Why were early tsuba's thin?

[kaigunair]

Was wondering what the prevailing theory is about why tosho, katsushi, and early ko-kinko tsuba's were relatively thin (about 2mm thick)?

 

I know there are always exceptions to the rule, but like the nihonto shape charts that attribute changes in the sori and kissaki to adaptations caused by changing battle field environments, what happened with tsuba that made being a large (80mm+) and thin (2-3mm) plate useful in one era, and then thicker (4-6mm) and medium sized (70-80mm) plates the norm going forward?

 

Horseback to foot soldier? Elegant sori's and shapes of earlier swords compared to later beefier blades? Tachi to uchigatana to katana? Larger tsuba good for protecting one's hand while on a horse, but harder for a quick draw? Maybe it gets in the way of a melee and could warp/crack compared to thicker tsubas against pole arms?

 

Or perhaps thinner tsubas make sukashi work harder...thicker = thinner sukashi designs.

 

Maybe keep the tanto & wak tsuba out of the equation for now....

 

[Mark Green]

While I am sure there are those who likely know more.

 

I would think, the most obvious reasons would be:

 

1. Metal was more precious, the further you go back. It takes a good chunk of raw iron/steel, to make a 5mm thick tsuba.

Believe me, I know!!

2. Swords were lighter. A thicker tsuba may throw off the balance.

 

There may be many other reasons. But these seem the most likely.

 

Mark G

[John A Stuart]

Mark makes a telling point. I see it this way; Earlier tsuba had less sukashi and could be thin without detriment to their strength. Balance was a consideration as well as the function of the sword, how worn and how it was used. So fashion had an effect. John

[kaigunair]

Interesting points. Would be nice if the weight of a tsuba was a common measurement along with thickness and length/width. Would be much easier to see how a large tosho compares to a thick but fairly open sukashi tsuba in terms of weight.

 

I was wondering whether there had been any studies or research put out in the past. In passing, I've noticed that western cavalry sabers sometimes had large hilts compared to fencing sabers, and wondering if something like this was the cause for larger and thinner tsuba. Maybe a combination of horseback and smaller blades.

 

Been thinking about this as I've been looking into the progression from onin to heianjo tsuba. Seems like the onin base plate is very much in the tosho flavor, while heianjo base plates were thicker with less plate work.

 

Any leads to previous articles or publications would be much appreciated.

[Soshin]

Hi Junichi-san,

 

Good question. I wrote a article for the JSSUS newsletter two years ago about the development of the Tosho tsuba (刀匠鍔). The Ko-Tosho tsuba (古刀匠鍔) are very early, thin, and with small openwork (ko-sukashi 小透). Here is a link to a online verison it: http://www.nihontomessageboard.com/articles/JSSUS_Tosho_Article.pdf. In terms of warfare and the changing use of the sword I am sure it would have affected tsuba development and style of construction. I remember reading that in early periods (Heian and Kamakura Periods) the bow was a more important weapon then the sword. Most of the more common Japanese martial arts (i.e. Karate-do, Judo, Iai-do,Batto-do, and Aikido) date to after the Meiji Restoration. The oldest type of Japanese martial arts referred to in Japanese as Ko-Budo (古武道) or Koryu (古流) generally date from the Edo Period. The style that I practice only dates to about 1690~1700 (i.e. Middle Edo Period). I am sure there are older martial arts still around but how much older I am not really sure. Even if the martial art school is old it has likely changed over time particularly in the Edo Period.

[kaigunair]

Thanks for the comments David.

 

But I'm getting the feeling that there is no research or consensus out there regarding the thinness of early, non-tachi guards? I find it interesting that there are articles on dating tsuba by hitsu-ana shape, timeline of brass work in iron tsuba from onin-heianjo-yoshiro, and dating by sukashi characteristics, but no studies on thickness?

 

Is this another landmine topic? If so, please PM me any past threads on it.

 

Any good references to books or papers on the subject, English or Japanese would be much appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance.

[John A Stuart]

Actually, thickness and relative thickness at the seppadai and mimi are kantei points. John

[Thierry BERNARD]

Actually, thickness and relative thickness at the seppadai and mimi are kantei points. John

[BMarkhasin]

Junichi,

 

John has hit the relevant points in his posts. Thickness is variable in any period, and was especially so in the Nambokucho through Muromachi, since this was a time of transition in blade style. You cant point to any one line of reasoning to account for the relative thinness of the plate in some guards (especially kokat and kotosho) . Balance, size, aesthetic, structure, economics etc are intimately linked and all played a role in early guard styles. As to kantei points, it is generally accepted that especially early to mid Muromachi iron guards are thin in the plate (~2 mm), and the kokachushi group had thicker rims to balance the thin web and provide some additional strength. Some of the rims also were ornamental. However there are also examples of thicker iron guards (sans significant sukashi) during this period, so thickness has to be considered along with other attributes. Seppadai shape and style are also kantei points, but not directly related to thickness. I have seen very thick Muromachi guards, very thin Kamakura period guards and everything in between. As to soft-metal examples, it cant be confidently stated that a thin plate equates to an earlier period. I would actually gravitate towards the opposite situation - early periods are characterized by relatively thicker soft-metal guards. Sorry for not providing any clear resolution to your inquiry, but you shouldn't expect a neat/decisive answer to such a complex topic.

 

Best Regards,

Boris.

[kaigunair]

Thanks Boris, John, and Thierry.

 

Theirry, that's a really great table. Was that one you compiled?

 

Thanks John and Boris for explaining the subject in detail. Thickness and age does seem more complicated now.

 

Most of the reference books/multi-volumes go something like aoi-shaped dolmounds tsuba --> tachi kanagushi--> ko-tosho /ko-katsushi/kagamishi, then split with a onin --> heianjo -->Yoshiro or early sukashi-->nobuie/kaneiye etc.

 

Are there any books that focus on pre-edo tsuba & fittings (excluding ko-mino/ko-goto)? I have a small book on kagamishi tsuba by sasano; some of the examples there, if I recall correctly, don't seem to be kagamishi. Uchigatana no koshirae provides some good pictures of early tsuba in situ. Are there more books like that one?

 

Lots to think about.

[Toryu2020]

Junichi

Look at Sasano Sukashi Sword Guards I believe he explains the state of ko-toehold and ko-katchushi quite well.

-t

[Ken-Hawaii]

Most of the more common Japanese martial arts (i.e. Karate-do, Judo, Iai-do,Batto-do, and Aikido) date to after the Meiji Restoration

 

David, I think you may want to reconsider this statement. The oldest forms of iaido/iaijutsu/kenjutsu date back to the 1500s, & Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto-Ryu claims to go back even further than that (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten ... D-ry%C5%AB). Judo started with Jigoro Kano, but it stems from jujutsu which started back in Sengoku times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jujutsu).

 

Ken

[Marius]

 

Are there any books that focus on pre-edo tsuba & fittings (excluding ko-mino/)?

 

Sasano's Tosogu no Kigen (Markus Sesko has done the translation and you can find it on Lulu.com, 2 volumes, one for the txt, one for the pics).

 

Burawoy's Picture Book of Old Tsuba is focused on oldies. It has a fine selection of guards and very good, if short text.

 

Haynes' Gai So Shi has very good examples of early guards

 

KTK catalogues have important old guards, too...

 

Tsuba Kanshoki and Tsuba Shusei have pretty large sections with these oldies, incl. many kagamishi.

 

Hope that helps.

[Marius]

2. Swords were lighter.

 

Mark, could you please indicate when and in relation to what? Without these qualifiers your statement is a bit vague

[BIG]

Hi all,

 

what's about Real Data like the " 140 Blade Lengths" Topic ?

 

Height, Width, Thickness and a Time axis will def. Gives an answer!

[Thierry BERNARD]

Theirry, that's a really great table. Was that one you compiled?

 

 

The chart is the one published by Robert Burawoy in the January, 1997 issue of the "Bulletin" of the Association Fanco-Japonaise, Paris.

[Soshin]

Most of the more common Japanese martial arts (i.e. Karate-do, Judo, Iai-do,Batto-do, and Aikido) date to after the Meiji Restoration

 

David, I think you may want to reconsider this statement. The oldest forms of iaido/iaijutsu/kenjutsu date back to the 1500s, & Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto-Ryu claims to go back even further than that (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten ... D-ry%C5%AB). Judo started with Jigoro Kano, but it stems from jujutsu which started back in Sengoku times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jujutsu).

 

Ken

 

Hi Ken,

 

I am not a expert or am I a teacher I just practice two Japanese martial arts. I really only know a little about the two that I practice period. Yes I am aware of Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu and it is a Koryu. "Jutsu" forms are more the often older and that is why I was referring to the modern "do" forms which are often modern connate who founders often trained in one or more Koryu styles. An example is Zen Nippon Kendo Renmei iaido seiteigata which has a lot of classical influence but is itself a modern connate. Regardless it is only secondary to the topic and I don't think it very helpful at answering Junichi original question.

 

Hi Junichi,

 

I completely agree with Boris and John statements. In term of thick older tsuba two examples I can think of are the Owari sukashi and Kanayama tsuba that date back to the middle Muromachi Period. In term of some Katchushi tsuba many are both thick and thin. Here is an example on my website that is 2.5 mm at the seppa-dai and at the rim is 6.8 mm: http://www.tsubaotaku.com/#!Nanban-Saku-Tsuba-/zoom/c211q/image1f5e.

[kaigunair]

Thanks all for the book suggestions.

 

Early Japanese Sword Guards - good primer material indeed. interesting to hear about iron habaki, and their thinness too. I do wonder about the "conservation of material" in ko-tosho resulting in thinness in light of many examples of ko-kinko tsuba also being thin. The books states the iron was thin (in both the iron habaki and iron tsuba) because material was the same as used in nihonto, which is also reflected in the proportionally smaller negative silhouette sukashi work. I would think early kinko made in similar thinness/proportions might indicate a style, if not a particular purpose. Looks like pictures and study material of iron habaki is needed!

 

Also interesting to note that ko-tosho is being attributed to sword smiths making the tsuba and habaki, based on the iron being of the same quality as nihonto. It further goes onto say that because the ko-tosh aren't signed, this indicates there were made by lower ranking smiths not entitled to sign their works. But when discussing the elegance and high standard of beauty, I can't see how this would then correspond to lower ranking smiths...

 

Going through Tosogu no Kigen. Been sometime since I cracked the Sesko reprints of this one open, but it does appear packed with the background and info that's helpful to understanding early tsuba. Not sure what it'll say about thinness, but is making for a very nice read.

 

[BMarkhasin]

Junichi,

 

See KTK 2009 book for an article about habaki evolution, which details some iron habaki. As for the concept of lower-ranking smiths making tsuba and as a result not signing, well that idea has been largely abandoned. It is quite likely that many iron kotosho/kokatchushi tsuba represent works by smiths also responsible for sword and armor production. This is thought to reflect that during times of protracted war, the economics for mass production, utility and ease of manufacture / repair mandated that individuals could multitask field production/maintenance of tosogu. It is incorrect to think Muromachi iron tsuba were lower quality items. If anything, the longevity and general high regard for these early iron tsuba through the centuries suggest they were considered reliable and generally high quality. Signatures are totally irrelevant in this context. Tsuba have been in production since Kofun period, but only in the latest Muromachi did artisans begin to organize and start signing with any regularity, and only then did 'schools' spring-up, as a result of broader socio-economic reason. Signed tsuba dating to earlier periods have been identified, but literally only a handful remain.

 

Best,

Boris.

[Pete Klein]

I have believed for some time now that it was the influence of Sen no Rikyu and the other wabi-cha followers which saved the early Tosho and Katchushi tsuba. Their combined aesthetic influence on the aristocrats of their day probably saved these examples from the bin and is why they have been preserved.

[Marius]

Pete,

 

In the light of the history of the Kizaemon bowl your theory sounds pretty plausible

 

Or have you stumbled upon any sources?

[Pete Klein]

Marius -- I came to this idea while studying Nobuie tsuba several years ago. Nobuie were made about the time of Nobunaga Oda who was a student of Rikyu. Study of Rikyu, wabi cha and a bit of logic. There has to be a reason these survived and this makes sense. In a humid country such as Japan for steel tsuba to survive over five hundred years requires conservation and the most likely to do this would be those of higher rank who have the means to store what they appreciate.

 

BTW -- a picture of that bowl used to be my avatar.

[kaigunair]

I have believed for some time now that it was the influence of Sen no Rikyu and the other wabi-cha followers which saved the early Tosho and Katchushi tsuba. Their combined aesthetic influence on the aristocrats of their day probably saved these examples from the bin and is why they have been preserved.

 

Conversely, it could be why there is a preponderance of certain types and motifs of ko-tosho and ko-katchushi examples that define the early tsuba, while a scarcity of other styles. When these "outliers" pop up, perhaps they get tossed into later periods, or maybe ko-kinko or ezo or ???.

 

Really makes me wonder what other styles might have been in vogue at even earlier times and provinces, but perhaps not saved because they did not conform to the tea aesthetics....? At the same time, the entire opening of Tosogu no Kigen is about when tsuba first began, so will have to come back to this later...