Daisho questions

[kmark]

From what I've read, the practice of wearing a long sword together with a shorter blade was not restricted to the beginning of the Momoyama period, but rather back when tachi were still in use..and tanto were worn beside the long blade. At some point in the Muromachi period (?), someone wore an uchigatana and wakizashi together, which became closer to our modern definition of a daisho. Somehow, this practice caught on and became widespread.

 

My question is...was there a compelling reason to wear a longer wakizashi together with the katana? I mean, the tanto served well enough with the tachi, so what made them switch to a short sword 12" - 22" in nagasa? I guess the point is, at what period in time did the daisho become male jewelry and a symbol of samurai status, and less of a practical combination of weapons? I've also read that some samurai during late Edo/Bakumatsu started wearing toppei-koshirae, sometimes even omitting the daito for a shorter wakizashi to go with the trousers they were wearing...

[estcrh]

My question is...was there a compelling reason to wear a longer wakizashi together with the katana? I mean, the tanto served well enough with the tachi, so what made them switch to a short sword 12" - 22" in nagasa?

Kanzan Satō notes that there did not seem to be any particular need for the wakizashi and suggests that the wakizashi may have eventually become more popular than the tanto due to the wakizashi being more suited for indoor fighting. He mentions the custom of leaving the katana at the door of a castle or palace when entering while continuing to wear the wakizashi inside.

 

The Japanese sword, Kanzan Satō, Kodansha International, 1983 P.68

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=vFS2iT ... sho&f=true

[IanB]

K. Mark, The whole wakizashi business has fascinated me for a while. As you say, the original wear for the military was the tachi / tanto combination, the latter being called katana in the Heian (See Sasama; Nihon Katchu Bugu Jiten, p. 34). Moving forward in time we have the portrait of Honda Tadakatsu wearing his black armour with the antler helmet (Tachisaka Shrine) which shows he has added an uchigatana, worn rather surprisingly edge down. It is impossible to say how long his uchigatana was but it is considerably shorter than the tachi. Moving even further forward we have numerous photographs of samurai, not invariably but usually, wearing some form of tanto with their katanas. Photos of them wearing a katana / wakizashi combination are surprisingly scarce, unless it is a picture of some high ranking person who is wearing a daisho. There were Tokugawa laws passed limiting the length of wakizashi and we know that various classes of the non-military were only permitted to wear a short sword, so, the question arises, how many of the many thousands of wakizashi we encounter were actually worn by samurai?

Ian Bottomley

[sanjuro]

Ian.

 

An impression I get from a number of sources, but primarily from the Honcho Gunkiko was that there were also Jin To (without kurikata) in the early Kamakura period that were worn either by way of a koshiate tachi style or as a camp sword when on campaign but not in the field, worn thrust through the obi, either edge up or edge down according to taste. There seems not to have been a set of hard and fast rules concerning the wearing of swords in the early days. The uchigatana I think was an outgrowth of the camp sword, as its name implies, used as a strike sword. Since samurai in the field wore several edged weapons and there was no real official dictate as to which sword was worn which way on which occasion, it was pretty much up to the individual warrior what he carried into battle, and the way in which he wore the weapon.

I agree that the wakizashi seems to have no precedent unless one takes into consideration that as the daisho became popular, then so did the practice of wearing either a wakizashi or a tanto when at home. Again a matter of choice, but before the official edicts concerning the pair of swords. Thus the tanto remained paired with the tachi on the battlefield. The katana which was an outgrowth of the uchigatana became paired with the wakizashi when in civilian dress. This of course does nothing to justify the existence of the wakizashi except as an affectation of the merchant class, which is precisely what happened in the Edo period.

Were many wakizashi worn by real samurai???? probably not after the mid to late Momoyama period, since the samurai had little need of a mid length blade other than as a badge of rank, and then only if ones station was one of a public official. Most samurai were not of such a rank, and the wakizashi would not have been required.

 

Just my take on the question.

[estcrh]

What about the edict in 1629 requiring the wearing of a daishō when on official duty. What exactly defined an official duty, almost all daisho I have seen include a wakizashi, and when I look at period prints and photos, I often see what appears to be wakizashi.

[sanjuro]

Hi Eric.

 

My observations were of the periods prior to the Edo period, by which time as you say, there were edicts concerning the wearing of daisho. Those photos were taken much later and of course the samurai or models would have been wearing the correct dress according to the edicts of 1629. 'Official duty' implies that the person would be an official of some kind or at least a middle to high ranking samurai. The lower ranks who were far more numerous had no obligation to wear the daisho, in fact many were Ronin and only wore the katana.

[cabowen]

Wakizashi had a definite purpose in the daisho-as someone has already mentioned, they were what protected a samurai indoors where the katana was either checked at the door or less effective in a confined space....

[estcrh]

Hi Eric.

 

My observations were of the periods prior to the Edo period, by which time as you say, there were edicts concerning the wearing of daisho. Those photos were taken much later and of course the samurai or models would have been wearing the correct dress according to the edicts of 1629. 'Official duty' implies that the person would be an official of some kind or at least a middle to high ranking samurai. The lower ranks who were far more numerous had no obligation to wear the daisho, in fact many were Ronin and only wore the katana.

keith, I thought you might have meant pre-Edo period......before the edict there did not seem to be any real set rules on length etc, but I have read that tanto were the preferred back up weapon while wearing armour, dont know how that hold up in reality though. In the Edo period it seems that if someone was a retainer that they were basically on duty every were but at home, and would not even the lowest ranking bureaucrat (and there were a lot of those!) be considered to be an official of some kind? You would think there would be a little more accurate info on the subject.

[sanjuro]

Eric.

 

I can understand the tanto and tachi pairing on the battlefield. Engagement was either on horseback (tachi) on foot with a sword in hand (tachi again) and at a combative distance equal to a step and a half (standard engagement distance for a sword wielding opponent). Closer than that would be grappling (very common on a battlefield), and this would require a tanto (hacking stabbing whilst holding and wrestling with an opponent.) Pretty standard bushi training in fact.

And yes the wakizashi is a very grey area when just about everyman and his dog during the Edo period carried one, and there is only sketchy and sometimes conflicting information available. In reality it was the katana alone that distinguished the samurai, since the heimin and all other classes were forbidden to wear it. The daisho was an official and formal dress code for the samurai for sure, but when you consider that more than half of the men entitled to be called samurai were earning a living as farmers, minor craftsmen or at worst common bandits , it cuts down the number of real samurai wakizashi in use, and leaves the majority of wakizashi in the hands of merchants etc. As for the wakizashi being for use in confined spaces I'll reserve my opinion pending the submission of proof that a wakizashi is actually efficient under those circumstances. There are techniques for use of a wakizashi taught by the martial ryu. However, a wakizashi is primarily a defensive/response weapon unless deployed against an unarmed opponent (make that victim). The wakizashi however did serve the samurai in place of the katana he was required to surrender at the door, as a fall back weapon when the katana was on a rack inside the door two floors down.

By no means least of all, I guess a man who is used to wearing a sword would feel somewhat naked if there wasnt a serviceable blade somewhere on his person. :D

[estcrh]

, but when you consider that more than half of the men entitled to be called samurai were earning a living as bandits or minor craftsmen, it cuts down the number of real samurai wakizashi in use, and leaves the majority of wakizashi in the hands of merchants etc.

Considering the population of Japan during the Edo period that would still leave hundreds of thousands of samurai as possible wakizashi owners and or wearers. Here is something to ponder>> http://www.una.edu/faculty/takeuchi/DrT ... _sword.htm

 

 

October 26, 2003

 

I. Popular Misconception About Chonin and the Swords in Feudal Japan.

 

Many Japanese swords enthusiasts in Japan and in the U.S. already know that the only samurai class was given the privilege of wearing/carrying a pair of dai-sho (i.e., katana and wakizashi) by the Shogunate laws in feudal Japan. However, when it comes to what kinds of swords that chonin (i.e., commoner) class was allowed to wear/carry, there still is a misconception widely shared. The most popular thus well accepted misconception of the kind is that "chonin class was not allowed to carry any swords at all." This misconception is very plausible because in popular Kurosawa movies and TV jidai-geki dramas, one does not see any chonin or peasants wearing a sword of any kind. What is very misleading is that the stereotypical portrayals of the non-samurai class citizens of feudal Japan in Edo period are in fact rather accurate. That is, historically non-samurai class citizens of feudal Japan in Edo period did not actually wear/carry any swords in their everyday life - regardless of what the laws, which many of them could not read, said.

 

Then why the notion that "chonin class was not allowed to carry any swords at all" is still a misconception when in fact that virtually no chonin class citizens wore/carried any swords in Edo period? To understand this, one must examine the sword control laws of feudal Japan for civilian class and actual cultural practice of the civilian class in the past.

 

II. The Sword Regulations of Feudal Japan.

 

Feudal Japanese government issued several orders to regulate the types of swords that are allowed to be carried by different classes of people. One thing consistent among all these orders was the fact that chonin (i.e., commoners) were prohibited from wearing long swords (i.e., katana) unless specifically given permission to do so by the government, while there was no regulation prohibiting the commoners from carrying short swords such as tanto.

 

However, until many years after the end of the Japanese Civil War (1600) those old laws regarding swords were not always followed by the people. This was partially because many of those older laws had different definitions of katana, wakizashi and tanto in terms of their lengths. As the result, in the beginning of the Edo period (early 1600s), there were still some chonin class commoners and many Yakuza gangs who openly carried long wakizashi that were virtually equivalent to prohibited katana (Iiyama, 1995; Kukubo, 1993).

 

In the mid 1600s when the Tokugawa Shogunate restored peace and order in society, the government also issued different orders to prohibit chonin from carrying long swords. One of such orders was "Dai-sho katana no Sumpou oyobi touhats futsumou no Sei" [The Order Regarding Dai-sho Paired Swords and Hair Style] issued in July, Shoho 2 (a.d.1645). This law also specified the maximum blade length of katana to be 2 shaku 8 sun or 9 sun (= 84.84cm - 87.87cm) and wakizashi to be 1 shaku 8 sun or 9 sun (= 54.54cm - 57.57cm) (Kokubo,1993; Ogasawara,1994b).

 

Then in March, Kanbun 8 (1668), the Tokugawa Shogunate once again issued "Muto Rei," [No Sword Order], an executive order to firmly prohibit chonin class from carrying any swords longer than "ko-wakizashi" (i.e., small wakizashi) unless specifically permitted by the government (Iiyama,1995). According "Mutou Rei," "ko-wakizashi" is a sword whose blade length is shorter than 1 shaku 5 sun (i.e., 45.54cm). However, after seven decades had passed since the Japanese Civil War and when the social structures of the Tokugawa Shogunate was stabilized in the peaceful capital city of Edo, the Shogunate amended the old executive order "Muto Rei" to add some exceptions to the prohibition. These exceptions included the permission for chonin to carry regular length wakizashi (but not katana) when they are traveling or when there is a fire (Iiyama, 1995).

 

III. Actual Cultural Practice of the Chonin Class in Edo Period.

 

As seen in above, historically the feudal government of Japan tried to control its civilian class subjects by prohibiting them from wearing/carrying long swords (e.g., katana). In fact, due to the continuous legal and political pressure to prohibit chonin from arming themselves, it has since become the shared cultural norm among law abiding chonin class in Edo period not to carry any swords other than some exceptional occasions, despite the fact that the laws did not specifically prohibit them from carrying relatively short "ko-wakizashi." In this sense, the most popular misconception about chonin and swords in feudal Japan is virtually supported in terms of the actual cultural practice among the civilian class, even though it is not supported in terms of the judicial history of feudal Japan.

 

While most law abiding chonin seemed to have stopped carrying virtually any swords casually (whether legally prohibited or not), carrying "ko-wakizashi" (that were still legal) when they were traveling was not an uncommon practice. In fact, as seen in some of the famous wood block prints or read old story books in the late Edo period (such as Toukaido chu Hizakurige), there are many descriptions of chonin carrying legal length "ko-wakizashi" during their travel (Iiyama, 1995). Therefore, Suke-san and Kaku-san characters in popular Mito Komon TV series carrying wakizashi in their chonin disguise is not historically inaccurate.

 

IV. Wealthy Chonin and Famous Osaka Shinto Era Wakizashi.

 

In the mid Edo period when wealthy merchants in the city of Osaka started gaining power, some of them ordered legal length wakizashi from famous Osaka Shinto era smiths for their personal use. Some wonder if the existence of large number of antique wakizashi made by some of those Osaka Shinto era smiths is an indication that those merchants either collected or regularly wore those wakizashi. However, Nihon-to experts in Japan tend to argue that such a practice among wealthy merchants was not historically substantiated (see Ogasawara, 1994a).

 

References:

 

Iiyama, Yoshiaki. (1995). "Edo jidai no tousou to fuzoku." ["The customs and sword furnishings in the Edo period."] In Shibata, Mitsuo. Shibata Mitsuo no Touken Handbook. [The Handbook of Japanese Swords by Mitsuo Shibata.] Pp. 120-125. Tokyo, Japan: Kogei Shuppan. ISBN4-7694-0094-2.

 

Kokubo, Kenichi. (1993). Zukan Tousou no Subete. [The Complete Book of the Japanese Sword Furnishings, Illustrated.] Tokyo, Japan: Kogei Shuppan. ISBN4-7694-0094-2.

 

Ogasawara, Nobuo. (1994a). Nihon-to no Kanshou Kiso Chishiki. [The Fundamental Knowledge of Japanese Sword Appreciation.] Tokyo, Japan: Shibun Do. ISBN4-7694-0053-5.

 

Ogasawara, Nobuo. (1994b). Nippon no Bijutsu 1, No. 332: Nihon-to no Koshirae. [The Art of Japan 1, No. 332: The Koshirae of Japanese Swords.] Tokyo, Japan: Shibun Do.

 

**********

* Edited and reprinted from the author's original posts on old Bugei Sword Forums.

Copyright � by S. Alexander Takeuchi, Ph.D.

[sanjuro]

Hard to pin down isnt it? With the Edo period, we are talking of a period in history some two hundred and fifty years in duration at which time many social changes were taking place. It is the great period of upheaval and social reform preceding post feudal Japan.

I am familiar with Prof Takeuchi's essays on the subject and find them most informative. Whilst I can only address the periods prior to the Edo period with any confidence, the importance of the Edo period is not lost on me due to its many contradictions and grey areas. The wakizashi question remains a grey area, and I guess this is what I am really getting at.

[Jacques D.]

Hi,

 

Seek out Myöji Taitö 苗字帯刀 (Maybe our Japanese members can help you).

[cabowen]

 

but when you consider that more than half of the men entitled to be called samurai were earning a living as farmers, minor craftsmen or at worst common bandits , it cuts down the number of real samurai wakizashi in use, and leaves the majority of wakizashi in the hands of merchants etc.

 

Can you cite any sources for those numbers? I find those figures very surprising....

[Clive Sinclaire]

Gentlemen

Another point probably worthy of consideration is the shorter katana (mostly from Bizen swordsmiths such as Sukesada, Tadamitsu I believe) that were present in Sue-koto times. It was said that this was to facilitate the techniques of fighting with 2 swords, ie nito made famous by Musashi, and the shorter needed to be longer than a tanto, and so was a wakizashi. This has some credibility as it was around this time that wakizashi begin to be seen.

Clive Sinclaire

[Toryu2020]

I think of it like this;

 

When on horseback you need a sword long enough to reach a man on the ground, or a man on another horse 5 or 6 feet away. The sword cannot interfere with the action of your horse or the use of your bow. Therefore we see the unique curve of the tachi slung from the side.

 

If you are unseated you need a dagger to attack the other rider inside his armour, not the armour itself.

 

Once everyone starts running about on foot several things happen. The tachi is too long to draw quickly and you develop serious bruises with it slapping your legs as you run. So the long sword is shortened and thrust thru the belt, but wait you already have a tanto there. If you are on foot you are likely carrying a spear or halberd or a bow. If all you have as a side arm is a tanto you might feel a little naked, so the tanto grows more robust even as the sword is shrinking. If you are well equipped enough to carry two sidearms and you are entering battles with a thousand or more on a side would you carry a sword and a dagger or two swords of near equal length? As armies are increasingly made up of units, with standard kit and armour, more and more warriors are wearing the daisho as part of their basic outfit.

 

With the growth of the great Daimyo and castle culture comes the need to distinguish the classes. Less fighting and more standing around on guard duty and other service in the castle means there is need for indoor and outdoor weapons/tactics (as has been noted). There is also now more opportunity for training in swordwork and for practice matches and duelling. It is at this time we see the development of the Kenjutsu Ryuha and Iai. By the time of the first Tokugawa Shogun the two swords and kamishimo were standard wear required for service in the castle, hence "Banzashi" or duty-wear.

 

Look at the shapes of the wakizashi pre-1600 and I think you will see the answer is right in front of your eyes; these were made for fighting men (warrior, farmer or bandit) true we may not have written records showing that they HAD to wear two swords but as noted above, contemporary depictions of warfare show many men wore two swords...

 

-t

[sanjuro]

Please correct me if my thinking is amiss, but the wakizashi came into common use by the bushi during the Momoyama period did it not? The wakizashi of that period are of various lengths shorter than the katana or uchigatana, and were also generally speaking a more businesslike sword than the Edo period equivalent (personal observation). It strikes me that during a period of protracted and widespread warfare that a samurai would want to be armed constantly, even though he may not be constantly on campaign.

Given the nature of Japanese houses and the presence of screens etc that were relatively fragile, you just cant go swanning around indoors with a katana stuck in your belt without damaging your surroundings (and possibly your katana saya). The wakizashi then serves the purpose of a more maneagable length weapon in confined spaces as has been mentioned, and rendered the wearer ready to face any unforseen threat. The wakizashi, or rather a sword of wakizashi proportions, was merely a convenient weapon for this purpose, which may be its primary reason for being. Wakizashi and O wakizashi were also worn by lower ranked bushi such as spearmen instead of a katana, again because they were less cumbersome than a sheathed full length sword when deploying the primary weapon which was in this case, the spear.

It was not until the latter part of the momoyama period at the earliest and more noticeably the Edo period, that the daisho pair became the accepted array of armament for the samurai, and it appears to me that this merely grew out of the practice of wearing a wakizashi at home in less peaceful times. The Daisho then arose from the common practice of owning both a long and a shorter sword rather than being created specifically as a matched pair of swords. Later of course this was modified so that the pair were matched and worn together as a mark of rank.

We have also ignored the fact that there are older daisho that consist of a katana and a tanto. :D

[Toryu2020]

Keith -

It seems we are pretty much in agreement; The wakizashi was a battlefield development of the Muromachi period worn as a single side-arm or as part of a pair. During this time the two would not have been a matched pair its true and as you say in the Momoyama period is when we see the appearance of the daisho koshirae. For a member of the samurai class however any two blades could be his dai-sho, they did not have to have matching fittings or be made by the same smith. This idea only came about in the Momoyama and among those with the money to outfit a pair of swords, becoming widespread under the Tokugawa.

 

The wakizashi of the Muromachi is a different animal from the Edo period shinogi-zukuri blade and the use of the two blades differed. Houses were much different in the Muromachi, I do not believe that indoor living had influence on the early development of these blades. Part of the problem I think is we have to distinguish Dai-sho swords, Dai-sho koshirae and dai-sho blades by a single maker. The practice of wearing two blades by members of the Buke I believe was common before the Momoyama when as a symbol of their status at the pinnacle of their class they commissioned dai-sho of the first quality...

 

Momoyama scrolls show low-ranked samurai and foot soldiers wearing pairs of swords, while many mounted warriors wear a tanto as their second blade. I think it depended partially on rank and circumstance.

-t

[sanjuro]

Thomas.

 

Yes I agree, and I think you have identified an area of grey that seems to be the seat of some confusion, with the following statement:

we have to distinguish Dai-sho swords, Dai-sho koshirae and dai-sho blades by a single maker.

 

The term Dai-sho merely means big-little, it does not mean matched either in koshirae or matched as in blades by the same maker. It merely means two swords of different sizes worn by a single warrior. Whilst all of these variations may be referred to as Dai-sho, the term in each case has a meaning that is somewhat different. A pairing of swords may take a number of forms. Tachi/tanto, Tachi/uchigatana, katana/tanto, katana/wakizashi. Dependant upon period and each equally legitimately referrable to as Dai-sho.

Mention Dai-sho to someone who is most familiar with Edo period arms and he will at once assume that the pair are katana and wakizashi, (because that is the general understanding of the term), and are matched either in koshirae and/or are made by the same smith. Mention Dai-sho to someone like myself who is familiar more with koto swords and samurai armament pre Edo, and I will assume that the swords are merely paired and not necessarily matched in any other way.

It is quite rare to find a dai-sho set that has matched koshirae and also blades by the same smith. Even late swords (shinto and shin shinto) are not common in complete sets. The ownership of such a totally matched pair would I think be beyond the means of the vast majority of samurai of any period. Boys toys for the wealthy-Daimyo grade and above. :D

[Jacques D.]

Gentlemen

Another point probably worthy of consideration is the shorter katana (mostly from Bizen swordsmiths such as Sukesada, Tadamitsu I believe) that were present in Sue-koto times. It was said that this was to facilitate the techniques of fighting with 2 swords, ie nito made famous by Musashi, and the shorter needed to be longer than a tanto, and so was a wakizashi. This has some credibility as it was around this time that wakizashi begin to be seen.

Clive Sinclaire

 

I'm a member/teacher of Katori Shinto ryu. Ryoto (two swords long and short) is part of our school curriculum which is largely anterior the Musashi's one (more a century). that suggests strongly daisho exists since the middle of the 15th century.

[sanjuro]

Jacques.

 

I may not be understanding what you are saying here, but Musashi was born in 1584 and died in 1645. Are you saying that the Katori Shinto ryu was teaching a two sword style prior to, or after that time?

[Jacques D.]

Hi,

 

Prior that time, Katori Shinto ryu was created by Iisaza Chöisai Ienao in 1447. Miyamoto Musashi is said to have been a student of this ryu.

[sanjuro]

Jacques.

 

Ah..... Yes of course. Thanks for that clarification. Now I see what you were saying.

[kmark]

Thank you, all, for the informative responses... my question has been answered.

 

The subject of the daisho has fascinated me for several years, whether it is the literal meaning of the word, or the more modern interpretation of a matched set of swords. I suppose daisho - like cars - greatly differed based on the owner's wealth and rank. Those with the money could afford to pay for a matched set, down to the koshirae, hamon etc. Those not so fortunate will make do with any combination that was within their budget. I'm willing to bet that the swords extant today are only a small fraction of what *might* have existed in the past - the rest lost due to fire, theft, wars, recycling or simple neglect.

 

I was chatting about this subject the other day, and the subject turned to the tsuba on the daisho set, particularly their sizing and the types of shapes that we've seen so far. I have seen sets where the wakizashi tsuba is smaller than the katana tsuba, in many cases very noticeably so, but I have also seen sets where the tsuba are essentially the same size. With the way of wearing the wakizashi across the belly, was the smaller tsuba size adopted out of convenience and comfort? Is that also a compelling reason to go to a hamidashi tsuba? The pictures posted by Eric on the first page were most informative... the first pic shows what appears to be a hamidashi tsuba on the wakizashi, and the other two had the wakizashi pulled out from the obi further than I would expect (maybe to show off the wakizashi in the photo)

[estcrh]

I'm willing to bet that the swords extant today are only a small fraction of what *might* have existed in the past - the rest lost due to fire, theft, wars, recycling or simple neglect.

 

K.Mark, not to mention the people who purposely break up daisho in order to either get just the fittings, of an individual blade with out the companion. In the same way some people break up matched suits of samurai armour, some people do not care about the historical significance of a daisho and only see them a two swords. Here is a thread from another forum that shows the huge difference in what people actually consider a daisho to be.

 

http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showth ... sprune=365

[kmark]

K.Mark, not to mention the people who purposely break up daisho in order to either get just the fittings, of an individual blade with out the companion. In the same way some people break up matched suits of samurai armour, some people do not care about the historical significance of a daisho and only see them a two swords. Here is a thread from another forum that shows the huge difference in what people actually consider a daisho to be.

 

http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showth ... sprune=365

 

Thanks, Eric... yes, what you describe is (in most cases) appalling disregard for an item's intrinsic value. It would be similar to tearing down a pristine classic car for scrap metal (cars being another passion of mine). I just read the thread, and it is interesting to see what people think are 'true' daisho, and... not so true daisho? In any case, I will stick with the more commonly-held view that the blades need not be by the same smith, but should be mounted together as a set. The koshirae need not match *exactly*, but should be put together with a deliberate thought and purpose to show that they are part of a set (ex. the katana tsuba would have a sukashi gunbai fan, while the wakizashi tsuba has a sukashi tessen iron fan design... I would consider that to be matched as a set).

 

@IanB... are you the same Ian Bottomley in the Discovery Channel's "The Samurai Sword"?

[estcrh]

 

Thanks, Eric... yes, what you describe is (in most cases) appalling disregard for an item's intrinsic value. It would be similar to tearing down a pristine classic car for scrap metal (cars being another passion of mine). I just read the thread, and it is interesting to see what people think are 'true' daisho, and... not so true daisho?

Historical value has been discussed here in regards to nihonto mounted in ww2 koshirae and whether the blade and ww2 koshirae should be kept together even if the blade gets mounted back in a traditional koshirae (lots of disagreement there!). And how about all those "classic cars" destroyed just to make a movie?

 

My belief on the matter of daisho is that there are different levels of daisho. maybe there should be official names. You have two completely different non matching swords worn together at the same time, then different blades with koshirae that have some matching elements, then non matching blades with matching koshirae, then matching blades with matching koshirae. The ultimate would be a purposely made completely matching daisho that was planned from the beginning to be a daisho.

 

Then you have modern made daisho as in someone takes two blades either matching or non matching and they construct matching koshirae. "intrinsic historic value" comes into play in this case with some people considering this to not even be a daisho while others prefer this type.

[sanjuro]

If one takes a pair of blades and then constructs matching koshirae for them, you have created a daisho of sorts. It does not however have any 'intrinsic historic value' since the blades share no history or ownership and the koshirae is effectively a new koshirae (new as in not original). You cant create history retrospectively by making two swords into a pair with matching mounts. You are in fact destroying or at least falsifying the individual history of both blades. Be that as it may, It is an apparent daisho for presentation purposes only. You have in fact merely done what many samurai did to create a pair out of matched koshirae for a mismatched pair of blades. I dont see any good reason apart from shear collector vanity for doing this, but hey what do I know? I'm one of those strange people who appreciate originality. :D

[estcrh]

Keith, a while back while looking to find a daisho for a friend I contacted a well known nihonto enthusiast who was advertising a nice looking daisho for sale, his description did not mention that the daisho was newly put together, it was only after I questioned the age of and history of the daisho that he revealed it was newly created. I really felt that this fact should have been mentioned in the description. I do understand someone maybe wanting to display a daisho while at the same time being able to control the fittings and condition etc but still that little detail (non historical daisho) should have been mentioned in the sellers advertisement. This just shows the disparity on views about this subject.

[sanjuro]

Eric.

 

Heres something that will make you drool: A collector friend of mine owns a daisho. His daisho consists of a katana and a wakizashi both clearly signed and dated exactly the same, and it has papers from the NBTHK. This daisho dates from the late Momoyama period. When he got it some years ago, it was mounted in a Meiji period koshirae of very good quality, which was clearly a replacement. He removed the koshirae, and sold it off because it was not the original koshirae. (two tsunagi and a katana kake came with the set). In doing so, he very nearly recouped the price he had paid for the entire set. The blades are now in Shirasaya on the original katana kake that came with them. He is even more of a traditionalist than I am, but he owns a true daisho that doesnt pretend to be anything than what it is - a pair of originally made and matched blades.

[kmark]

Eric.

 

Heres something that will make you drool: A collector friend of mine owns a daisho. His daisho consists of a katana and a wakizashi both clearly signed and dated exactly the same, and it has papers from the NBTHK. This daisho dates from the late Momoyama period. When he got it some years ago, it was mounted in a Meiji period koshirae of very good quality, which was clearly a replacement. He removed the koshirae, and sold it off because it was not the original koshirae. (two tsunagi and a katana kake came with the set). In doing so, he very nearly recouped the price he had paid for the entire set. The blades are now in Shirasaya on the original katana kake that came with them. He is even more of a traditionalist than I am, but he owns a true daisho that doesnt pretend to be anything than what it is - a pair of originally made and matched blades.

 

Keith, that is hardcore. He sold off the Meiji koshirae because it was not the original-intended mounts for the blades?