Shinobi Ana

[Pete Klein]

I have found several swords and koshirae with what are referred to as 'shinobi ana' which is a mekugi ana close to the nakago jiri.  What is the reason/rationale for these second mekugi ana?

 

Thanks much,

 

Pete

[Jean]

Pete,

 

I'll say to secure the nakago in tsuka, I have seen them generally on long nakago.

[Pete Klein]

HI Jean -- yes, I would imagine so but I find it interesting that they used two functioning mekugi.  I am wondering if there was something specific for this or was it just insurance against one coming loose?  They seem rather rare on uchigatana (the book, 'Uchigatana no Koshirae' illustrates one, # 63).

[Grey Doffin]

I've always assumed they were insurance on a longer (heavier) blade.  Makes sense to have it and I can't think of a different reason.

Grey

[Ray Singer]

A while back (13 years ago?) I was considering a very heavy daito by Enomoto Sadayoshi. It was a blade with a thick Kasane and had a shinobi-ana. When I asked why, not having seen this feature on other works by Sadayoshi, I was told that the smith made this particular piece for use in tameshigiri and wanted the extra reinforcement.

 

Best regards,

Ray

[Pete Klein]

Thanks so much fellows!  I am wondering if what Ray mentioned is spot on as if someone was doing heavy combat one handed the extra mekugi might act to reinforce the far end of the tsuka against leverage where the left hand would normally hold the tsuka in two handed grip.  A single mekugi acts like a fulcrum and rotational force could be delivered to the end of the tsuka.  It's just an idea.  Perhaps Guido can get involved as this is very much his subject?

[kusunokimasahige]

To be honest I think that shinobi-ana are especially fit for having it out in armor.

That does not explain of course why not all swords have two ana but you tend to see it a lot in earlier blades and blades from the Sengoku era.

[Guido]

Perhaps Guido can get involved as this is very much his subject?

 

Not really, I never was good at physics. Or psychology, since I remember Keith Larman writing at length about the second mekugi, and how its safety function is actually neglectable, it being more of a feature to put the mind at ease. The proper nakago to tsuka fit is way more important holding the sword in place than that tiny bamboo pin; if stress is being put on the mekugi, the fit of the tsuka is off. Period swords with two mekugi are few and far between – if there indeed was a known problem with them breaking, those who actually used swords back in the day would have put a series of them in the nakago and tsuka, and not just one.

 

I actually know the second mekugi-ana close to the nakago-jiri as hikae-mekugi-ana 控目釘孔, backup peg hole. Shinobi-ana 忍び孔, or hidden hole, not only sounds like a kinky sex practice, I also wonder if it's not a misnomer; or rather a wrongly used term. A second mekugi-ana that isn't used and therefore can't be seen, yes, makes sense, but a second hole where a mekugi goes through is anything but hidden.

[george trotter]

There may be more to having a shinobi-ana than just "peace of mind". I say this as it is well known that in WWII, when the Type 98 fittings were meant to be superseded by the Type 3, there were a number of criteria given for the change. As well as "minor" changes in the decoration of the saya, a simplification of the fittings and a dust cover at the sayaguchi, The following points seem to point to battle experience providing evidence of a need to strengthen the nakago and tsuka.

1. the nakago was lengthened and two mekugi were used.

2. the binding was changed to katate maki type and was lacquered for added strength.

I think this feature was more to do with "added security/strength" in the hilt area than any "cosmetic" or "psychological" consideration.

My comments are based on the known record  of these changes (see Ohmura's site) and also observation of Type 3 specimens compared to the usual Type 98 with one ana.

I am referring of course to the gendaito versions of the Type 3 but it also applies to the mass-produced version, except that these rarely had lacquered maki.

From this known information it seems reasonable to say that some swords have a shinobi-ana because of their intended "hard combat" use.

Hope this helps,

Regards,

[Guido]

From this known information it seems reasonable to say that some swords have a shinobi-ana because of their intended "hard combat" use.

I admit that I'm no expert, but what "hard combat" were swords subjected to in WWII, except for the occasional beheading of Chinese and POWs (although I wouldn't call that exactly "combat")? As I understand it, swords were used for symbolic and pschychological reasons, including leading charges with drawn swords by officers, but hardly to do any actual fighting.

 

***

 

"Lt. Watanabe, you only killed 30 allied soldiers with your sword this time, usually it's more than 50 – how comes, considering that they are still too stupid to shoot you from a safe distance when you charge them screaming like a banshee?" "My mekugi broke." "Damn, we still can't afford metal ones, let's use two instead! Our ancestors didn't know what they were doing anyhow for a thousand years, using only one ..."

[Davis]

Years ago I had a gendaito by Shinoda Ujifusa with this feature.  Unfortunately I no longer have it.  When I get the time I'll go through my things to find if I've kept any details.  It was a very unusual sword.  There are many fully documented accounts of Japanese soldiers attacking and killing British and Allied soldiers with their swords in close combat.  Also a few of Allied troops using Japanese captured swords to kill Japanese. 

Mick

[Jussi Ekholm]

Zusetsu Nihonto Yogo Jiten by Kajihara Kotoken has hikae mekugiana as primary term for this feature. However it also has shinobi ana as an alternative name.

 

Here is the explanation part: 生目釘孔の他に開けられた目釘孔のことで、刀身を柄に強く固定する為のもの And I think it just means the second hole is for securing the fit.

 

However you can find many large odachi that have only single ana, like here with tad over 92 cm nagasa. Which is in size that surely saw use. There are even much larger odachi around c.120cm nagasa that have single ana.

 

 

So like usual it's easy to agree with Guido. And indeed shinobi-ana does have bit kinky clang to it, maybe my imagination is running bit too wild.

[Pete Klein]

OK -- thanks again to all.  It must just be an anomaly as it is not seen very often. 

[Toryu2020]

Not an anomaly Pete but a fashion,

popular in the Late Shinto, Shishinto period, ostensibly because of the longer nakago and the fight that was brewing. Even so many swords were made with shinobi-ana but many tsuka were not. Nice to have if doing tameshigiri but not at all necessary really.

 

there is tell of the Chinese and Japanese in Manchuria, having a gentlemens agreement of sorts, one hour before sundown each day all fire would cease and any man brave enough would face the enemy with swords only out in no mans land...

 

-t

[george trotter]

I admit that I'm no expert, but what "hard combat" were swords subjected to in WWII, except for the occasional beheading of Chinese and POWs (although I wouldn't call that exactly "combat")? As I understand it, swords were used for symbolic and pschychological reasons, including leading charges with drawn swords by officers, but hardly to do any actual fighting.

 

***

 

"Lt. Watanabe, you only killed 30 allied soldiers with your sword this time, usually it's more than 50 – how comes, considering that they are still too stupid to shoot you from a safe distance when you charge them screaming like a banshee?" "My mekugi broke." "Damn, we still can't afford metal ones, let's use two instead! Our ancestors didn't know what they were doing anyhow for a thousand years, using only one ..."

Hi Guido, thanks for your comments.

I am of course aware that shinobi ana are a rarity in the pre-Meiji era, but I was only pointing out the changes made to the gunto tsuka/nakago  in WWII and the reasons given for this...all of which seem to align with wishing to strengthen the gunto tsuka against failing when in service use (combat).

If this is not the case, please give your reasons for saying the changes were made for some other purpose...and please give your sources for saying so.

Thanks,

[Lance]

Maybe the wartime switch to an extra ana and type 3 mounts was to  make up for  the lower quality materials (cotton ito and thinner ray skin) less skilled mass production (Seki)   compared to traditional craftsmen who were able to fit the tsuka  properly?  Lacquered ito  would probably hold up better to abuse and not deteriorate out in the field as much (jungle rot?)  

Regards,

Lance     

[Guido]

George, you use the word "seem" in every other sentence, but ask *me* to quote sources? Nice try ...

 

Anyhow, I think Lance already nailed it. Crappy assembly and neglect made backup holes neccessary, at least in the minds of those wo thought swords were actually used. It's like wearing both a belt and suspenders because you assume your cheaply made pants might drop to your ankles while running a marathon. You haven't tried it yet, and chances are slim you ever will, but the precaution can't hurt.

 

To sum my point of view up: there were reasons that it was thought a good idea to put two pegs through the hilts of later WWII swords, but they didn't come from actual expierence in "hard combat". There was extremely hard combat in the Sengoku period, and yet we don't see two holes being a standard back then. If you think swords played a major role in WWII combat, it should be easy for you to come up with evidence - not the other way around, I can't prove something that didn't happen.

[ROKUJURO]

Looking at the manufacture of a good TSUKA, I think it is correct to assume what Lance said. TSUKA offer a three-dimensional fit to a NAKAGO, and a blade holds upside-down in a new TSUKA without a MEKUGI. The MEKUGI should be placed in a way to exert some pressure in the direction of the NAKAGO JIRI. There should be no pulling force on that tiny bamboo pin! 

If the wood dries out or happens to become wet in use, there might occur fine cracks which could not be compensated by the TSUKA-ITO. As I read the TSUKA was often replaced in SAMURAI times to prevent any risk of a loose blade, and if you remember that special handles (without TSUKA-ITO) were newly made for a blade when testing it (be that TAMESHIGIRI or execution), one might understand the importance of a perfect fit of TSUKA and NAKAGO.

I think that the second MEKUGI-ANA was an option to secure a blade the TSUKA of which could not be replaced at any time in use, as was the case in a war. A DAIMYO might have his KATANA replaced at any time, a lower ranking SAMURAI or an ASHIGARU probably not.....

[Marius]

Jussi,

 

Sorry to hijack the thread, but I just love that tachi. Please note that the nakago had originally much stronger curvature. BTW, if you want to see some real o-dachi, look at the treasures of Oyamazumi.

[george trotter]

Hi Guido, I am afraid you are mistaken...I actually did refer to a source (you must have missed it?).  Here is the basic link:

ohmura-study.net/952.html  

Please read his introductory paragraph on this link. Elsewhere he gives a presentation of the original documents and subsequent newspaper announcements describing the changes prescribed to transition from Type 98 to Type 3...all of these were my sources. This link describes the actual changes and Ohmura states that the reason for them was that "by the teachings of the battle, the brittleness of the hilt, the peg, and the tsuka-ito of the Type 94 and 98 was a problem". From this problem the need to strengthen the tsuka/nakago was seen. You are correct though...these do not refer to the quantity of fighting in which swords were used, just that the changes will make the swords more efficient in use.

You say the changes were only intended to reassure those who thought that swords were "actually used" in battle...well... Ohmura's information does not say anything about these military delusions you refer to...that is why I also did not mention such a possibility  .

Ohmura's site also does not mention that (as you say) the Type 3 came about due to "crappy assembly and neglect [which] made the backup holes necessary" so once again I did not mention such a possibility.

As you can see I only referred to sources that actually stated reasons and those reasons are what I posted here...rather than speculation and opinion as fact.

 

I agree with you of course that the sword fighting of the sengoku jidai did not produce ashi-garu swords with longer nakago and two mekugi ana (as far as I know)...although I think it did produce the stronger katate-maki and the even stronger gangi-maki, Why a longer nakago and an extra ana may not have been necessary has been addressed in part by the learned sword users here...I cannot comment on their comments as I am not a sword user, but I can make a comment on a sengoku jidai sword I saw (Kane ...something, dated in the 1520s if I remember correctly) that was mounted as a Type 98 gunto for WWII...its tsuka was broken clean off at the end of the short nakago (one ana)...as this failure occurred in battle against the Australians in New Guinea I can only say that this problem did occur in battle as described by the documents in Ohmura's site...therefore it is reasonable to say that a proportion of the ashi-garu issue swords of the sengoku jidai would also have broken, and for the same reason...stress in battle.

In addition I have seen a number of veteran bringback Type 98 mounted Showa period shingunto and pre-Meiji blades with broken tsukas...these had the longer nakago (1 ana)...so even though the nakago was longer, the tsuka still broke off. I must add that I have never seen a Type 3 with a broken off tsuka.

Soooo, perhaps you can now accept that the Type 3 with longer nakago, 2 ana and lacquered katate-maki/gangi-maki actually did come about for the battle-use connected reasons as stated on Ohmura's site.

If you still disagree, could you please say why...and quote your sources?

Hope this helps...

[Davis]

Hi Guido

 

If there was a scale for weapons used in WW2 that rated each type for its efficiency and killing potential, the atomic bomb would probably score highest and at the other end of that scale the humble sidearm, pistol etc., would score lowest.  Edged weapons would hardly register.  Most references state the Japanese sword used in WW2 was purely ceremonial.

 

My late father in law was a Burma veteran, one of my uncles was with the Green Howards.  They both introduced me to some of their old comrades. Many times I have been given first hand accounts of the Japanese sword used against them in battle. Their use made very little difference to the outcome of battles and they were not effective as the wielder of such was the most likely to get shot first.  However, many were used in close combat.

 

" In The Trade of War" Captain James R. Allan of the Green Howards, on page 172, gives an account of how he was attacked by a Japanese Officer, who had jumped from a tree onto his back.  A fight to the death ensued. As he was being hacked with the samurai sword he managed to pull out his kukri and sever his opponents neck.  Captain Allan survived but spent six months in hospital encased in plaster.  He kept the sword and it's now in the care of a fellow collector.

 

A regimental museum has a sword on display that was used in a deadly attack on a British tank.  The experiences of George MacDonald Fraser and Freddie Spencer Chapman are also well worth a read.

 

Mick

[Henry Wilson]

" In The Trade of War" Captain James R. Allan of the Green Howards, on page 172, gives an account of how he was attacked by a Japanese Officer, who had jumped from a tree onto his back. A fight to the death ensued.

 

I have the greatest respect for all those men and women who fought in any war. However the above quote made me chuckle as I imagined how on earth someone could jump from a tree with a sword on the offensive. Call me sick if you like but it reminds me of Pink Panther movies and Kato and Clouseau fighting:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=omek-g6_LAQ

 

What has slap-stick comedy and inaccurate racial stero-types have to do with anything? I wonder how much of these accounts can be taken as reliable. I myself am known to sex up a good yarn every now and then, especially in the nearest boozer.

 

No offence or disrespect intended and the greatest respect to those veterans but I think we need to take certain "orientalisms" with a pinch of salt.

[Guido]

A regimental museum has a sword on display that was used in a deadly attack on a British tank.

Does it have a hikae- mekugi-ana?

[Stephen]

 the grain of salt for them ol vet stories. 

[raaay]

I would Just like to share one little story about a Japanese swords used in ww2.

 

I was once at the Nottingham Arms fair with a dealer friend of mine many years ago, I was sitting at his table when a old gentleman approached the table with a sword rapped in a black bin bag and asked if my friend would be interested in buying the sword which turned out to be a standard Shin-Gunto mounted sword.

 

My friend looked at the sword and said yes he would like to purchase the sword, they agreed a price for the sword the transaction was completed, and then the old chap said would you like me to tell you how I got the sword in Singapore.

 

The old gentleman said that the Japanese officer nearly killed me you know, my friend looked at me and said here we go, we are going to get another war time story, indicating it would be made up story ! that's when the old chap said let me show you what he done to me before I managed to get a shot off.

 

He opened up his overcoat undid his shirt and showed us his scar, which went from his left shoulder across and down his chest and finished down at his right hip, it was a that point I picked my chin up of the floor and said to the old chap you are a very luck man to survey that encounter with a Japanese sword and my friend apologised to him after that and basically sat back in his chair in a stunned silence.

 

True story.

[Stephen]

RayRay

 

Great tale, always good to have validity to those stories. 

[george trotter]

While we wait for evidence that disproves that "the teachings of battle" (i.e. combat) was the reason the tsuka of Type 94/98 gunto was changed to Type 3, it might be interesting to examine the statement that "Our ancestors didn't know what they were doing anyhow for a thousand years, using only one [ana]".

Well let's look at that thousand years:

(1.) For the first 550 years there were pretty regular (though not constant) wars. These were regular trained armies. Swords were necessary tools of war.

(2.) From 1460-1603 there was the Sengoku jidai.These were conscript ashigaru armies led by professional samurai. Ashigaru swords were mass produced, but still tools of war.

(3.) After 1615 there was virtually no use of swords for battle combat. Swords became adornments and symbols of social rank. Swords only began to be used again as tools of war in the late 19th century through to 1945.

 

So let's see what sources show:

(1:1.)  Before 1460: While the vast majority of swords are not ubu nakago, a quick look through Fujishiro Koto hen shows that of the ubu nakago examples surviving, there are a fair number with a hikae/shinobi ana, eg. ARITSUNA 1156 p. 412; TAMESHIGE 1219 p.199; MORIMITSU 1394 p.536...etc. These are quality swords made for trained swordsmen.

 

(2.1) From 1460 through sengoku jidai: We still see these swords, eg.  MITSUTADA 1467 p.482; KANEMOTO 1528 p.126; TSUGUHIRO 1532 p.209; ARI?MITSU 1532 p.415; TSUNEIYE 1592 p.209 etc.. These are quality swords made for trained swordsmen to use in combat, not ashigaru swords.

 

(3.1.) After 1615 swords were not used for combat (other than a couple of rebellions) until Meiji, but hikae/shinobi ana are still seen (see Shinto hen pp. 23, 63, 68, 81, 95, 104, 291, 312, 356, 371, 396-7). These swords are virtually all privately purchased by samurai. Some of these samurai obviously ordered a hikae/shinobi ana.

 

On evidence from Fujishiro, actual oshigata show that the extra ana has always been present throughout the last 1000 years.

While we don't know the reason for these extra ana, evidence from Ohmura shows that  "the lessons of battle" was the  reason for its use in WWII.

 

Hope this is helpful to the discussion,

[Davis]

The Shinoda Ujifusa sword I referred to before was catalogued by Bonhams as shinshinto.  It had a very short heavy blade with a very long nakago. Although it had shinobi-ana it wasn't utilized.  It was in civilian mounts with a leather combat cover, there was no provision for a sarute.  The mei read something like  "A Takayama sword forged by Shinoda Ujifusa".  It also had a dedication to Jimmu.  I have seen several of these Takayama swords with shinobi-ana that weren't utilized and had no apparent purpose.

 

Guido

I don't know the answer to your question.  Coming to this board after 50 years of collecting Japanese swords has made me realise that I know very little about them.  What I do have though is a passion for history.  The "tank incident" involved the loss of British lives and that of the Japanese Officer. Given time I will obtain the full story together with the names of the men involved.  They deserve to be remembered.

Mick

[pcfarrar]

Aoi Art listed a sword revelant to this discussion today:

 

http://www.aoijapan.com/katana-oumi-kami-fujiwara-tsunehira-84-7-cm

[Geraint]

Mick.

 

You probably already have this information but the incident features in Fuller and Gregory.  The sword and the caption are in the 5th Royal Enniskilling Dragoon Guards museum and although the name of the Japanese officer is not given the text says, "..a Japanese officer armed only with this sword climbed into a tank and stabbed both Captain Carnaby and his gunner before being shot by Lance Corporal Jenkins, MM, in hand to hand combat in this tank."  (MM = Military Medal, a gallantry award.)

 

All the best.