Explaining the Shinto era

[Peter Bleed]

Comments by Ron Watson in another thread got me thinking – as so many things do - about the nature of Shinto swords. In the discussion of Sengoku era firearms, Ron pointed out that the likely reason there are so few guns that survive from the Sengoku era is because they were used – as used up! – during Hideyoshi’s invasion of Korea. This useful insight got me wondering about why the Shinto phase of sword history happened.

Sword collectors do have to explain Shinto developments. The question is why did Japanese smiths produce all of those swords at a time when there was essentially no serious battling. Yes, yes, I know that smith like Ujifusa, Kunikane, Shigekuni Kunihiro et at were rooted in the Sengoku era and couldn’t have known that peace was breaking out all. But why were so many really good swords produced up through Kanbun times?

There are two usual approaches to answering that question. 1) Swords became status symbols held by the warrior class who ruled the police state that was Tokugawa Japan. OR 2) There was at this time something like an aesthetic revolution – supported by peace and prosperity – that supported a burst of innovation and excellence – in swords and a whole lot of other things.

Is it possible that serious losses in Korea – following the costly events of the 16th century at home - diminished the national armory to a level that there was a broadly felt need to simply “rearm” ?

Peter

[John A Stuart]

Compared to the Senkoku period the Edo period was relatively peaceful. There were still armed conflicts even beyond the Osaka campaigns. The Shimabara Rebellion, many 'hyakusho' peasant uprisings (eg.Jōkyō Uprising 1686) 4.9 per year in 17th, 11.8 per year in the 18th and 14.8 per year in the first half of the 19th centuries, 'murakata sodo' village disturbances, 'yanaoshi ikki' (eg. the Aizu and Shindatsu Uprisings) and within them ronin were active as well. There were the campaigns against the Ainu as late as 1789 with the Menashi-Kunashir Rebellion. The Boshin War 1868. So, swords, yari, yumi, teppo etc. Each clan still had to have the ability to defend themselves and their lord and to answer their feudal lords in turn. Merchants and their yojimbo needed to be armed as well and teppo were under domain control as, too, the swords needed for the bushi class (status). John

[Lance]

Maybe it was a combination of the reasons below?:

 

Beides the post-Korean campaign need to restock swords, another large loss would have of have been the Sword Hunts, when those in power confiscated potential enemies' weapons to prevent any rebellions.

 

(read this one somewhere ,dont remember where though) Once a sword was around 100 years old it was looked upon as too valuable, spiritually or monetarily for every day use by the average samurai fanilies, weren't carried around so much and became more of a family heirloom or used for gifts?

 

Even though many old swords were remounted and/or shortened by wealthy Daimyo, they'd still want a newer sword (Gendaito for time period they were living) for daily use and training, and many of the older sword's shapes weren't optimal for the newer sword fighting schools popping up during the Edo period.

 

Demand for swords by the merchant class, they probablty had to buy new swords as the samurai didn't seem to be too fond of them and weren't likely to sell them their own swords, unless they were completely broke.

 

The style flashier style of Shinto swords made for the merchant class became popular to the Samurai as a status symbo/symbol of wealthl as previously mentioned.

 

I think at least the demand for newer swords due to training or daily use aspect could be valid, especially with the rising popularity of Kambun style swords during that time period.

 

Regards,

Lance

[John A Stuart]

So, to continue on. Swords were still a necessity, but, what was the reason for the changes we see? From 794 the capital was Kyoto (Heiankyo) except when it was Kamakura (1192-1333). When the country was solidified under Tokugawa rule Edo became the de facto capital of Japan although it officially was still Kyoto, the seat of the Emperor. This meant that large groups of sword-smiths went to that area to ply their trade for the bakufu in Edo or to the burgeoning merchant city of Osaka where money was available to support them. As happens, as time progresses tastes and fashion change, the utilisation of swords change (length, shape, hamon, purpose), trade goods (iron and steel for example), foreign art and craft influences, which changed the character of these new swords. The people themselves changed and so did many facets of their lives, swords with them. Now these changes didn't happen one night which is why the arbitrary dating of 1598 or 1603, whatever, is circumspect and just a convenience. John