles in it, bowls that looked almost like dry wood, etc.). In terms of price, it also depends on who is selling: in Japan, you can often find good second pieces at very low prices, because the person selling won't practice anymore and they are simply trying to get rid of it, and they'd rather sell it for cheap or even give it to someone who will practice and use them. I haven't practiced in a while, but in the Urasenke tradition of tea ceremony, I did not feel that price mattered much. Rather the atmosphere created when using them is what matters. In that case, what you like, and what you bring are most important.

I haven't read Kimura sensei's book on Muso Shinden Jushin ryu, so I may have missed mentions of wakizashi or kodachi, but there is no mention of wakizashi in any of the books I have concerning Muso Shinden ryu (by Danzaki sensei, by Matsumine sensei, or books concerning Nakayama sensei).

There is a method of practice called katate hayanuki in the Muso Shinden / Muso Jikiden / Muso Shinden Jushin schools, where all the kata of chuden are made one-handed. Some have interpreted this as meaning the seating kata were meant to be done with a wakizashi. The densho in Kimura sensei's book clearly show longswords however, even in seated position. Depending on the teacher, the sword is drawn either with the tsukakashira forward (as threat) or 45° to the right (to avoid getting the sword taken from you). The sword may also be set with the tsuka relatively far forward. I have not seen evidence of iai with daisho, but those two points could either be due to technique or because a wakizashi was expected to be there. It is always claimed that nobody would bring a longsword indoors, but this is false. The journal of samurai Ishigaki (石城日記, https://kmj.flet.kei...on/2013/04.html#view), which he drew when locked at home during the Bakumatsu, shows that at least acquaintances and friends would bring the longsword indoors (not in the belt, but next to them). Also the longsword would be worn when seated in seiza during practice too! Unless daisho is worn in your koryu, I do not think there is any advantage to wear one, in terms of improvement. In matters like these, the answer is usually "ask your sensei".

My own gendaito made for iai has also a fuchi that it 41mm long. But a craftsman of the 加賀 style wrote in a recent book that the fuchi is made about 39mm long (and 加賀, 肥後, and 尾張 all make the kashira slightly smaller than the fuchi). In the 加賀 style, the height (腰) of the fuchi is 9mm and the width (平) is usually 23mm (26mm for bigger ones, 21mm for smaller ones). This depends also on the sori of the blade: fuchi height (腰) increases when the sori decreases (浅い反り).

Indeed, if made-to-order prices (or some that I have seen) are anything to go buy, the new tsuba could end up at least half the price of a gendaito. The only place where you might have a chance at ordering a tsuba now remains Japan, but I have no idea about the price (as far as I know Paul Martin might be able to contact craftsmen for such an order). On the topic of price, Kawami Norihisa has cited Alessandro Valignano who wrote that lord Otomo Sourin bought an iron tsuba for the equivalent of 4500 ducats. Swords would be bought for the equivalent of 3000~6000 ducats. Some conversions give the value of a 16th century ducat to about 148 USD. So the price of the tsuba was about 666,000 USD and the price of swords was in the range of 444,000~888,000 USD (due to how money was handled in the caste system, this may be a useless conversion).