wakizashi tsuka length

[Yves]

Hi, is there a way to determine the length of the tsuka of a wakizashi. For a katana it is measured basically on the length of your forearm, but how is the length for a wakizashi tsuka determined? Do not seem to find that anywhere. 

[GeorgeLuucas]

Good questions that I’ve wondered also
 

I’ve assumed it’s a combination of things. Maybe the overall length, and an aesthetic choice. Looking forward to what others have to say 

 

Here are my two Wakizashi with pretty different profiles; and tsuka to nakago lengths

 

Cheers,

-Sam

 

 

[Yves]

I was thinking that if the tsuka would be proportional to the blade length and my katana has a 9 sun tsuka (75 cm ) that a wakizashi  (50 cm) would be 6 sun (+- 18 cm)

[2devnul]

Hi,

 

IMHO this is the reasoning behind determining Tsuka length (for both, Wakizashi and Katana):

1. Overall blade length.

2. Nakago length.

3. Esthetics. 

4. Personal preferences of 'wielder'. 

 

I read somewhere that there were decrees made by Tokugawa Shogunate about Tsuka-ito and Saya color. But I don't think the size/length of Tsuka itself was specified. Of course I can be totally wrong with my assumptions. 

 

[1kinko]

Not surprisingly, tsuka length has a lot to do with hand size. From The Art of Tsukamaki by Thomas Buck, 2 hand widths plus 2 fingers for katana, 1.5 habd widths for for wakizashi, and 1 hand width for tanto.

[Jon]

Did the owner of the sword have big hands or little hands, what did he prefer..remember before anything else a Nihonto was a weapon of war, with life and death outcomes…any small margins like your preferred handle length would be important to the warrior…as with blade lengths… decrees may or may not have happened, but if a warrior was short and he needed a shorter katana   He would have a shorter katana…if he was tall and could manage the length he would take the longer sword. 

[ROKUJURO]

On 9/17/2023 at 8:47 PM, Yves said:

...... my katana has a 9 sun tsuka (75 cm )....

Really? I think it is more like 27, 27 cm.

[OceanoNox]

On 9/21/2023 at 8:06 AM, 1kinko said:

Not surprisingly, tsuka length has a lot to do with hand size. From The Art of Tsukamaki by Thomas Buck, 2 hand widths plus 2 fingers for katana, 1.5 habd widths for for wakizashi, and 1 hand width for tanto.

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).

[2devnul]

9 hours ago, Jon said:

Did the owner of the sword have big hands or little hands, what did he prefer..remember before anything else a Nihonto was a weapon of war, with life and death outcomes…any small margins like your preferred handle length would be important to the warrior…as with blade lengths… decrees may or may not have happened, but if a warrior was short and he needed a shorter katana   He would have a shorter katana…if he was tall and could manage the length he would take the longer sword. 

 

I would be careful about statements like "weapon of war" or "warriors". Please keep in mind that neither Katana nor Wakizashi were primary weapons on battlefields. Also, what about EDO period? Self-defense weapon, or last resort weapon (battlefield) is more adequate. 

Another thing is that not every samurai was a warrior. I would rather say that during Edo period even bigger part of samurais weren't battle-hardened warriors or skilled fencers. We can fairly assume that there were samurai who carried Daisho due to the status, but their fencing skills were poor or even none. Not to mention rich merchants, where in my opinion their sword designs were definitely to boast and not related to fighting skills. 

[Yves]

17 hours ago, ROKUJURO said:

Really? I think it is more like 27, 27 cm.

75 cm is the nagasa of the blade...

[Jon]

On 9/22/2023 at 7:31 AM, 2devnul said:

would be careful about statements like "weapon of war" or "warriors

Hi Adam, I think it is fair to describe any Japanese sword created up until the end of the EDO period as a weapon of war…yes they were not the major battlefield weapon, as with armies in almost all ages the true battle winning weapons were polearms/spears and projectile weapons..but and this is very important a sword was the side arm of choice for most warriors thought history, yes you get some aberrations but the personal weapon of last resort was almost always a sword…so effectively your sword was the automatic pistol equivalent of a different age..so although it was not generally a battle winning weapon ( although the Roman legions show how it could be) it was a weapon of war (a L131A1 general service pistol, is not a battle winning weapon but as a side arm it’s still a weapon of war).

 

In regards to samurai of the EDO period not being warriors, they were a warrior class who ruled in a feudal system, effectively all feudal systems are ruled by a warrior class..so although they may not have been very practiced at some points in the EDO period, and infact had the warrior bit purposefully suppressed by the shogunate as a method of control, they were still of the warrior class and would be expected to do everything expected of a feudal warrior, that is bear arms and protect his land.and person…linked in with the specific honour code of that groups of feudal warriors, be they European, Japanese they all followed a pretty similar paradigm of violence and personal ability to do violence….remember when you look at the paintings of an Elizabethan  lord in all their lace..each and everyone was a born and raised to kill and die in a way we cannot really comprehend in the modern world…just look at the writings of Shakespeare….everywhere you look its violence ( violence is a natural part of all feudal systems)..as one paper I read put it “They are supposed to be strong defenders of their family and their honor and their name”…even in the 18/19century middle England you can still see the roots of the warrior ruling class…small swords were still part of a gentleman’s outfit and he would be expected to at least be schooled in its use, the last duel was fought in England in 1852….The reality is the feudal culture in England ended in 1660 but the ruling classes still followed the rules of personal honour and weapon carrying until 1852….Japan did not end feudalism until 1871 and the triple pillars of the feudal state were in place:  1) those who fought ( the ruling classes), 2) those who prayed ( creating social cohesion) and 3) those who worked ( peasants ), this was fundamentally important and a  basic tenant of feudalism is that those who rule must be able to fight. 
 

This is a quote from the ever interesting Cambridge world history of violence..

 

“Moreover, the extended period of peace resulted in two currents of tension related to samurai identity: a dynamic tension between the civil arts, or the arts of peace (bun) and the military arts (bu); and a tension that arose from the lack of opportunity for samurai to demonstrate their martial skills and valour on the battlefield, resulting in a hypersensitivity in defending their honour. This chapter explores how a culture of honour violence developed among male samurai during the centuries of the Tokugawa peace”

 

Finally we have the concept of the peaceful EDO period…it was very peaceful but only peaceful when compared the nightmare of the warring state during the 15/16century, the EDO period was not peaceful in the way we could consider peaceful between 1600 and 1872 there were still 30+ battles and campaigns on Japanese soil. Post 1750 there was a very sudden breakdown in social cohesion and a very significant uptick in violent conflict across Japanese society…

[Bazza]

Jon, as for the last paragraph are you able please to give some references, particularly regarding "Post 1750 there was a very sudden breakdown in social cohesion and a very significant uptick in violent conflict across Japanese society… ".  I recall a book from my undergrad days titled (I think) "Samurai Poverty of the Bakumatsu period" or some such title.  Poverty in a ruling class seems a given for an "uptick in violent conflict across Japanese society".  A B&W film I recall seeing years ago showed a lot of violence.  A pistol in the film indicated it was probably set in the Bakumatsu period.

 

BaZZa.

[Baba Yaga]

18 hours ago, Jon said:

Hi Adam, I think it is fair to describe any Japanese sword created up until the end of the EDO period as a weapon of war…yes they were not the major battlefield weapon, as with armies in almost all ages the true battle winning weapons were polearms/spears and projectile weapons..but and this is very important a sword was the side arm of choice for most warriors thought history, yes you get some aberrations but the personal weapon of last resort was almost always a sword…so effectively your sword was the automatic pistol equivalent of a different age..so although it was not generally a battle winning weapon ( although the Roman legions show how it could be) it was a weapon of war (a L131A1 general service pistol, is not a battle winning weapon but as a side arm it’s still a weapon of war).

 

 

Finally we have the concept of the peaceful EDO period…it was very peaceful but only peaceful when compared the nightmare of the warring state during the 15/16century, the EDO period was not peaceful in the way we could consider peaceful between 1600 and 1872 there were still 30+ battles and campaigns on Japanese soil. Post 1750 there was a very sudden breakdown in social cohesion and a very significant uptick in violent conflict across Japanese society…

 

Exactly! If not for participating in a described war. When need be the Samurai were a violent bunch, but favored the art of peace.  

[Jon]

17 hours ago, Bazza said:

for the last paragraph are you able please to give some references, particularly regarding "Post 1750 there was a very sudden breakdown in social cohesion and a very significant uptick in violent conflict across Japanese society

Hi Bazza

 

a couple of reads one light discussion piece, from a top academic and one journal paper.

 

This is a transcript of an interview with SUDA Tsutomu, professor, Meiji university ( He studies violent trends in society and specifically how modern trends can be seen to be reflected in history) “Advice from History for Today’s Society of Increasing Violence -Trends in Society from the Edo Period to the Closing Days of the Tokugawa Shogunate and the Role of Yoshida Shoin-“ 2015( Meiji.net). He links in the violence upheaval from the last 100 years of the shogunate as it failed to the imperial violence of the Meiji and post Meiji period ( age of Japanese military expansionism’) 

 

This is a really nice paper on terrorism in 19c Japan…:Warriors of High Aspirations: The Origins of Military Insubordination, 1858–1868,Danny Orbach Feb 2017, but you will need a university account to access.

 

[Jon]

On 9/22/2023 at 7:31 AM, 2devnul said:

sword designs were definitely to boast and not related to fighting skills.

 I was thinking about this a bit more and I think a really good indicator of where EDO period samurai were with this can be seen in the Ryu no Maki ( dragon scrolls). These give you a great understanding that the EDO samurai’’s world view was still essentially that of the warrior

 

“the warriors path is the origin of power and majesty. Therefore the emperor has his jeweled sword and his court flourishes. The son of heaven keeps his sword with him always: when he goes forth he carriers it before him, when he stops he lays it in a safe place. Even when he sleeps he does not part from it.The moral power of the jeweled sword flows outward and the people are liberated.How much more so should the warrior keep his sword by him night and day revering it like a god and guarding it as he would guard his own body and mind”

 

Then it goes a bit more into the viscera of what a warrior is:

 

“The tools of the warrior’s art are claws and teeth.When one looks into the Heart of things, one sees that those with teach bite, those with claws grab and those with stingers sting.This is not taught;it is the law of nature. What then do they who travel the path of man use? Teeth and claws-the sword. men wear swords. Although they proclaim to be distinct from using them,there are none who are completely outside the need for military readiness. Those who fail to learn this are ignorant of combat.”

 

essentially the EDO samurai’s primary function was still that of warrior/ruler and the wearing of swords was the essentially to show this…and with that required the willingness and ability to use them…even if they also had the need to be administrators and the time to be scholars. Essentially you can never remove the warrior element from the samurai class.