Samurai rank by tsuba

[Ken-Hawaii]

Skip Holbrook posted a most interesting article in the NCJSC To-Ron newsletter, entitled "Not All Samurai Were Generals." In it, he stated that "...the guard on a person's sword was probably an important indicator of the wearer's rank." And "The Samurai system was more subtle [than the ranks we see on our own military officers] but just as precise."

 

Not only had I never heard of this, but I was also unable to find any on-line references.

 

I would appreciate any information on this topic because it sure makes me view my own tsuba in a different light!!

 

Thanks!

Ken

[kusunokimasahige]

Hello Ken,

 

A very interesting proposition, albeit an (in my eyes) far fetched one, since Samurai in service of a Daimyo or the Bakufu all were paid. Tsuba were certainly not priced along the same price range, so it would only be natural that high ranking ones would have had fancier Tsuba than those of lower rank.

 

The rank system was set up differently and would in my view not have been distinguished by Tsuba.

You could read : Samurai Warriors by prof. Stephen Turnbull, though it is still a rather superficial book as it is

a collection of works he wrote for Osprey. There are other scholarly books, well researched by historians, of

which I do not all have a title for you at the moment.

 

 

 

Some interesting titles of books and articles are :

 

Social Structure and Population Change: A Comparative Study of Tokugawa Japan and Ch'ing China

James I. Nakamura and Matao Miyamoto

Economic Development and Cultural Change

Vol. 30, No. 2 (Jan., 1982), pp. 229-269

Published by: The University of Chicago Press

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3 ... 1473082457

 

The Taming of the Samurai: Honorific Individualism and the Making of Modern Japan

By Eiko Ikegamia & Ann M. Harringtona

 

 

The rise of the merchant class in Tokugawa Japan, 1600-1868: An introductory survey

Author: Sheldon, Charles David.

PUBLISHER: Russell & Russell (New York)

 

A Modern History of Japan: From Tokugawa Times to the Present.

Andrew Gordon.

 

Adoption and Samurai Mobility in Tokugawa Japan

Ray A. Moore

 

Rule by Status in Tokugawa Japan

John W. Hall

Journal of Japanese Studies

Vol. 1, No. 1 (Autumn, 1974), pp. 39-49

Published by: The Society for Japanese Studies

Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/133436

 

Sumptuary Regulation and Status in Early Tokugawa Japan

Donald H. Shively

Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies

Vol. 25, (1964 - 1965), pp. 123-164

Published by: Harvard-Yenching Institute

Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2718340

 

Talent and the Social Order in Tokugawa Japan

R. P. Dore

Past & Present

No. 21 (Apr., 1962), pp. 60-72

Published by: Oxford University Press

Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/649996

 

Samurai Status, Class, and Bureaucracy: A Historiographical Essay

Douglas R. Howland

The Journal of Asian Studies

Vol. 60, No. 2 (May, 2001), pp. 353-380

Published by: Association for Asian Studies

Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2659697

The Mito Ideology: Discourse, Reform, and Insurrection in Late Tokugawa Japan, 1790-1864.

By J. Victor Koschmann

 

Territoriality and collective identity in Tokugawa Japan

David L. Howell

Daedalus

Vol. 127, No. 3, Early Modernities (Summer, 1998), pp. 105-132

Published by: The MIT Press

Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20027509

 

 

 

There are many more however.

The Jstor articles should be accessible to anyone presently studying at University

or those who have a subscription, like University Libraries.

 

KM

[Ken-Hawaii]

I've read about half of your references, HJ, but this wasn't my original idea at all. I'm fairly certain that Skip Holbrook wouldn't have published his article without a lot of supporting information & studies - he's rather well-known for his knowledge of tsuba....

 

Ken

[kusunokimasahige]

I agree Ken. I dont know if the man is still alive, but if so it would not be a problem contacting him or someone who knows him.

 

KM

[sanjuro]

I dont wish to be a wet blanket, but this all sounds like a tsuba collector who is trying to make tsuba more important than they really were. More wishful thinking than anything else. Social status perhaps to a degree, but rank per se is quite different. One is a product of wealth and the other a product of power. Not necessarily the same thing.

 

My old sensei's words still ring true...... Without a tsuba, a sword is still a sword. Without a sword a tsuba is a piece of metal with a funny shaped hole in the middle.

 

Sorry guy's..... just a little dark humour there. Dont get upset now. Remember, I own a few tsuba also.

 

Peace. :D

[kusunokimasahige]

Ken, I just read this article by J.Gilbert and he states the possibility of tsuba reflecting social status/rank :

 

"While citing a document from just a bit later than our area of focus, it seems likely that the selection of appropriate sword furniture was at least as important to the urban warriors of late 16th C Kyoto as the clothing they wore. The choice of sword fittings was not only an aesthetic decision limited by finances, but may also have been dictated by what was appropriate to one’s position within the social and political warrior hierarchy. "

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~jggilbert/KyoOwari.htm

 

This still remains to be seen of course.

 

KM

[Steve Waszak]

An interesting topic...

 

I would be skeptical, too, about tsuba functioning as a formal, that is, "official" indicator of rank. But I have no doubt whatsoever that they served powerfully as status markers. I’m not sure how far back such semiotic function might have gained a foothold among the buke, but it is certainly clear enough that by the Momoyama Period the dynamic of object-as-status-symbol/marker was well established. And on a koshirae, THE dominant semiotic agent would have been the tsuba. There are a few points to be emphasized here:

 

While the koshirae (including the tsuba) that houses a blade is of course secondary in importance to the blade itself, to see the koshirae---and the tsuba---as therefore of little importance is to show one’s lack of recognition of the extreme significance of semiotic function in a culture. And Japan is a culture whose exquisite sensitivity to subtlety, to nuance, to meaning-through-suggestion or allusion, to connotation versus denotation, is second to none in the world’s history. It is flat impossible to understand this and then decide that tsuba would have no important function as a semiotic agent. To do so would be an act of willful ignorance.

 

By the Momoyama Period, we have some few tsubako signing their work. It is disingenuous to consider this fact and then conclude that, despite the clear implications of such a practice, the tsuba made by such individuals would not carry a greater cultural weight of some kind, whether that be expressly political or otherwise. The particular and specific artists of this time who were signing/carving names onto the tsuba they made were all associated with high-ranking bushi. Most if not all of these tsubako were retainers for these high-ranking individuals. The power-status dynamic is thus seen in that fact. It strains credulity to think that some low-ranking foot soldier, who happened in some manner to come into possession of such a tsuba, would be able to employ it on his koshirae and not be taking a risk. To say the least. Such an action would be seen as presumptuous by those who outrank him, and that wouldn’t likely go down so well. I am speaking here of a foot-soldier/low-ranking bushi who is actually affiliated with a family/clan, rather than of a ronin; even in the case of the latter, though, it is not difficult to imagine that he would find it harder to find employment if it were determined he was “putting on airs.” This would have been even more the case by the Edo Period than it might have been earlier, when the various codes and prescriptions applying to samurai were even more rigidly adhered to.

 

In any hierarchical system of rank, there will always be a heightened sensitivity to propriety. That is, there will be an increased sensitivity as regards how one comports oneself according to his rank/station. We already know that the Buke of the Edo Period (and to some degree prior to this) were exceedingly conscious of their class, and of their rank/station within the particular clan/family they were a part of. Much of their “presentation of self” was heavily codified and ritualized, right down to the way they occupied space physically, the way they moved, the way they spoke (or whether they spoke), and of course, the way they dressed. It is nearly incomprehensible to think that extreme consciousness of how one’s koshirae presented publicly would not have been part of this larger dynamic. This would include, of course, the tsuba.

 

For a class of men about whom nearly every detail of their being expressed meaning---political and social meaning---and for whom the sword symbolized and embodied their identities and purposes in life, how could it be that the single most important element of their “public swords,” that is, not the blades themselves, but the koshirae, didn’t express important social and political meaning? Clearly, tsuba must have had and did have this function. The specifics and degrees to which they did very likely depended on period and region. But there simply cannot be any doubt about the tsuba as semiotic agent.

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

[sanjuro]

Steve.

 

You speak here in the main of the higher end of the social scale where such things were as you state, of greater moment in the day to day social interaction of samurai with commoner and samurai with samurai. this is a fairly rarified atmosphere, that of the court and the officials who governed the country and it provinces. How then would this translate to the lower echelons of society among the vast majority of samurai who held less exalted rank. These are the men who did the fighting and dying after all, and practical and at best tasteful sword furniture would surely have been of more importance than what really amounts to 'class jewellery'.? Or did I just answer my own question with the use of the word 'tasteful'?

[Ken-Hawaii]

Let me quote the first two paragraphs of Skip Holbrook's article directly:

 

Not all Samurai were generals - but all Samurai carried swords which all needed tsuba. A point that is seldom mentioned is that the guard on a person's sword was probably an important indicator of the wearer's rank. Can such a small item carry such important information? Consider our current military - a gold bar, a silver bar, two silver bars, a gold leaf, a silver leaf, a silver bird, a silver star...all less than a square inch in size. The Samurai system was more subtle but just as precise. Indicators recognized by everyone probably included the amount of work needed to make the tsuba, and the size, material, and use of family crests. What is often viewed to be a tsuba of inferior work or made for the market may well be what was worn by a young Samurai, a man much respected and high in the social structure of Japan.

 

Similar criteria existed for merchants with one major exception: they were allowed by law to carry only one sword. For the merchant, factors such as cost of materials, workmanship, etc., were governed by his wealth, not his military rank - but that is a different story.

 

Now I'm certainly not as well-versed in tsuba details as is Skip by any stretch of the imagination, but I can't see him making these statements in a newsletter read by hundreds or thousands of those of us who collect, study, & admire Nihonto & their accoutrements unless he has a firm grasp of the topic. If anyone has a contact for Skip, I would appreciate having him comment on this thread, but in the meantime, it sure sounds like this would be an excellent chance for the rest of us to learn something we simply hadn't thought about.

 

Ken

[Steve Waszak]

Hi Keith,

 

Well, there are a few things I might say in response... One of these is just to observe that most of the tosogu that most of us are interested in (study, collect, etc...) and that, I would say, inspired the thread in the first place are those associated with the (relatively) rarefied atmosphere of which you speak... Same goes for blades, no? How many of us seek out the mass-produced weapons of the 16th-century? These are less interesting, less awe-inspiring, less beautiful, less-well-crafted (or "uncrafted"), less collectable. They may have been used predominantly by the "men who did the fighting and the dying," but that fact does not imbue those blades with greater value than those blades which are and have been traditionally more esteemed. Those mass-produced swords may have great value as historical artifacts, but as examples of blade-smithing mastery, they don't. Same goes for tsuba, except that in addition to qualitative superiority (at least as concerns artistry, if not necessarily physical functional performance), the more exalted tsuba also, as I have said, had multifarious and, at times, profound semiotic function.

 

I would make two further observations: first, it's not as though all samurai had only one tsuba to his name. An Ashigaru may have had just one, basic, utilitarian tsuba fitted to his sword (I wonder how many such tsuba still exist). But for higher-ranking bushi (I don't mean only the highest-ranked men here; I mean those of even lower-middle rank, who certainly did plenty of fighting), to have had more than a single "fighting" guard for his sword would not have been uncommon. And, yes, I think it likely that the highest-ranked individuals had several tsuba to choose from in outfitting their several blades and/or koshirae.

 

Second, unless you are speaking of the lowest of the foot-soldier types, I DO think the extreme rank- and hierarchy-consciousness of the buke---once they had established themselves as a distinct and identifiable class---would have "trickled down" to even the "lesser" samurai. This is not to say, of course, that in the middle of a battle, such men would have been thinking at all times of their rank and how it was being expressed. But these men were not always fighting. And when they weren't (which was most of the time, after all), I would argue that they were likely to have been conscious of their rank and social status, and the various ways in which these were expressed. That this would have extended to tsuba is not much of a stretch. Again, we have to keep in mind that according to period and province or region there were probably variances in these dynamics...

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

[cabowen]

All of this is pure conjecture with equal amounts speculation and assumption. Without any reliable (scholarly) sources or research to support this train of thought, it is all rather meaningless.

[Steve Waszak]

Even with "reliable (scholarly) sources or research" it would remain effectively conjectural, since scholarly sources do not guarantee factual accuracy. As for how "meaningful" "all of this" is, that is subjective, necessarily so. So your comment is inane.

 

There is also such a thing as inferential logical necessity (or at least likelihood), which identifies tsuba as semiotic agents. To deny this is silly: as soon as tsuba were made with any sort of pictorial or even abstract design element, they became semiotic agents. This is indisputable. If you deny this, you don't know what semiotic means.

[cabowen]

I see nothing to indicate that anything you have said is anything but conjecture. Have you done any actual research? Can you provide a publications list? I see no sources cited, only unsubstantiated opinions. Are you a recognized expert on pre-Meiji Japanese samurai culture and history? Have you done a literature review of Japanese sources? Do you read Japanese?

 

All of this is armchair quarterbacking. Many opinions, little research backing any of it up. No, scholarly sources do not guarantee factual accuracy, but they do guarantee that at least someone has taken the time to do some homework. And we don't discount them all because some may not be accurate.

 

Too few people actually take the time to test their hypotheses and do the research before muddying the waters. As someone who has spent a great deal of time doing research in Japan I find these kind of discussions, without any scholarship, to be pointless.

[kusunokimasahige]

Steve,

 

Though I can understand and adhere to part of your explanation on the semiotics of social culture/structure translated to Tsuba, I am a bit baffled by your following deduction :

 

I think it likely that the highest-ranked individuals had several tsuba to choose from in outfitting their several blades and/or koshirae.

 

It brings a rather silly question to mind, namely : "did high ranking Samurai who possessed several koshirae and tsuba, use them to the whim of the day ?"

 

What I mean by that, is that a different tsuba for every day, or rather a tsuba/koshirae for every different situation, (one when you are with the Daimyo, one at court, one for the Jinja etc.), in Tokugawa Japan, if that at all was the case, would have been not only documented in some way shape or form, but also would be found in the stringent rules concerning the Bushi class. It would have been laid down in law.

 

We know many of the court ceremonies because they were laid down in writing. So if what you say was the case, the same thing would have been done regarding the use of tsuba as badge of rank.

 

KM

[Steve Waszak]

Bowen,

 

You are, once AGAIN, as is your wont, advancing a specious argument. Either you know you are, which makes you dishonest, or you don't, which makes you incompetent. One day, you and I simply must meet. We will, eventually. I look forward, greatly, to that. Till then, there is this:

 

This notion you are basing your entire response on rests on the reliability of "sources." Yet you yourself observe that "some [sources] may not be accurate." So which sources, exactly, can you trust? How do you know you can trust them? How do you know others are not trustworthy? In case it wasn't clear, these are rhetorical questions. Ironic, really, that you're so on about "sources" here, when the vast bulk of your posts A. do not cite any sources; B. fail to provide any publications lists; C. provide no literature reviews of Japanese sources (again, as though these guarantee anything at all). In fact, a great many of your posts to this forum do nothing but present "unsubstantiated opinions." I'm quite sure you see yourself as a "recognized expert on pre-Meiji Japanese samurai culture and history," but of course, this counts for nothing.

 

The speciousness of your "argument," however, is especially to be found in your (disingenuous?) assumption that something as unquantifiable as semiotic interpretation can be "researched" and determined to be "true" or not via "reliable sources." Sheesh. You are out of your element here. You may have done "research," but you clearly are in deep water when it comes to epistemological questions pertaining to semiotics. Are these questions conjectural? Sure. So? Are you suggesting that informed conjecture is without value? I suppose as one who invests so heavily in the gospel of shinsa you are hopelessly married to iemoto-ism. And your faith in "reliable, scholarly sources" only reinforces that. I'm done with you here. I know that you will have to post again to have the last word, as you have to live up to your eminently worthy nickname. But I'm done here.

 

To anyone else, I'd be happy to discuss this topic with you via email or PM...

[cabowen]

What argument? I have neither agreed nor disagreed with your opinions.

 

I have simply pointed out the fact that your post is full of unsubstantiated opinion and conjecture, without any sort of substantiating evidence to support it. It contains a whole lot more than "epistemological questions pertaining to semiotics".

 

My own use of sources has nothing to do with my observation that you have not provided any... If you wish me to provide sources at some point, please ask. I don't as a rule spout opinions unless I can support them in some fashion.

 

If you want to support your claims, generally you cite corroborating sources. You can let your readers decide if they are trustworthy or not. That's usually how it works. Or is everything you say simply taken as gospel on your planet?

[Toryu2020]

Ok so no real sources to cite here but I offer the following;

 

It is said that Takeda Shingen developed the mukade tsuba for his Mukade-tai, his elite guard and messenger corps, marking them as members and important individuals among his troops. Just as the shu-saya or ichiban yari marked someone of exceptional bravery or as a member of the vanguard.

 

There was a tale related years ago in the JSSUS about a samurai that discovered a famous tsuba while on a mission for his lord in the provinces, upon returning home he realized he could not wear it publicly and would never have come across it without the patronage of his lord, he therefore made a gift of it to his daimyo, for which he was rewarded. He was then faced with the question whether or not to compensate the seller as the tsuba had now become much more valuable than even he had thought when he purchased it. A tale certainly, but one told to teach the us the values of the time; don't wear tsuba/koshirae above your station, don't take advantage of the ignorant, don't covet valuable swords and tsuba!

 

Yagyu tsuba are said carry the message of individual teachings from the famous school of swordsmanship but may also have marked the wearer as a member of the ryu, as a school supported by the Tokugawa this may have meant you were someone of some importance and not just a "fan."

 

Culturally it makes perfect sense, in todays' Kendo dojo if you were to show up in super high class bogu on your first day you would be subjected to constant harassment until either your skills matched your equipment or you quit! This is not a new attitude.

 

In Iaido we eschew flashy dress and koshirae for shinsa and embu most especially for beginners. There is a great deal of examination of the kit and comportment of new faces, if someones rank is known you know how to behave, but if new you check them out and "rank" them based on appearance and performance, including what equipment they employ.

 

How many cheap poorly made koshirae have you seen with an exceptional top class tsuba attached? How many well made koshirae have you seen where the tsuba has been removed or swapped out with something that clearly does not fit? An untouched specimen of a period koshirae is a thing of beauty no matter the quality but the qualities are clear and all the parts seem to fit the "rank" do they not?

 

My own teacher says that the choice of tsuba was more important than the choice of sword for it tells the world what kind of man you are, and once the sword is drawn "the tsuba is just a hand-stop and the blade simply a weapon."

 

In short I agree with the idea, while "sources" and clear evidence may require some work on our part I feel confident that the idea is a correct one.

 

-t

[cabowen]

First, this argument assumes that not only was their some complex tsuba hierarchy, but that it was easily identifiable by all. Lacking any quantifiable markings, we would need to assume that all, or a vast majority of samurai, were tsuba experts, able to identify and discriminate a range of tsuba values by sight. We would also have to wonder about all the copies and fake tsuba produced in large quantities. If it was "putting on airs" to wear a Nobuie tsuba by a low ranking samurai, what market exactly were all these copies aimed at? Would a low ranking samurai with his fake Nobuie be ostracized for wearing an expensive tsuba? Would be ordered to commit seppuku for impersonating a higher rank? Or would everyone know it was a fake and cut him some slack?

 

Might it be more a case of economics? Most wore what they could afford? Or is that too simple?

 

Were tsuba used symbiotically? That is blatantly obvious at a casual glance and hardly warrants comment.

 

Showiness is not much admired in Japan today, and it is probably safe to say it wasn't in the past as well. It is likely that if by chance a low ranking samurai somehow came to own something he could never otherwise afford, it would stick out and he may get hammered down, much like he would in any case, if he choose to show off... But some formal, organized, hierarchy of tsuba? That requires a higher level of proof...Given the Japanese penchant for documentation, it should have been found long ago.

[Jacques D.]

Hi,

 

In my opinion, tsuba is only one of the numerous signs of a Daimyo/samurai's rank. If you have money, you can afford what you want (look at the merchants in the XVIII century) excepted of course all that is forbidden by law.

 

 

That's my first and last comment on this topic.

[KORSH]

I am not an expert on history or tsuba, but I could imagine both thesis were reality. I don`t think there were any real hierarchy of tsuba that everyone had to follow similar to law of the samurai class. If this was the case I am sure we would have tons of writings on this topic about the differant tsuba them selves and the hierarchy system. The fact is, we don´t.

At this point I would like to remind some that the color of the ito wrapping on the tsuka had this kind of a system at court. Now we know about it, because it was written down as a law <- another fact.

 

Still I think Toryu and the general Idea of this topic has some truth in it as well.

 

If we assume that the quality of tsuba was a question of money, then it is probably, that higher ranked samurai (who had more money to their dispance) had a finer tsuba (sword, koshirae, Armor, etc.). In this case you could truly identify a rank of a samurai looking at his appearance, including the tsuba. This is a general Idea, so that the tsuba would be just one element of judging the rank of a person you don`t know. It is important not to forget, that samurai trained on a daily basis. Swords and tsuba was something of an every day life. To identify a sword or a tsuba would not have been something special to them. If I compare this with today, I think anyone of us would identify a ferrari when he sees one (or at least see that it is a fancy car) and not mistake it for a volvo.

 

The remark of Toryu complies with the code of behavior of the samurai. Imagine you are a midle calss samurai who was saving money to buy a Daimyo calss tsuba. I can not imagine that he would wear this tsuba in public or even go to his lord and show of with it. The code of attitude bindet him to wear what ever he likes - according to his rank -, as it could be an insult to a higher rank otherwise. In this case you could also tell the rank by the quality of the tsuba. Yet again this is also a general Idea and not tsuba specific.

 

So I think, allthough there were no laws about a specific hirarchie of tsuba, you could actually tell the rank of a person by the tsuba (sword or anything alse, which was rank related).

[cabowen]

You can make the same statement about all the daily items and trappings of all members of any class in a class based society. The kimono, the obi, the kodogu, the netsuke, and on and on. It is a socio-economic reality that is entirely obvious to the point of being mundane.

 

This thread asks the question "do tsuba contain an overt or covert regimented indication of rank?" Other than following the above basic economic truth that in general the rich/upper class had nicer "stuff" than the lower class, we would need corroborating evidence, not conjecture and speculation, to properly answer. Due to the issues I have raised above which indicate why such a formal distinction would be problematic, and the fact that no such written regulations have yet to be brought forth, in my opinion, the answer is no. Of course I would happily change my opinion in the face of scholarly work to the contrary.

[Curran]

Ken,

 

Skip doesn't 'do Internet'. He's an old style gentleman with a touch of Atticus Finch manners.

We swap letters once or twice a year and talk in Tampa. He and Bob Haynes really stand out in the kodogu end of the spectrum when everyone else was focused solely on swords. He corresponds more with a few others on this list.

 

I'm going to sidestep any row or flamewar here. Also got a long day ahead, so may not respond for a bit.

 

I sort of took what Skip said as already established, and am surprised it is debated.

There wasn't a rigid system from top to bottom, but there were court rules and in some instances battlefield rules.

The private doesn't wear Inspector General's insignia (unless a movie staring Danny Kaye).

I think there are examples of this as far back as Kamakura - Nambokuchu tsuba.

Others might be able to illustrate further back based on certain kodogu I am thinking about, but I can only say with certainty that the tsuba thing goes back to the Mongolian Invasion period.

 

I don't have my Nihonto Kodogu books for the winter, so cannot really illustrate this. It is as Skip says, much akin to general's stars and lieutenant's bars. I think it is less straightforward during Edo period, but still a sense of do n don't based on rank.

 

EDIT:

Reading Tom's and some of the other posts, I guess I should make it clear-

Some of the pre-Edo tsuba were every bit as Overt as 4 star general insignia vs 1 star insignia vs major. I don't know about lower ranks.

[cabowen]

Some of the pre-Edo tsuba were every bit as Overt as 4 star general insignia vs 1 star insignia vs major. I don't know about lower ranks.

 

This should be quite easy to both illustrate and corroborate with references in the literature. Establish that there were clearly delineated, uniform, regimented ranks as far back as Kamakura/Nanbokucho, then show how these were overtly displayed by tsuba. Also, how changes in the rank structure through time translated into differences in overt representation on tsuba. Also, how any defined ranking differences, if they existed, between Daimyo families, translated to the production of tsuba in their respective han. Should be interesting.

[kusunokimasahige]

Chris, I must disagree with the following statement you made:

 

Showiness is not much admired in Japan today, and it is probably safe to say it wasn't in the past as well.

 

That is simply not true. Look at any Japanese armour, read the tales of he Heike as well as other Gunkimono again, and look at so many of the clothes and accoutrements which were worn and used from 700AD-1868 by the Bushi class. (See note of John below for a narrower and more correct dating).

 

Raku tea bowls for instance came into fashion partly because of their imperfection in a world which was highly based on being perfect.

 

Now if you mean by showiness, boasting while you are clearly not what you say you are, ten you are totally correct.

 

 

 

Toryu, you write the following :

 

Culturally it makes perfect sense, in todays' Kendo dojo if you were to show up in super high class bogu on your first day you would be subjected to constant harassment until either your skills matched your equipment or you quit! This is not a new attitude.

 

In Iaido we eschew flashy dress and koshirae for shinsa and embu most especially for beginners. There is a great deal of examination of the kit and comportment of new faces, if someones rank is known you know how to behave, but if new you check them out and "rank" them based on appearance and performance, including what equipment they employ.

 

I dont know in which Dojo you train, but from what I have experienced in my country what you say is not at all correct in my experience.

 

If you by flashy dress mean highly beautiful silk hakama, haori, or even armor and jinbaori, I could understand, since every dojo has its rules, and you would not be able to appear on any examination in front of Judges wearing the traditional top knot or even remotely looking like a bushi. They would immediately see that you are some kind of a nut job.

 

Checking someone out based on appearance to "rank" them is also not really considered polite in the Netherlands.

The same goes for harassing someone who on their first day appears in a super high class bogu. He or she would just politely be told to leave it at home untill he or she is ready, and would be training with the rest. Whether he sits at the end of the line because he is new, or not is up to the Sensei. If you would start harassing someone, you would be kicked out of the school for lack of respect.

 

What it is like in other dojo I of course do not know. I only know that most Kendo and Koryu dojos in my country are much more friendly.

 

KM

[cabowen]

I'm referring to showiness in character, not material items. And by the way, are you sure there was a delineated bushi class in 700ad?

[John A Stuart]

Really the samurai or bushi came into existence in the 9th century CE, definitely the early beginnings were not until after the Taiho system was adopted in 792 which used the Chinese system of magistrates and their sons which became hereditary administrative enforcers. Note the development of this class during the Rokuhara era, Kamakura, Ashikaga and Momoyama periods. John

[Lance]

I haven't seen it mentioned here but could the idea of rank on fittings be attributed to the "dress code" for koshirae during the Edo Period alternate attendance/residence edict for Daimyo? I believe the requirements were for a black lacquered saya, black wrap over white ray skin tsuka with shakudo tsuba and fuchi with horn kashira. Is it possible that the use of mon on these fittings fit with the idea of status: One example I've read numerous times and been told is that the more kiri mon on a fuchi or tsuba indicated a higher social level and might fit with or be interpreted as the western idea of different rank markings?

Wether this is true or not or only apples to kiri mon I don't know, but it might be a good place to start and see what the actual rules were in full detail if they still exist in writing?

It seems like everything before the Edo period would be more fluid, the class system was more volatile pre-Edo period due to families/individuals rising and falling in power or wiped out all together?

Also when weapons were taken from dead enemies on the battlefield would samurai pass up on a sword above his station and give it to his superior or would it be part of his reward for courageous fighting?

 

Regards,

Lance

[Jean]

Mon were on clothes

[cabowen]

Mon were on clothes

 

Careful Jean, you may be heading into deep water when it comes to epistemological questions pertaining to semiotics.

[Jean]

Must go back to Gaston Bachelard.