Please for love of god mate..get yourself a copy of The Connoisseurs Book Of Japanese Swords by Kōkan Nagayama. The history of Nihonto is extremely complex and requires more than just a glossing over to understand the nuances.
@@AntonyCumminsit’s about $50 and clears up many inaccuracies often repeated online these days. Katate-uchi or sometimes katate-uchigatana for example was the battlefield “strike sword” and is often confused for uchigatana in the west due to the similar name. Uchigatana is the correct name for what has become westernized as katana. Katana in Japan as you’ve pointed out can refer to any sized single edged blade. You can spend a lifetime studying Nihonto and still feel like you’ve only scratched the surface, so I understand the need for brevity in a RUclips video. However it’s much easier in the long run to not have to relearn inaccurate or incorrect information.
@@AntonyCummins along with Connoisseur's Yoshindo's The Art of the Japanese Sword and Sato's The Japanese Sword are must haves for English resources on Nihonto. Yoshindo's is from the modern smiths perspective, and even goes into how older swords are almost always less robust than they appear because of polishing over the years. So less fumbari, thicker and wider than what most think of. The most important thing about the fittings (only mentioned in my other comment) is that the bare sword is the sword, and the mounting is just the clothes for the day.
Great video! It's a great perspective to have, and that is that pre Edo bushi didn't think about the weapons in the way Edo to modern folks think about them! I will say I don't really think the curve and the length are the main difference, though. Extant examples sort of work out that way, and many tachi were shortened over the years depending on the fashion of the time period. Earlier (Heiean and Kamakura) foot soldier swords are not extant, though some talk about them being too low of quality to be worth preservation (which is why they aren't really extant). Generally speaking, the main difference is simply that one is hung and edge down, which works well for horseback, and the other is edge up through the sash, which works well for foot and quicker draw to strike motion. The rest of the "stats" the weapon has would vary depending on the period, and probably had as much or more to do with fashion than anything else. Nanbokucho era length as a "mine is bigger than yours" analogy is a prime example of this, and many of those swords, even famous ones were shortened later. Uesugi Kenshin's famous akechi koshirae (uchigatana mount without guard) housed a fairly long and curved tachi from the mid Kamakura period. I think understanding that a higher ranked bushi of the pre Edo periods could have had BOTH mount styles is likely, especially if they had the money to do so. Muramachi period especially. During Heian/Kamakura/Nanbokucho would more likely have worn in the tachi style. Hell even seasonal or special occasion mounts. The most important thing to remember about Japanese sword mounts is that they are viewed as clothes. Earlier tachi mountings were often a bit different than the diagram shown here as well. One main difference is that often they were covered in lacuered leather, the whole kit much like European swords but also over the metal fittings, and a bag like rain guard over the tsuba was common. The saya having a wrap in the upper third would have not really started to be a thing until likely the Nanbokucho period, and was mostly added to keep the saya in better shape from the bouncing and rubbing it would have had while on horseback. Then the thin leather that was then lacquered would have been common over the top of those examples as well. There are many extant tachi mountings like this from those periods. Your source being from 1670s probably has some Edo sensibilities, and some of the mounting pieces were on earlier examples, but many often aren't. Hilt wrapping was also done in a bit different fashion, a simpler cross over compared to the more common Edo-modern diamond style that is mostly seen. Many extant examples have just had the single ring on the bottom third of the saya, and nothing other than the hangers, opening collar and butt cap. Also lacuer hardened rawhide was often used in many places on the mount instead of metal same as the armors of the periods. The number of seppa and o-seppa that existed wasn't very static, you can see period examples with multiple layers or just a couple. Generally speaking as any mount ages, they loosen, and additional seppa are added. Not always evenly, so one side of the tsuba could have 2, the other 3 or something like that.
The way we see and classify swords is very much a modern thing. When you get into pre-Edo period especially, but even in the Edo Period, nomenclature around swords gets much more fuzzy. In terms of the tachi, older tachi tended to be more curved and longer, then by the Sengoku Period we see them commonly (although not always) getting shorter and less curved. It got to the point that in terms of curve and length, there were in some cases little difference between tachi and uchigatana, and a person might use the same blade in either koshiare depending on the situation. Not to say all did that, but it was something that happened.
This is a wonderful explanation of a complicated topic, from a pre-Edo perspective; many thanks, Antony, as always, for your excellent educational materials. I also have a question, if you've a moment: I've heard about tachi saya being made (at least sometimes) so that they could be disassembled, opened up, cleaned, and reassembled. Have you ever heard of this, and if so, can you add any interesting details?
PLEASE SUPPORT KIMONO WOLF HERE
instagram.com/kimono_wolf/
Please for love of god mate..get yourself a copy of The Connoisseurs Book Of Japanese Swords by Kōkan Nagayama. The history of Nihonto is extremely complex and requires more than just a glossing over to understand the nuances.
We are doing a basic intro this year on weapons as a playlist. So keeping it simple. But thank you and I will do.
@@AntonyCumminsit’s about $50 and clears up many inaccuracies often repeated online these days. Katate-uchi or sometimes katate-uchigatana for example was the battlefield “strike sword” and is often confused for uchigatana in the west due to the similar name. Uchigatana is the correct name for what has become westernized as katana. Katana in Japan as you’ve pointed out can refer to any sized single edged blade. You can spend a lifetime studying Nihonto and still feel like you’ve only scratched the surface, so I understand the need for brevity in a RUclips video. However it’s much easier in the long run to not have to relearn inaccurate or incorrect information.
@@AntonyCummins along with Connoisseur's Yoshindo's The Art of the Japanese Sword and Sato's The Japanese Sword are must haves for English resources on Nihonto. Yoshindo's is from the modern smiths perspective, and even goes into how older swords are almost always less robust than they appear because of polishing over the years. So less fumbari, thicker and wider than what most think of.
The most important thing about the fittings (only mentioned in my other comment) is that the bare sword is the sword, and the mounting is just the clothes for the day.
Wow cool awesome video Antony tis Tachi sword is often overlooked and underrated
I love the tachi
Thank you very much for the shoutout, and of course for the additional context!
Any time!
Thank you very much
Great video! It's a great perspective to have, and that is that pre Edo bushi didn't think about the weapons in the way Edo to modern folks think about them!
I will say I don't really think the curve and the length are the main difference, though. Extant examples sort of work out that way, and many tachi were shortened over the years depending on the fashion of the time period. Earlier (Heiean and Kamakura) foot soldier swords are not extant, though some talk about them being too low of quality to be worth preservation (which is why they aren't really extant).
Generally speaking, the main difference is simply that one is hung and edge down, which works well for horseback, and the other is edge up through the sash, which works well for foot and quicker draw to strike motion. The rest of the "stats" the weapon has would vary depending on the period, and probably had as much or more to do with fashion than anything else. Nanbokucho era length as a "mine is bigger than yours" analogy is a prime example of this, and many of those swords, even famous ones were shortened later.
Uesugi Kenshin's famous akechi koshirae (uchigatana mount without guard) housed a fairly long and curved tachi from the mid Kamakura period. I think understanding that a higher ranked bushi of the pre Edo periods could have had BOTH mount styles is likely, especially if they had the money to do so. Muramachi period especially. During Heian/Kamakura/Nanbokucho would more likely have worn in the tachi style. Hell even seasonal or special occasion mounts. The most important thing to remember about Japanese sword mounts is that they are viewed as clothes.
Earlier tachi mountings were often a bit different than the diagram shown here as well. One main difference is that often they were covered in lacuered leather, the whole kit much like European swords but also over the metal fittings, and a bag like rain guard over the tsuba was common. The saya having a wrap in the upper third would have not really started to be a thing until likely the Nanbokucho period, and was mostly added to keep the saya in better shape from the bouncing and rubbing it would have had while on horseback. Then the thin leather that was then lacquered would have been common over the top of those examples as well. There are many extant tachi mountings like this from those periods.
Your source being from 1670s probably has some Edo sensibilities, and some of the mounting pieces were on earlier examples, but many often aren't. Hilt wrapping was also done in a bit different fashion, a simpler cross over compared to the more common Edo-modern diamond style that is mostly seen. Many extant examples have just had the single ring on the bottom third of the saya, and nothing other than the hangers, opening collar and butt cap. Also lacuer hardened rawhide was often used in many places on the mount instead of metal same as the armors of the periods. The number of seppa and o-seppa that existed wasn't very static, you can see period examples with multiple layers or just a couple. Generally speaking as any mount ages, they loosen, and additional seppa are added. Not always evenly, so one side of the tsuba could have 2, the other 3 or something like that.
Thanks for the video 👊🏻 Personally I like these 5 Japanese weapons as my favorites in no particular order Yari, Katana, Wakizashi, Tanto & Yumi
The way we see and classify swords is very much a modern thing. When you get into pre-Edo period especially, but even in the Edo Period, nomenclature around swords gets much more fuzzy. In terms of the tachi, older tachi tended to be more curved and longer, then by the Sengoku Period we see them commonly (although not always) getting shorter and less curved. It got to the point that in terms of curve and length, there were in some cases little difference between tachi and uchigatana, and a person might use the same blade in either koshiare depending on the situation. Not to say all did that, but it was something that happened.
Always good info scott
This is a wonderful explanation of a complicated topic, from a pre-Edo perspective; many thanks, Antony, as always, for your excellent educational materials. I also have a question, if you've a moment: I've heard about tachi saya being made (at least sometimes) so that they could be disassembled, opened up, cleaned, and reassembled. Have you ever heard of this, and if so, can you add any interesting details?
They can deffo be taken apart. I still do not own a tachi.
👍👍👍
Tachi are also prettier swords 😅
🙂