Index Of Japanese Swordsmiths – Revision

Some of you might remember the lengthy discussion we had on NMB on a revised hardcover edition of my 2012 published two volume INDEX OF Japanese SWORDSMITHS.

Well, it never worked out and the initial hardcover version never worked to be easy buyable from everywhere in the world. Also an errata and a correction of all the typos seemed to be overdue and so I decided to give it another try as a two volume hardcover copy on Lulu. With this, we don’t have to care about a minimum number of buyers to get the thing started as it is print on demand. Also the price of the set will be noticeable lower as Lulu has way better royalties than BoD.

Now doing so, I will slightly change the layout o ensure a better legibility, coming along with a larger font as I got feedback that the initial font was way too small. I attach a preview who a page of the revised edition might look like.

And with this, you all come into play as I need some feedback to enlarge my own errata done over the three years. I have created an email address of its own for this, “swordsmith.errata@gmail.com”. This is a “fire-and-forget” email address, that means I will not reply from there and just collect your suggestions and corrections. If you really have to discuss a thing or to, please get in touch with me via my regular address “markus.sesko@gmail.com”.

Thank you all for your cooperation!

PS: The eBook version will be updated too of course.

RevisionPreview

Easter eBook Super Sale

Dear Readers,

Inspired by my last year’s Christmas Super Sale and responding to the”unfairness” that eBooks are always excluded from Lulu offers, I just started an Easter eBook Super Sale where ALL of my eBooks are reduced by 50%! This offer will be valid for a week so you have enough time to decide what you want. So fill up all your tablets (or PC´s) with all the important Nihonto and Tosogu reference material you need four your studies!

If you have any questions or can´t find the one or other book, don´t hesitate and contact me via my “markus.sesko@gmail.com.

Thank you and a Happy Easter to everyone!

http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/nihontobooks

PS: I have two signed Masamune paperbacks and a signed Tameshigiri hardcover here at my place. If you want one of them, please drop my a mail (price as announcted but free shipping).

Easter-Sale

KANTEI 1 – SUGATA #6

I don’t want to let too much time go by between the two long sword parts of sugata-kantei so here we go with part two.

*

1.14 Mid-Muromachi period (1428-1467)

The mid-Muromachi period basically keeps the “Kamakura-revival” sugata of the early Muromachi period but what we can see is a decreasing nagasa, a more noticeable taper, a thicker kasane, and an increasing sakizori. These are all features connected to the shift from tachi to katana, a topic that well deserves a chapter on its own and should therefore omitted here.

Representative schools and smiths for a mid-Muromachi period sugata are: The Eikyô Bizen (永享備前) school (Norimitsu [則光], Sukemitsu [祐光], Toshimitsu [利光], Yoshimitsu [賀光], Hisamitsu [久光]); the founders or early generations of the later flourishing Seki schools (Zenjô Kaneyoshi [善定兼吉]); the early Ôishi-Sa (大石左) school (Ienaga [家永])

MuromachiMid

Picture 9: typical mid-Muromachi period katana:
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Bizen no Kuni Osafune-jû Saemon no Jô Fujiwara Ason Norimitsu” (備前国長船住左衛門尉藤原朝臣則光), dated Chôroku three (長禄, 1459) nagasa 71.6 cm, sori 1.9 cm

*

1.15 Late Muromachi period (1467-1555)

By the late Muromachi period, the classic tachi had been pushed into the background and mostly katana were produced when it comes to long swords. They have a noticeably shorter nagasa of 60~65 cm, a slightly elongated chû-kissaki (often with a pronounced fukura), a wide mihaba which does not taper that much, a thick kasane, and a deep sakizori. Those blades with a really short nagasa of around 60 cm were made for single-handed use and are referred to as katate-uchi (片手打ち).

Representative schools and smiths for a late Muromachi period sugata are: The Sue-Bizen (末備前) school (Sukesada [祐定], Katsumitsu [長船勝光], Munemitsu [宗光], Kiyomitsu [清光], Tadamitsu [忠光]); for Kyô-mono Sanjô Yoshinori (三条吉則), Heianjô Nagayoshi (平安城長吉), and Kurama Yoshitsugu (鞍馬吉次); for Yamato the Sue-Tegai (末手掻) school; the Sue-Sôshû (末相州) school (Masahiro [正広], Tsunahiro [綱広], Yasuharu [康春]); the Shimada (島田) school (Sukemune [助宗], Yoshisuke [義助], Hirosuke [広助]); the Sengo (千子) school (Muramasa [村正], Masashige [正重]); the Sue-Seki (末関) school (Kanesada [兼定], Kanemoto [兼元]); Kaga smiths (Kashû Ietsugu [加州家次], Kashû Kiyomitsu [加州清光]); later generations Fujishima Tomoshige (藤島友重) and Uda (宇多); the 2nd generation Yamamura Yasunobu (山村安信); the 3rd generation Momokawa Nagayoshi (桃川長吉); the Gassan (月山) school; the Kai-Mihara (貝三原) school and the other offshoots of Bingo´s Mihara school; the Hiroyoshi (広賀) lineage of Hôki province; and for Kyûshû the Taira-Takada (高田) school (Taira Nagamori [平長盛], Shizumasa [鎮政], Muneyuki [統行], Shizunori [鎮教], Shizutada [鎮忠], Munemasa [統正]); the Tsukushi-Ryôkai (筑紫了戒) school; the Kongôbyôe (金剛兵衛) school; the Ôishi-Sa (大石左) school.

MuromachiLate

Picture 10: late Muromachi period katana (from left to right):
jûyô-bijutsuhin, mei “Bizen no Kuni-jû Osafune Jirôzaemon no Jô Fujiwara Katsumitsu” (備前国住長船二郎左衛門尉藤原勝光), dated Eishô one (永正, 1504), nagasa 60.6 cm, sori 1.8 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Bizen no Kuni-jû Osafune Yosaemon no Jô Sukesada” (備前国住長船与三右衛門尉祐定), dated Eishô 18 (永正, 1521), nagasa 64.8 cm, sori 1.9 cm
mei “Momokawa saku Nagayoshi” (桃川作長吉), 3rd generation, nagasa 72.5 cm
jûyô-bijutsuhin, mei “Muramasa – Myôhô Renge Kyô” (村正・妙法蓮華経), dated Eishô ten (永正, 1513), nagasa 66.4 cm, sori 1.6 cm

*

1.16 End of Muromachi period (1555-1572)

Blades increased again in length towards the end of the Muromachi period. Normal for that time is a nagasa of about 73~75 cm, a rather wide mihaba, a thick kasane, a chû-kissaki or a slightly elongated chû-kissaki, and a pronounced sakizori but which is no longer as strong as seen on the previous katate-uchi.

Representative schools and smiths for a sugata from the end of the Muromachi period are: The subsequent Sue-Bizen (末備前) generations (Sukesada [祐定], Katsumitsu [勝光], Norimitsu [則光]); the Sue-Sôshû (末相州) school; the Sue-Seki (末関) school (Kanetsune [兼常], Kanenobu [兼延], Wakasa no Kami Ujifusa [若狭守氏房], Daidô [大道]); for Yamato the Kanabô (金房) school (Masatsugu [政次], Masashige [政重], Masazane [正真]); the Shitahara (下原) school (Yasushige [康重], Terushige [照重]); the Taira-Takada school; the Dôtanuki (同田貫) school (Hyōbu [兵部], Kiyokuni [清国], Masakuni [正国], Matahachi [又八], Kunikatsu [国勝]).

MuromachiEnd

Picture 11: typical katana from the end of the Muromachi period:
mei “Bushû Shitahara-jû Yasushige” (武州下原住康重), nagasa 73.0 cm, sori 2.3 cm

*

1.17 Momoyama to early Edo period (1572-1624)

Apart from continuing with the late Muromachi period sugata, a trend started in the Momoyama period which revived the oversized mid-Nanbokuchô blade shapes, but in their shortened condition. That means smiths from that time made katana with a wide mihaba, scarce taper and niku, a shallow sori, and an elongated chû-kissaki or an ô-kissaki, but with a nagasa of about 70~75 cm. Also the kasane of the Momoyama-era revival blades is a hint thicker than at the mid-Nanbokuchô period originals. As the climax of this revival trend was reached during the Keichô era (慶長, 1596-1615), we refer to such a sugata as Keichô-shintô-sugata (慶長新刀姿) Another term we find for sugata from that time is Keigen-shintô-sugata (慶元新刀姿) which refers to blades made from the Keichô to the Genna era (元和, 1615-1624). This term refers to the transition from kotô to shintô and includes the wide Nanbokuchô-revival blades made in the Keichô era and the beginning of the trend back to more classical shapes during the Genna era.

Representative schools and smiths for a Momoyama period sugata or a Keichô-shintô-sugata are: Umetada Myôju (埋忠明寿); the Horikawa (堀川) school (Kunihiro [国弘], Kunimichi [国路], Kuniyasu [国安], Kunitomo [国儔], Kunikiyo [国清]); the Mishina (三品) school (Etchû no Kami Masatoshi [越中守正俊], Iga no Kami Kinmichi [伊賀守金道], Tanba no Kami Yoshimichi [丹波守吉道]); Echizen Yasutsugu (越前康継), Higo no Daijô Sadakuni (肥後大掾貞国), Yamato no Daijô Masanori (大和大掾正則), Hankei (繁慶), Nanki Shigekuni (南紀重国), Sagami no Kami Masatsune (相模守政常), Hida no Kami Ujifusa (飛騨守氏房), Higo no Kami Teruhiro (肥後守輝広), Hizen Tadayoshi (忠吉), Izu no Kami Masafusa (伊豆守正房).

Momoyama

Picture 12: katana from the Momoyama and early Edo period (from left to right):
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Kyûshû Hyûga-jû Kunihiro saku” (九州日向住国広作), dated Tenshô 18 (天正, 1590), nagasa 70.5 cm, sori 2.8 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Kuniyasu” (国安), Horikawa, nagasa 75.8 cm, sori 1.5 cm
jûyô-bijutsuhin, mei “Kanewaka” (兼若), dated Keichô nine (慶長, 1604), nagasa 65 cm, sori 0.4 cm
jûyô-bijutsuhin, mei “Nanban-tetsu o motte Bushû Edo ni oite Echizen Yasutsugu” (以南蛮鉄於武州江戸越前康継), dated Keichô 19 (慶長, 1614), nagasa 69.3 cm, sori 1.5 cm

*

1.18 Early Edo period (1624-1652)

After the Momoyama-era trend back to mid-Nanbokuchô shapes, again a more classic sugata arrived on the scene. These blades have a nagasa of about 70 cm, a noticeable but not very strong sori, do taper, and show a chû-kissaki or a slightly elongated chû-kissaki. As this moderate shape started to appear with the Kan´ei era (寛永, 1624-1644), such a sugata is also referred to as Kan´ei-shintô-sugata (寛永新刀姿).

Representative schools and smiths for an early Edo period sugata are: The Ôsaka-shintô (大坂新刀) masters (Oya-Kunisada [親国貞], 1st generation Kawachi no Kami Kunisuke [河内守国助]); Dewa no Daijô Kunimichi (出羽大掾国路), the next generation of the Mishina (三品) smiths, Soboro Sukehiro (そぼろ助広), Hidari Mutsu Kaneyasu (左陸奥包保), 1st generation Ôsaka-Ishidô Tameyasu (為康), the 2nd generation Ôsaka-Ishidô Yasuhiro (康広), the early Edo-period Shitahara generations (1st generation Chikashige [周重], 3rd generation Yasushige [康重], 3rd generation Terushige [照重]), the 2nd generation Hizen Tadahiro (忠広).

EdoEarly

Picture 13: of katana from the early Edo period (from left to right):
Izumi no Kami Fujiwara Kunisada (和泉守藤原国貞), nagasa 64.8 cm, sori 2.1 cm
Kawachi no Kami Fujiwara Kunisuke (河内守藤原国助), nagasa 69.7 cm, sori 1.5 cm
Yamashiro no Daijô Fujiwara Yôkei Kunikane (山城大掾藤原用恵国包), nagasa 75 cm, sori 1.5 cm
Yamashiro no Kami Fujiwara Kunhikiyo (山城守藤原国清), nagasa 74.2 cm, sori 1.8 cm

*

 

1.19 Advanced early Edo period (1652-1688)

From about the mid-17th century onwards, blade shapes change significantly. The nagasa measures still around 70 cm but the blades taper strongly, have a shallow sori, and end in a compact chû-kissaki which even tend to a ko-kissaki in certain cases. It is assumed that this change was due to new preferences in swordsmanship for thrusts rather than for cuts but if this is the only reason remains to be seen. Anyway, as this new blade geometry appears with the Kanbun era (寛文, 1661-1673) it is also referred to as Kanbun-shintô-sugata (寛文新刀姿). If one knows about the characteristics of a Kanbun-shintô-sugata, it is usually not that hard to recognize that a blade was made somewhere around Kanbun. In other words, a Kanbun-shintô-sugata is one of the more easier recognizable sugata. Please note that there are some Kanbun-shintô-sugata that have all Kanbun-shintô characteristics except for the shallow sori (for example third blade in picture 14).

Representative schools and smiths for a Kanbun-shintô-sugata are: The next generation of the Ôsaka-shintô smiths (Inoue Shinkai [井上真改], Naka-Kawachi Kunisuke [国助], 2nd generation Sukehiro [助広], Echigo no Kami Kanesada [越後守包貞], Gonnoshin Terukane [言之進照包]); Edo-shintô smiths like Kazusa no Suke Kaneshige (上総介兼重), Yamato no Kami Yasusada (大和守安定), schools like the Nagasone (長曾禰) school (Kotetsu [虎徹], Okimasa [興正]); the Hôjôji (法城寺) school (Masahiro [正弘], Yoshitsugu [吉次]); the 2nd generation Sendai Kunikane (国包), Miyoshi Nagamichi (三善長道).

EdoAdvancedEarly

Picture 14: katana in Kanbun-shintô-sugata from the avanced early Edo period (from left to right):
mei “Tsuda Echizen no Kami Sukehiro” (津田越前守助広), dated Kanbun seven (寛文, 1667), nagasa 71.0 cm, sori 1.0 cm
mei “Tanba no Kami Yoshimichi” (丹波守吉道), dated Kanbun six (寛文, 1666), nagasa 68.6 cm, sori 1.7 cm
mei “Jû Tôeizan Shinobigaoka no hotori Nagasone Okisato saku – Enpô ninen rokugatsu kichijônichi” (住東叡山忍岡辺長曽祢興里作), dated Enpô two (延宝, 1674), nagasa 69.7 cm, sori 2.1 cm
mei “Ôshû Sendai-jû Fujiwara Kunikane” (奥州仙台住藤原国包), dated Kanbun five (寛文, 1665), nagasa 63.6 cm, sori 1-3 cm

*

1.20 Mid-Edo period (1688-1781)

The mid-Edo period faced about the same changes as the early Edo period. That means a peculiar shape, in this case Kanbun-shintô-sugata, was given up in favor of an again more moderate and what we would describe as a “typical katanasugata. Thus the blades curve more, show a harmonious taper, and end in a chû-kissaki. As the Genroku era (元禄, 1688-1704) marks about the turning point back to “normal” katana shapes, the term Genroku-shintô-sugata (元禄新刀姿) is used to refer to blades made in that style. Representative schools and smiths for the mid-Edo period are: Tatara Nagayuki (多々良長幸), Ikkanshi Tadatsuna (一竿子忠綱), Nobukuni Yoshikane (信国吉包), Nobukuni Shigekane (信国重包), Musashi Tarô Yasukuni (武蔵太郎安国).

Well, we must bear in mind that certain schools and smiths did not follow each and every new trend in blade shapes. For example the Hizen Tadayoshi school maintained from the early Edo period onwards the very same sugata. Their sugata is strong and impressive and might best be descibed in a nutshell as intermediate between Keichô-shintô and Genroku-shintô-sugata. Also the Satsuma-shintô smiths basically remained in terms of sugata in the Keichô-shintô era, although with an elongated chû-kissaki instead of an ô-kissaki.

EdoMid

Picture 15: katana from the mid-Edo period (from left to right):
mei “Ikkanshi Tadatsuna hori-dôsaku” (一竿子忠綱・彫同作), dated Genroku twelve (元禄, 1699), nagasa 63.3 cm, sori 2.1 cm
mei “Chikuzen-jū Minamoto Nobukuni Yoshikane” (筑前住源信国吉包), nagasa 68.4 cm, sori 2.0 cm
mei “Shinano no Daijō Fujiwara Tadakuni” (信濃大掾藤原忠国), nagasa 69.7 cm, sori 2.6 cm
mei “Bandōtarō Bakusei Nyūdō Bokuden“ (坂東太郎鏌正入道卜伝), dated Enpô eight (延宝, 1680), nagasa 66.3 cm, sori 2.1 cm

*

 

1.21 Late Edo period (1781-1844)

The craft of sword forging faced a strong decline after the turn to the 18th century. Basically the Genroku-shintô-sugata was kept until the appearance of master swordsmith Suishinshi Masahide (水心子正秀) who tried to revive the old kotô forging traditions, a trend known as fukkotô (復古刀), which also brought along a return to classic Kamakura-period blade shapes. That means in concrete terms the typical late-Edo period katana has a nagasa of about 70~75 cm, a little wider mihaba which tapers smoothly, a deep sori, and a chû-kissaki.

Representative for the late Edo period, or if you want the early shinshintô era, are the smiths in the vicinity of Suishinshi Masahide like Taikei Naotane (大慶直胤), Hosokawa Masayoshi (細川正義), and Nankai Tarô Tomotaka (南海太郎朝尊).

EdoLate

Picture 16: katana from the late Edo period (from left to right):
mei “Kaji-chōja Mutsu no Suke Hiromoto” (鍛冶長者陸奥介弘元), dated Bunsei nine (文政, 1826), nagasa 71.0 cm, sori 2.0 cm
mei “Matsumura Masanao” (松村昌直), dated Kansei nine (寛政, 1797), nagasa 71.3 cm, sori 1.6 cm
mei “Dewa no Kuni-jū Taikei Shōji Naotane + kaō” (出羽国住大慶庄司直胤), dated Bunsei three (文政, 1820), nagasa 62.2 cm, sori 1.1 cm
mei “Dewa no Kuni Taikei Shôji Naotane + kaô” (出羽国大慶庄司直胤), dated Bunka 15 (文化, 1818), nagasa 76.0 cm, sori 2.2 cm

*

 

1.22 Bakumatsu to early Meiji era (1844-1876)

The bakumatsu era brought another revival, that is to say back to the impressive mid-Nanbokuchô shapes what means wide mihaba, scarce tapering and scarce hira-niku, a shallow sori, and either an elongated chû-kissaki or an ô-kissaki. Some of them are even interpreted as nagamaki-naoshi, i.e. with extreme long ô-kissaki and hardly and sori. But the kasane is usually a bit thicker than at the mid-Nanbokuchô originals.

Representative schools and smiths for impressive, mid-Nanbokuchô-oriented bakumatsu-era sugata are: The Kiyomaro (清麿) school (Kiyomaro [清麿], Masao [真雄], Masao [正雄], Kurihara Nobuhide [栗原信秀], Saitô Kiyondo [斎藤清人], Kanetora [兼虎]); Koyama Munetsugu (固山宗次), Sa Yukihide (左行秀), Gassan Sadakazu (月山貞一).

Bakumatsu1

Picture 17: mid-Nanbokuchô-style katana from the bakumatsu era (from left to right):
mei “Minamoto Kiyomaro” (源清麿), dated Kai one (嘉永, 1848), nagasa 68.4 cm, sori 2.2 cm
mei “Yûshaken Masao” (遊射軒真雄), dated Bunkyû three (文久, 1863), nagasa 71.0 cm, sori 1.7 cm
mei “Tôbu Tokigaoka-Hachimangû hokuhen ni oite Sa Yukihide” (於東武富賀岡八幡宮北辺左行秀), dated Keiô two (慶応, 1866), nagasa 73.4 cm, sori 1.2 cm
mei “Naniwa-jû Gassan Yagorô Sadakazu seitan hori-dôsaku” (浪華住・月山弥五郎貞一精鍛彫同作), dated Meiji four (明治, 1871), nagasa 78.2 cm, sori 1.4 cm

 

Not all smiths carried the mid-Nanbokuchô revival to its extreme. Well, although still some classic Kamakura-period sugata were made at that time, there was a general and evident trend to more massive blades which remind of Keichô-shintô at a glance. Representative smiths for such “moderate” mid-Nanbokuchô inspired shapes are: Kurihara Nobuhide (栗原信秀), Takahashi Naganobu (高橋長信), Koyama Munetsugu (固山宗次), Tairyûsai Sôkan (泰龍斎宗寛), the 7th generation Korekazu (是一), certain Mito smiths (Ichige Norichika [市毛徳鄰], Naoe Sukemasa [直江助政]), Hôki no Kami Masayoshi (伯耆守正幸), Oku Motohira (奥元平), Gassan Sadakazu (月山貞一).

A peculiar blade interpretation that appeared in bakumatsu times is the so-called kinnôtô (勤王刀, lit. “royalist´s sword”) with an overlong nagasa of around 85 cm, hardly any sori, and a chû-kissaki. But it has to be noted that also shorter blades with the same geometry but measuring just around 65~75 cm, are referred to as kinnôtô. Representative for such kind of blades are for example Sa Yukihide and Saitô Kiyondo.

Bakumatsu2

Picture 18: moderate mid-Nanbokuchô-style katana from the bakumatsu era (from left to right) and far right, picture of a kinnôtô:
mei “Koyama Sôbei Munetsugu” (固山宗兵衛宗次), dated Tenpô eight (天保, 1837), nagasa 70.8 cm, sori 2.1 cm
mei “Suifu-jû Naoe Sukemasa” (水府住直江助政), dated Bunsei eight (文政, 1825), nagasa 69.8 cm, sori 2.0 cm
mei “Hôki no Kami Taira Ason Masayoshi” (伯耆守平朝臣正幸), dated Kansei nine (寛政, 1797), nagasa 75.4 cm, sori 2.0 cm
mei “Heianjô-jû Môri Hayato Ôe Kanetoshi” (平安城住毛利隼人大江兼寿), nagasa 86.5 cm, sori 0.6 cm

KANTEI 1 – SUGATA #5

A few weeks ago, we have ended the basics when it comes to the sugata of a Japanese sword, that means the names and characteristics of the different elements of a blade. Now and over the next few chapters, I want to introduce on a chronological basis the differences in blade shapes, or in other words, doing the actual sugata-kantei.

*

1.8 Heian period (794-1184)

The Japanese sword got its curvature somewhere around the mid-Heian period, i.e. around the 9th and 10th century BC. As these earliest nihontô are an utmost rarity and virtually to impossible to handle and find on the market, they shall be ruled out for our considerations on sugata. So we start with the earliest “tangible” time what is the late Heian period, i.e. the 11th and 12th centuries. It goes without saying that even from those times it is very rare to study and purchase blades in their original condition as most of them either hold a status like kokuhô or jûyô-bunkazai and are thus only accessible in Japan and at special occasions, or were shortened and/or are polished down. What makes now a typical late Heian-period sugata? Blades from that time are slender, taper noticeably, have a deep koshizori, funbari, and a ko-kissaki, an interpretation which makes them look highly elegant, noble, or graceful, depending on what term you want to use to classify such a shape. In Japanese you will find terms and formulations like yasashii (優しい), yûbi (優美), yûga (優雅), kôshô (高尚), koten-teki (古典的), or hinkaku ga takai (品格が高い) to refer to a classic late-Heian period sugata. Another Japanese term which might be found in preferrably older publications is in no tachi (陰の太刀). It means “slender tachi,” or “unobtrusive tachi” if you want, but has to be understood as the opposite of the yô no tachi (陽の太刀), the “magnificent” or “powerful tachi,” as here the yin and yang (Japanese in and ) terminology was used to distinguish between two fundamentally different tachi shapes. In late-Heian times, the classical tachi was the weapon of higher-ranking bushi and was thus wielded from horseback. Accordingly, unshortened blades from that time have a somewhat longer nagasa of about 80 to 85 cm. Again, I don’t want to go too much into historic details in this series on kantei so please forgive me for the lack of differentation here and there.

Let us stay with the sori for a while. I have mentioned that blades from that time show mostly a koshizori, that means the center of the curvature is towards the base, often right at the area of the habaki. But not only that, we can also observe that the curvature continues into the tang, i.e. also the nakago curves gently. An additional way to describe a koshizori which is relative often found in Japanese sources and which had been mentioned above is to say that the sori “bends down” towards the tip, saki ni itte fusaru (先に行って伏さる) or saki ni itte utsumuku (先に行って俯く). This just means that the sori does not increase again as it would be the case at a toriizori but runs out gently from the deepest curvature, the base, towards the tip.

Representative schools and smiths for a classic late-Heian period sugata are: Early Kyô-mono like the Sanjô (三条) school (Munechika [宗近], Yoshiie [吉家], Arikuni [有国], Arinari [有成]), Gojô (五条) school (Kanenaga [兼永], Kuninaga [国永]), or Awataguchi (粟田口) school (Kuniie [国家], Kunitomo [国友]); for Yamato the early Senju´in (千手院) school (Yukinobu [行信], Yukiyoshi [行吉]); the Ko-Bizen (古備前) school (Tomonari [友成], Masatsune [正恒], Takahira [高平], Kanehira [包平], Sukenari [介成], Sukehira [助平]); the Ko-Aoe (古青江) school (Yasutsugu [安次], Moritsugu [守次], Masatsune [正恒]); the Ko-Hôki (古伯耆) school (Yasutsuna [安綱], Ôhara Sanemori [大原真守], Moritsuna [守綱]); early northern Ôshû-mono like the Môgusa (舞草) school (Yasufusa [安房], Takeyasu [雄安], Morifusa [森房], Arimasa [有正]); the Ko-Kyûshû smiths like Sô Sadahide (僧定秀), , Chôen (長円), Ryôsai (良西); and the Ko-Naminohira (古波平) school (Masakuni [正国], Yukiyasu [行安], Yukimasa [行正]).

But it has to be mentioned that even if all these smiths are dated to the late or end of Heian period, we can see certain differences when it comes to their sugata. In other words, not all of these smiths focused solely on slender classic late-Heian period tachi shapes. For example Ko-Hôki Yasutsuna was known for making somewhat more robust and wider blades. And an extreme example is the Kyûshû Chikugo smith Miike “Tenta” Mitsuyo (三池典太光世) who made noticeably stout tachi for his time. These differences in shape might go back to the different production sites and the different clientel but what must not be forgotten is that we hardly have any reliable dates when it comes to such early smiths. For example, old sword documents date Sanjô Munechika traditionally around Ei´en (永延, 987-989) but more recent and comparative studies suggest that he was rather active at least a century later. The same applies to Yasutsuna who is listed as being active around Daidō (大同, 806-810) or Kōnin (弘仁, 810-824), eras when the Japanese sword was still in its uncurved chokutô phase. Or Miike Tenta Mitsuyo who is listed, depending on the source, around Kōhei (康平, 1058-1065), Jōhō (承保, 1074-1077), or Heiji (平治, 1159-1160).

In the following I would like to introduce pictures of blades from that time. Please take your time and internalize their elegance and gracefulness and also take a look at the nagasa. Although chances to handle blades like these in their original condition are as mentioned very rare, you will recognize them when holding a noticeable long but slender, elegantly curved blade with quite a smallish kissaki in hand. That means, with such a blade you know that you might be in the realm of the late Heian period or that you are facing a later work that tries to reproduce such a very classical sword. And in the latter case, i.e. when just the sugata suggests late Heian but everything else shintô or shinshintô for example, you might be able narrow down the kantei via remembering who was known in this or that time for making copies of very classical blades. But I will point out such “peculiarities” in the chapters on the schools and smiths.

Heian1

Picture 1: late-Heian period tachi (from left to right):
meibutsu Mikazuki-Munechika (三日月宗近), mei “Sanjô” (三条), nagasa 80.0 cm, sori 2.7 cm
meibutsu Tsurumaru-Kuninaga (鶴丸国永), mei “Kuninaga” (国永), nagasa 78.8 cm, sori 2.7 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Aritsuna” (有綱), Ko-Hôki, nagasa 83.4 cm, sori 3.2 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Yukiyasu” (行安), Ko-Naminohira, nagasa 73.9 cm, sori 2.7 cm

Heian2

Picture 2: late-Heian period tachi (from left to right):
kokuho, mei “Tomonari saku” (友成作), nagasa 80.0 cm, sori 2.9 cm
kokuhô, mei “Sanetsune” (真恒), Ko-Bizen, nagasa 89.7 cm, sori 3.7 cm
meibutsu Dôjigiri-Yasutsuna (童子切安綱), mei “Yasutsuna” (安綱), nagasa 80.0 cm, sori 2.7 cm
kokuhô, mei “Sanemori tsukuru” (真守造), Ko-Hôki, nagasa 76.7 cm, sori 1.9 cm

Heian3

Picture 3: atypical late-Heian period tachi (from left to right):
meibutsu Ô-Kanehira (大包平), mei “Bizen no Kuni Kanehira saku” (備前国包平作), nagasa 89.2 cm, sori 3.4 cm
meibutsu Ôtenta-Mitsuyo (大典太光世), mei “Mitsuyo saku” (光世作), nagasa 66.1 cm, sori 2.7 cm
meibutsu Sohaya no tsurugi (ソハヤノツルキ), meiMyōjun-denji sohaya no tsurugi - utsusu-nari” (妙純傅持ソハヤノツルキ・ウツスナリ), attributed to Miike Tenta Mitsuyo, nagasa 67.9 cm, sori 2.4 cm

*

1.9 Early Kamakura period (1185-1232)

The general sugata did not change drastically or suddenly with the transition from the Heian to the Kamakura period but what we can observe is a slight increase in width and kissaki size and a little lesser tapering. The pronounced koshizori remains and the changes in shape reflect about the changes in time: The warrior class had just gained supremacy but the aristocracy was still strong, to put it in a nutshell. So these early Kamakura shapes are often described with wordings like “elegant but strong,” in Japanese yûbi de chikarazuyoi (優美で力強い) or yûsô (優壮), but often they are still referred to as “classic” (koten-teki, 古典的).

Representative schools and smiths for a classic early Kamakura period sugata are: Kyô-mono like the Awataguchi (粟田口) school (Kunitomo [国友], Hisakuni [久国], Kuniyasu [国安], Kunikiyo [国清]); the Ko-Ichimonji (古一文字) as connecting link from the Ko-Bizen to the Fukuoka and other Ichimonji schools (Norimune [則宗], Sukemune [助宗], Nobufusa [延房], Muneyoshi [宗吉], Nobukane [信包], Narimune [成宗], Sukeshige [助茂]); the Ko-Aoe (古青江) school (Sadatsugu [貞次], Suketsugu [助次], Tsunetsugu [恒次], Masatsune [正恒], Yasutsugu [康次], Nobutsugu [延次]); subsequent Ko-Kyûshû and Ko-Naminohira smiths like Bungo Yukihira (豊後行平).

KamakuraEarly

Picture 4: early Kamakura period tachi (from left to right):
meibutsu Kitsunegasaki (狐ケ崎), mei “Tametsugu” (為次), Ko-Aoe, nagasa 78.8 cm, sori 3.3 cm
kokuhô, mei “Bungo no Kuni Yukihira saku” (豊後国行平作), nagasa 80.1 cm, sori 2.8 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Kiyotsuna” (清綱), Ko-Niô, nagasa 79.7 cm, sori 2.3 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Hôju” (宝寿・寶壽), nagasa 74.8 cm, sori 3.7 cm

*

1.10 Mid-Kamakura period (1232-1288)

The increase in length and width continuously proceeded in the mid-Kamakura period and tachi became now noticeably more magnificent than their early-Kamakura or late-Heian predecessors. The mihaba gets wider, the tapering decreases, the sori shifts more from a koshizori to a toriizori, we can see plenty of hira-niku – and a variant of that, the hamaguriba – and the kissaki appears as a full chû-kissaki. But at about the same time, a blade shape appears which is even bigger, shows less taper, a somewhat thicker kasane and higher shinogi, a narrow shinogiji, and which ends in a stubby ikubi-kissaki. The mid-Kamakura period shape is mostly circumscribed as “magnificent,” or gôsô (豪壮) in Japanese.

Representative schools and smiths for a mid-Kamakura period sugata are: Kyô-mono like the Awataguchi (粟田口) school (Kuniyoshi [国吉], Kunitsuna [国綱], Yoshimitsu [吉光]); the Rai (来) school (Kuniyuki [国行], Niji Kunitoshi [二字国俊]); the Ayanokôji (綾小路) school (Sadatoshi [定利], Sadaie [定家]); for Yamato certain Senju´in-based smiths (Rikiô [力王], Sadashige [定重]); very early Sôshû smiths like Shintôgo Kunimitsu (新藤五国光), Shintôgo Kunihiro (国広), Daishinbô (大進坊); the Fukuoka-Ichimonji school (Yoshifusa [吉房], Sukezane [助真], Suketsuna [助綱], Norifusa [則房], Munetada [宗忠], Yoshimochi [吉用], Yoshimoto [吉元]); the Ko-Osafune (古長船) school (Mitsutada [光忠], Nagamitsu [長光], Junkei [順慶], Kagehide [景秀], Sanenaga [真長]); other Bizen-mono like Saburô Kunimune (三郎国宗) or Hatakeda Moriie (畠田守家); the Katayama-Ichimonji school (Norifusa [則房]); the Chû-Aoe (中青江) school (Suketsugu [助次], Shigetsugu [重次], Sadatsugu [貞次], Moritsugu [守次]); and the latest Ko-Kyûshû smiths like Sairen (西蓮) or Naminohira Yukiyasu (行安) or Yasuyuki (安行). And representative smiths for making tachi in the “other,” the massive ikubi-kissaki-style sugata were for example Niji-Kunitoshi, Osafune Mitsutada, or several Ichimonji smiths.

Before we continue with the Kamakura period it must be pointed out that classifying Kamakura-period sugata is not as easy as it seems. One problem is the pure lack of extant unshortened blades and another problem, which is connected to problem number one, is that basically only those blades are extant in an unaltered condition which were made by noted smiths for a high-ranking clientel. Also we have to distinguish between war swords (hyôjô no tachi, 兵仗太刀) and ceremonial swords (gijô no tachi, 儀仗太刀) and this differentiation is as important as the realization that we are facing just the tip of the iceberg. To visualize the complexity of these problems: Blades from that time can be made to be worn as ceremonial sword by courtiers (kuge), as war sword for courtiers (nodachi, 野太刀, not to be confused with the overlong field swords of the same name), as war sword of the military aristocracy (buke), as treasure sword for both buke or kuge, or as war sword for the common warriors. The blades of all these swords show more or less subtle differences according to their use. Though we have to recognize that all we have is a small window through which we can peek into the Kamakura-era sword world and we have to be careful when it comes to sugata from that time. To learn more about the difficulties when it comes to classifying Kamakura-period sword shapes, please read the blog post I wrote a while ago.

KamakuraMid

Picture 5: mid-Kamakura period tachi (from left to right):
kokuhô, mei “Yoshihira” (吉平), nagasa 73.8 cm
kokuhô, mei “Kunimune” (国宗), Bizen-Saburô, nagasa 72.7 cm, sori 2.4 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Kuniyuki” (国行), Rai, nagasa 69.6 cm, sori 2.7 cm
kokuhô, mei “Yoshifusa” (吉房), Ichimonji, nagasa 81.4 cm, sori 3.0 cm

*

1.11 Late Kamakura and early Nanbokuchô period (1288-1336)

Tachi continuously increase in size and length towards the end of the Kamakura and early Nanbokuchô period but what is now most conspicious is the increase in kissaki size and the giving-up of the koshizori in favor of a toriizori. Apart from that, the kasane starts to get thinner and the abundance of niku disappears again. Tachi-sugata from that time are large and magnificent but yet not exaggerated or strikingly oversized.

Representative schools and smiths for a late Kamakura to early Nanbokuchô period sugata are: Kyô-mono like the Rai (来) school (Kunimitsu [国光], Kunitsugu [国次], Mitsunake [光包], Ryôkai [了戒]); the Senju´in (千手院) school (Yoshihiro [義弘]), the Shikkake (尻懸) school (Norinaga [則長], Norihiro [則弘]); the Taima (当麻) school (Kuniyuki [国行], Kunikiyo [国清], Chô Aritoshi [長有俊]); the Hoshô (保昌) school (Sadamune [貞宗], Sadayoshi [貞吉]); the Tegai (手掻) school (Kanenaga [包永]); for the Sôshû tradition (Masamune [正宗], Yukimitsu [行光], Sadamune [貞宗], Shizu Saburô Kaneuji [志津三郎兼氏], Kinjû [金重], Gô Yoshihiro [郷義弘], Norishige [則重]); the Yoshioka-Ichimonji (吉岡一文字) school (Sukeyoshi [助吉], Sukemitsu [助光], Sukeyoshi [助義], Sukeshige [助茂]); the Iwato or Shôchû-Ichimonji (岩戸・正中一文字) school (Yoshiuji [吉氏], Yoshimori [吉守]); the Osafune school (Kagemitsu [景光], Chikakage [近景], 1st generation Kanemitsu [兼光]); the Hatakeda (畠田) school (Sanemori [真守], Morishige [守重]); the Un (雲類) group (Unshô [雲生], Unji [雲次]); other Bizen smiths like Kokubunji Sukekuni (国分寺助国) or Wake no Shô Shigesuke (和気庄重助); the Chû-Aoe school (Yoshitsugu [吉次], Tsuguyoshi [次吉], Nobutsugu [信次], Naotsugu [直次], Hidetsugu [秀次]); the Katayama-Ichimonji school (Sanetoshi [真利], Tsugunao [次直], Chikatsugu [近次]); and for Kyûshû for example Jitsu´a (実阿), Ô-Sa (大左), Sa Kunihiro (左国弘), the Enju (延寿) school (Kunisuke [国資], Kuninobu [国信], Kunitoki [国時], Kuniyoshi [国吉], Kuniyasu [国泰]), or for the Naminohira school Yasumitsu (安光).

KamakuraLate

Picture 6: late Kamakura early Nanbokuchô period tachi (from left to right):
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Kunitoshi” (国俊), Rai, nagasa 75.5 cm, sori 2.4 cm
kokuhô, mei “Kunitoshi” (国俊), Rai, nagasa 72.2 cm, sori 2.3 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Sahyôe no Jô Fujiwara Kunitomo” (左兵衛尉藤原国友), Enju, dated Shôchû one (正中, 1324), nagasa 89.1 cm, sori 3.9 cm
kokuhô, mei “Bizen no Kuni Yoshioka-jû Sakon Shôgen Ki no Sukemitsu” (備前国吉岡住左近将監紀助光), dated Genkô two (元享, 1322), nagasa 82.1 cm, sori 3.6 cm

*

1.12 Mid-Nanbokuchô period (1336-1375)

The mid-Nanbokuchô period marked the height of the length and overall size growth of the tachi. Blades from that time measure up to 90 cm and even some longer ôdachi with a nagasa of 120 cm were produced in considerable numbers. There is not much taper, a scarce niku, a thin kasane, a narrow shinogi-ji, a shallow toriizori, and an ô-kissaki with not much fukura. The vast majority of these oversized tachi have been shortened but the large kissaki, the thin kasane, and the wide mihaba identifies them, with some experience, rather easy as mid-Nanbokuchô even if they show the same, about 70~75 cm measuring nagasa of a tachi or katana. Please note that sometimes and due to later polishings and alterations, an ô-kissaki is not that large and elongated as you might think. Or in other words, certain mid-Nanbokuchô tachi are described with having an ô-kissaki but which is in fact only slightly larger than a chû-kissaki. Mid-Nanbokuchô tachi-sugata are described as “magnificent” or “exaggerated,” and in Japanese we find terms like gôsô (剛壮) or yûdai (雄大). And as the climax of this trend in size growth was reached in the eras Enbun (延文, 1356-1361) and Jôji (貞治, 1362-1368), the term Enbun-Jôji-sugata (延文・貞治姿) has become established to refer to oversized mid-Nanbokuchô blades.

Representative schools and smiths for a mid-Nanbokuchô period sugata are: For Kyôto the Hasebe (長谷部) school (Kunishige [国重], Kuninobu [国信], Kunihira [国平]); the early Nobukuni (信国) smiths; the later Rai smiths (Tomokuni [倫国], Kunizane [国真]); Daruma Shigemitsu (達磨重光); for Yamato the Tegai (手掻) school (Kanetsugu [包次]); the Hoshô (保昌) school (Sadakiyo [貞清], Sadayuki [貞行]); for Sôshû masters like Hiromitsu (広光), Akihiro (秋広), and Hiromasa (広正); for Mino the Sôshû-influenced Naoe Shizu (直江志津) school (2nd generation Kaneuji [兼氏], Kanetsugu [兼次], Kanetomo [兼友], Kanenobu [兼信], 2nd generation Kinjû [金重], Kaneyuki [金行], Tametsugu [為継]); the Sôden-Bizen (相伝備前) school (2nd generation Kanemitsu [兼光], Tomomitsu [倫光], Masamitsu [政光], Motomitsu [基光], Yoshimitsu [義光], Motoshige [元重], Chôgi [長義], Yoshikage [義景]); the Ômiya (大宮) school (Morikage [盛景], Sukemori [助盛], Morokage [師景]); the Un (雲類) group (2nd generation Unji [雲次], Unjû [雲重]); the Chû-Aoe (中青江) school (Tsuguyoshi [次吉], Tsugunao [次直], Moritsugu [守次], later generations Sadatsugu [貞次]); the Ko-Mihara (古三原) school (Masaie [正家], Masahiro [正広], Masamitsu [正光]); the Uda (宇多) school (Kunimitsu [国光], Kunimune [国宗], Kunifusa [国房]); Kashû Sanekage (真景); the Sekishû-Naotsuna (石州直綱) school (Naotsuna [直綱], Sadatsuna [貞綱]); Hôjôji Kunimitsu (法城寺国光); the Niô (二王) school (Kiyotsuna [清綱], Kiyosada [清貞]); for Kyûshû the Sa (左) school (Yasuyoshi [安吉], Yoshisada [吉貞], Kunihiro [国弘], Hiroyuki [弘行],); Tosa Yoshimitsu (土佐吉光).

Also we must not forget that up to the mid-Nanbokuchô period there were some smiths who worked in two blade shapes, that is to say on the one hand in a tachi-sugata that followed the style of their times, and on the other hand in a classical slender tachi-sugata which remind of the late Heian or early Kamakura period. Representative for these “reminiscence of classic tachi-sugata” were Rai Kunitoshi (来国俊), Rai Kunimitsu (来国光), Ryôkai (了戒), for the Osafune school Nagamitsu (長光), Kagemitsu (景光), Sanenaga (真長), and the 1st generation Kanemitsu (兼光), Kanro Toshinaga (甘呂俊長), and certain Enju smiths like Kunimura (国村) or Kunitomo (国友).

NanbokuchoMid

Picture 7: mid-Nanbokuchô period tachi (from left to right):
kokuhô, mei “Bishû Osafune Tomomitsu” (備州長船倫光), dated Jôji five (1366), nagasa 126.0 cm, sori 5.8 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Bizen no Kuni Osafune-jû Yoshikage” (備前国長船住義景), suriage, nagasa 74.4 cm, sori 0.9 cm
kokuhô, mei “Senju´in Nagayoshi” (千手院長吉), dated Jôji five (1336), nagasa 135.7 cm
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Kaneuji” (兼氏), suriage, nagasa 66.7 cm

*

 

1.13 Late Nanbokuchô and early Muromachi period (1375-1428)

The late Nanbokuchô period brought a turning away from the exaggerated mid-Nanbokuchô blade shapes. That means tachi still have a rather long nagasa and a shallow toriizori but the kasane increases a bit, the blades taper again, and the tip returns to a chû-kissaki. And towards the end of the Ôei era (応永, 1394-1428) we are back at classical Kamakura-period tachi but now interpreted with a hint of a sakizori and a somewhat shorter nagasa. Well, it is difficult to recognize this sakizori as it is really just a hint but at an ubu blade from that time, you might just “feel” a somewhat different toriizori, i.e. with its deepest point slightly more towards the tip than usual.

Representative schools and smiths for a late Nanbokuchô and early Muromachi period sugata are: For Kyô-mono the the Sanjô (三条) school (Yoshinori [吉則]), the later Nobukuni (信国) masters; for Bizen the Kozori (小反) and Yoshii (吉井) school and for early Muromachi the Ôei-Bizen (応永備前) school (Morimitsu [盛光], Yasumitsu [康光]); for Mino the Akasaka-Senju´in (赤坂千手院) school; the Fujishima (藤島) school; the Uda (宇多) school.

MuromachiEarly

Picture 8: late Nanbokuchô and early Muromachi period tachi (from left to right):
jûyô-bunkazai, mei “Bishû Osafune Morimitsu” (備州長船盛光), dated Ôei 23 (1416), nagasa 76.1 cm, sori 1.1 cm
mei “Bishû Osafune Tsuguyuki” (備州長船次行), Kozori, suriage, nagasa 78.4 cm, sori 2.3 cm

 

 

The specialist for treatment of sword cuts

Whilst translating recently a battlefield-related article, I came across the term kinsô’i (金創医) that referred to “physicians” who were specialized in the treatment of incised wounds in general and of arrow wounds and sword cuts in particular. The article did not go much into detail at this point as it was more of a general nature but that term awoke my interest and as hardly anything is available on the net on this topic, I started to do some research the result of which is this humble article.

Basically, the ancient and medieval Japanese medical system was very similar to he one in the West. That means, there were academic physicians and partly specialized and partly allround practitioners who were considered lower ranking. This lower ranking was either connected to the fact that these practitioners did not undergo that an extensive training as the physicians, or to certain religious and social stigmas associated with unclean things like blood and the like. As for Japan, the records on “physician affairs” go pretty far back, that is to say to the 8th century Taihô and Yôrô Codes. The former was merely an adaption of the governmental system of China’s Tang Dynasty whereas the latter already incorporated Japanese traditions and practical necessities of administration. Pretty much of these codes is known today as it had survived in original and transcribed forms and we find therein also a medical service statute, the ishitsu-ryô (医疾令). Depending on what you base your counting on, i.e. extant original fragments or later transcriptions of the code, the ishitsu-ryô consisted of either 19, 24, or 26 articles. It deals with the regulations regarding the training and appointment of physicians (e.g. regulations of how to become a physician, an acupuncturist, a massage therapist, a spirit-vanquisher by charms [charm healer] and so on), the duties of the court physicians (ten’yaku-ryô, 典薬寮) and the local physicians in the provinces, and the operation of medicinical-herb gardens.

 EyeSurgery

Eye surgery as seen in the late Heian to early Kamakura period picture scroll Yamai no Sôshi (病草紙).

Well, most of the then know-how and the model for the aforementioned codes was imported from Chinese mainland and so it is no wonder that also medical science, i.e. the art of healing and of preventing diseases, came mostly from abroad. There were some indigenous physicians but it is assumed that they were rather healers and shamans and that there was no systematically accumulated and handed-down medical knowledgebase. Records of visits of mainland physicians date back to the 5th century AD but a more continuous and systematic exchange of medical knowledge only started with the missions to Tang China in the 7th, 8th and 9th centuries. The main carriers of this knowledge were Buddhist monks who played a major role in the entire “mainland exchange program.” Court physicians were given court titles, a requirement anyway to be be around in the imperial palace and to see and treat the emperor, and a kind of medical hierarchy started to develop. As far as medical knowledge is concerned, the latest trends, medicines, and treatments were constantly “updated” from Jin, Western Xia, Yuan and Ming Dynasty China. But we can see major changes from the Muromachi period onwards, on the one hand as the then established Ashikaga-bakufu was now introducing a medical service statute itself, i.e. for the ruling warrior class, and on the other hand that the entire approach of applying medicine and treating patients started to change. That means, in former times, physicians basically looked up the patients’ symptoms in their handed-down books and treated them or prescribed them medicine according to what was written in there. But now, physicians started more and more to rely on personal experiences and their own lifelong studies what in turn resulted in an increased body of medical publications, although often kept secret within a school or family.

Returning to our main topic, the kinsô’i specialists for incised wounds, we rightaway have to go back again to the Taihô and Yôrô Codes. In these codes, it was distinguished between internal medicine (tairyô, 体療), surgery (sôshu, 創腫), pediatrics (shôshô, 少小), obstetrics (jo’i, 女医), otorhinolaryngology (jimoku-kushi, 耳目口歯), acupuncture (hari, 鍼・針), massage (anma, 按摩), charm healing (jugon, 咒禁), and herb farming (yaku’en, 薬園). But it has to be pointed out that the then surgeons did not carry out surgeries like we understand that term today. It was more a removing of tumors and swellings (shu, 腫) – thus the name sôshu – and treating external wounds like cuts and also burns. Later on, that means during the Kamakura and Nanbokuchô periods, the terms tairyô and sôshu were replaced by the terms naika (内科) and geka (外科) respectively. With the aforementioned significant changes in medical system over the Muromachi period, more specialists emerged and although some distinctions between tumor, furuncle, or boils removers and those who treat incised wounds had been going round since the Nanbokuchô period, there were now “real specialists” like the haremono-ishi (腫物医師, tumor surgeon), the kizu-ishi (疵医師, general wound surgeon), and the kinsô’i (金創医) and no longer just “surgeons” who performed all surgeries. And it is in my opinion safe to assume that it was the increased warfare during the Sengoku era which demanded specialized cut wound surgeons. Well, incised wounds had always been mentioned separately, for example in the ishitsu-ryô where we read that court physicians are required to provide and have in stock medicine for incised wounds. But now, treating incised wounds became a special field with a body of teachings on its own, very likely born from surgeons who had direct and constant battlefield experience similar to the European barber surgeons who looked after soldiers during or after a battle.

An advancement in the successful treatment of incised wounds came with the exchange with European physicians like the Portuguese Luís de Almeida (1525-1597) towards the very end of the Muromachi period, for example due to the introduction of surgical suture. Well, Japanese records are pretty rare on this matter but just on the basis of thinking about the difficulties of treating larger open wounds and the existence of ancient Chinese records of sutures, I think it is logical to assume that wounds have had been sutured in Japan before the contact with European physicians. On the other hand, it seems as if a kind of “reinvention” of surgical sutures took place in the mid to late Edo period, “reinventure” because Western medicine was soon treated with suspicion or “neglected as a precaution” after the sakoku (鎖国, “locked country”) foreign relations policy enacted in the early Edo period. So it is also possible that even larger open wounds were mostly just treated with compression bandages and the like. For example, we know from Muromachi-eriod records that persons injured by sword cuts were treated with medicine taken internally, e.g. ginseng, Ligusticum wallichii, or peony roots, and that bleeding was stopped by sprinkling powdered resins with names like shôroku (松緑), furuse-ma (古瀬麻), or kirinketsu (麒麟血) onto wounds. And as a painkiller, ointments of rosewood or bulrush were directly applied on the wound. Also we read of urinating in a jingasa and applying the urin to the wound as a disinfectant.

 Bandages

Guidance for putting on bandages from an early 19th century publication.

Last I want to deal with the question who these kinsô’i were. In view of the fact that up to the Muromachi period many of the trained physicians were actually monks and because often priests of the Ji-shû (時衆) group accompanied the warriors onto the battlefield in the role of army chaplains (jinsô, 陣僧), battlefield physicians and thus kinsô’i are often equated with monks. Well, we do know that Ji-shû priests also acted as physicians but experts suggest to be careful in this respect. That is to say, also non-ordained persons who had specialized in treating incised wounds often shaved their heads when operating in or around a battlefield in order to avoid being shot and attacked. In other words, shaving your head identified you as a member of the clergy just like the red crosses or red crescent used by present-day protected persons in armed conflicts as international humanitarian law considers them as non-combatants (whether military or civilian) and thus they may not be attacked and not be taken as prisoners of war. Also because of the fact that kinsô’i were rather of low rank, we can assume that the majority of them did not come from academically trained and “qualified” physicians but were recruited from local and self-trained practitioners.

I hope this was an interesting brief excursion to the history of battlefield-related medical staff in general and to the kinsô’i in particular, a subject that is as indicated not that widely known in sword-related fields.

Masamune Book Update

It should be safe now to re-order or order your book respectively if you were waiting for things being fixed. Please note that you should only re-order if Lulu.com has sent you a notification mail that your order was cancelled (and refunded you). So if you never got any notification from Lulu.com, just wait a little it is likely that your order went through. Again, if there are any troubles (or if you receive a faulty copy), please don’t hesitate and get in touch with me via “markus.sesko@gmail.com.” Thank you all for your patience and I hope that I don’t loose any readers due to this fiasco…

IMPORTANT: Masamune Book Update

Over the last couple of days, Lulu.com and customers of mine have informed me that there was some issue with the PDF file that serves both as basis for the print and for the eBook. In the meanwhile, some of you who already had placed an order on the book were refunded by Lulu.com as the order was cancelled. The problem with the PDF is now solved and I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience as you have to place a new order! This is the first time anything like that happened and I am very sorry for all the trouble!! Please get in touch with me via “markus.sesko@gmail.com” if you have any further questions.

 

 

MASAMUNE – His Work, his Fame and his Legacy

It’s done, my announced Masamune book is out now!

I quote from the blurb:

“It is often said that Masamune was the greatest Japanese swordsmith of all times but we have to define what we mean by “greatest.” From a mere technical point of view, it is next to impossible to say if there was one “greatest” swordsmith as the country brought forth so many great master smiths over the centuries. Each of these masters had a more or less personal approach in producing a perfect sword, and within these elite circles of smiths we are not only referring to technical perfection but also to aesthetical considerations. Or, in other words, these great master smiths not only strived to produce an impeccable sword but also to leave a work of art following the then aesthetical currents. This all, i.e. the technical and artistic aspect, is both very true for Masamune and, putting aside the claim to name a “greatest,” we can at least say for sure that Masamune is by far the most famous swordsmith of Japan. A lot has been written on Masamune and his swords, both inside and outside of Japan. The aim of this publication is to contribute to the understanding and appreciation of this great swordsmith in the West, that is to say by not only presenting his most famous works but also by providing, on the basis of an examination of all major written records on Masamune, a newly researched and detailed historic overview of his life and the circumstances in the establishment of a new forging tradition. This publication introduces more than 50 of his meibutsu (noted swords). “

Please note that there are two editions: The standard b/w paperback edition that is (shortly) available everywhere (e.g. Amazon.com), and the hardcover color higher quality paper deluxe edition that is only available via Lulu.com. I would highly recommend the latter edition as the pictures should turn out much better on the higher quality paper. Also I added many portraits of previous historic owners of the meibutsu to give the provenances “a face.” These also should do much better in color.

Paperback Edition 49.90 USD

Deluxe Edition 89.90 USD

eBook Edition 19.90 USD

MasamuneCover

 

 

KANTEI 1 – SUGATA #4

1.7.2 Horimono (engravings)

 

Let us continue with the engravings that are usually found on a Japanese sword. As mentioned at the very beginning, I will skip historic background as much as possible and focus on what you see on blades and what is essential for kantei. As for horimono, an excellent and detailed overview in terms of terminology and religious significance had been written by Gabriel Lebec just last year and is available as PDF here. So if you want additional and background info on this subject, this is where you go. Important for kantei conclusions drawn on the basis of horimono is to know that engravings other than hi basically follow two approaches: The one is the belief that certain religious symbols provide good luck, offer protection from evil or harm, and/or underline what the sword wearer beliefs, and the other one is to personalize and decorate a blade. Well, it can be said hat virtually all horimono have some kind of religious background and that over time just the degree of detail and repertoire increased. In short, deities were in the beginning often justrepresented by their bonji (Sanskrit character) but were later on fully “carved out” in a picturesque manner. And the detail of such engravings can be truly amazing! And stylized religious symbols were later in time no longer interpreted in an abstract and abbreviated but in a full and more “realistic” manner. When it comes to Japanese depictions, we differentiate between three degrees of elaboration or abbreviation: 1. shin (真): “formal,” “full,” or “most elaborate;” 2. gyô (行): “semi-formal” or “intermediate degree of elaboration;” and 3. (草): “informal,” “free,” or “abbreviated.” For the definition of horimono (and other Japanese arts as well), these terms are used as prefixes, e.g. shin no …, gyô no …, and sô no …

An important aspect of horimono is the fact that hey do not necessarily had to be added at the time the blade was forged. That means, every later owner of a blade was able to decide to have it enlarged by whatever engraving (or groove). This was sometimes done to hide certain flaws, for example open fukure blisters in the shinogi-ji, or to “push” an unsigned blade into a certain direction. For example, a blade whose workmanship suggests Nanbokuchô Sôshû might have better chances to receive an attribution to the great Sadamune if enlarged with futasuji-hi as several blades of this master show this kind of grooves. Also important to know is that as far as swords are concerned, classicism had always been a choice. So a smith or client from whatever period, let’s say late Muromachi or mid-Edo could have made or ordered a blade that models on classical Kamakura masterworks, including their horimono, or if not modelled on a concrete example, made or ordered an elegant blade that got a classic touch by adding an ancient-looking engraving at its base. And with this, we arrive at the question of what was/is considered as classical? As a rule of thumb it can be said that classical horimono are those that had emerged before the end of the Kamakura period. Often quoted examples of what is thought to be the oldest horimono are a suken as relief in a hi on a blade of Bizen Tomonari (友成), the bonji for Fudô-Myôô on top of a suken on a blade of Ko-Hôki Ôhara Sanemori (大原真守), and the relief of a kurikara, a bonji and the a deity as relief (experts argue on what deity is depicted), or a crane that bites into a pine cone on blades by Bungo Yukuhira (行平) (see picture below). That means we are as early as in the late Heian or very beginning of the Kamakura period with these smiths. What is obvious at these earliest horimono is that they focus pretty much at just the base of the blade and that they are quite simple.

Tomonari             Sanemori                  Yukihira          matsukui

From left to right: Tomonari, Sanemori, Yukihira.

Before I introduce one by one the most common engravings, I want to address the question of which blades from which schools or smiths are likeliest to show horimono? And in this case I mean horimono in terms of more elaborate decorations and not just suken. Well, chronologically speaking, more elaborate horimono are very often seen at the Nobukuni (信国) school followed by the Hasebe (長谷部) school and the Bizen Osafune smiths from master Kagemitsu (景光) onwards. That means we basically start not before the mid to late Nanbokuchô period with elaborate engravings. The Bizen smiths in general are known for adding relative often horimono what applies to the Kozori group (小反) that emerged towards the end of the Nanbokuchô period as well as to the Ôei-Bizen, Eikyô-Bizen, and Sue-Bizen groups. The Sôshû smiths too are famous for their horimono and that concerns the master smiths after Masamune, i.e. Hiromitsu (広光) and Akihiro (秋広), as well as the entire Sue-Sôshû group. Another candidate whose blades show almost always any kind of horimono is Heianjo Nagayoshi (平安城長吉), or to be precise the later smith who was active around Eishô (永正, 1504-1521). When it comes to the end of the Muromachi period, we find – apart from the Sue-Bizen and Sue-Sôshû smiths – relative many elaborate horimono on works of the Yamato Kanabô (金房) and Shitahara (下原) school. And at the transitional time to the shintô era, we find many engravings on blades made in the vicinity of the supposed “founder” of the shintô, Umetada Myôju (埋忠明寿), e.g. at Horikawa Kunihiro (堀川国広) and Hizen Tadayoshi (肥前忠吉) and on blades of their immediate successors like Dewa no Daijô Kunimichi (出羽大掾国路) and his Mishina colleague Etchû no Kami Masatoshi (越中守正俊). Not to forget Echizen Yasutsugu (康継) and the Shimosaka (下坂) school where he came from. Somewhat later in shintô times, Kotetsu (虎徹) and Awataguchi Ikkanshi Tadatsuna (粟田口一竿子忠綱) are famous for adding elaborate horimono, stating that proudly on the tang via the phrase hori-dôsaku (彫同作) what means “horimono by the smith” in contrast to horimono engraved by a specialized horimono artist like it was often the case at the earliest Hizen smiths. And as for shinshintô times, first and foremost Hosokawa Masayoshi (細川正義) and Taikei Naotane (大慶直胤) must be named. But I would like to repeat that this “list” concerns schools and smiths that are known for adding elaborate horimono. That means, more simple and classical engravings are found throughout all periods and schools. Anyway, if a certain school or smith is famous for a certain horimono or certain horimono interpretation, I will point that out again in the corresponding chapters. Having that said, let me now introduce in alphabetical order the most common horimono. And not to make this blog post disproportionally long, I will add comparisons of individual horimono interpretations as PDFs.

bonji (梵字) – Sanskrit character(s). Might be used alone or in combination with other engravings, for example on top of a groove or suken or in between two grooves that have been “interrupted” for the purpose of adding a bonji. It is almost impossible to point out a certain school or smith that is very famous for adding bonji but I would say Nobukuni, Heianjô Nagayoshi, Hiromitsu, Akihiro, the Sue-Sôshû school, the Osafune school, the Ôei-Bizen school, the Sue-Bizen school, Umetada Myôju, the Horikawa school, Dewa no Daijô Kunimichi, Etchû no Kami Masatoshi, Hizen Tadayoshi, Echizen Yasutsugu, Higo no Daijô Sadakuni (肥後大掾貞国), Kotetsu, Suishinshi Masahide (水心子正秀), and Taikei Naotane.

Bonji

Daikokuten (大黒天) – One of the Seven Lucky Gods associated with wealth and prosperity. Sometimes also just referred to as Daikoku. He is usually interpreted as relief and depicted standing on two bales of rice. Usually seen on blades of Horikawa Kunihiro, Dewa no Daijô Kunimichi, and Kotetsu. A Daikokuten horimono is sometimes also soon at Hiroyoshi (広賀) from Hôki. ComparisonDaikokuten.

Daikokuten

dokko (独鈷) – A single-prong vajra hilt. Such a vajra hilt is a weapon which is used as a ritual object to symbolize both the properties of a diamond (indestructibility) and a thunderbolt (irresistible force). The dokko can be found as horimono itself or with one prong elongated to a ken sword, an interpretation which is referred to as dokko-ken (独鈷剣) or short dokken (独剣) (see bottom picture below). This kind of horimono is for example sometimes found at blades of the Sue-Sôshû school but is much lesser seen than its “famous” counterpart, the sankozuka-ken, i.e. the three-pronged vajra hilt. ComparisonDokko.

 dokko

dokko-ken

Fudô-Myôô (不動明王) – Guardian deity primarily revered in Vajrayana Buddhism or in Japan respectively in the Shingo, Tendai, Yen, and Nichiren sects. He is usually depicted in a fierce manner, holding a sankozuka-ken or kurikara, a sword with a dragon coiled around it in the one hand, and a kensaku (羂索) rope in the other hand. The flaming nimbus or halo behind the statue is known as the karura (迦楼羅) flame, after a mythical firebreathing birdlike creature, the Garuda (jap. Karura). His seat, the banjakuza (盤石座 , lit. “huge rock base”), is considered an appropriate iconographic symbol to demonstrate the steadfastness of Fudô-Myôô. A Fudô-Myôô engraving is also seen at quite many schools and throughout all times so it is hard to name any name here. ComparisonFudoMyoo.

FudoMyoo

hatahoko (幡鉾・旗鉾) – Lit. “banner spear.” Symbolic weapon used in esoteric Buddhism to decorate an altar place. The spear or lance is sometimes also referred to as Bishamon-ken (毘沙門剣, lit. “Sword of Bishamon”) or just hoko (鉾). A hatahoko engraving is pretty rare. The one shown below is found on a Hizen Tadayoshi blade and was added by the horimono-shi Munenaga (宗長) who had refined his craft under Umetada Myôju.

hatahoko

kensaku (羂索) – Rope of Fudô-Myôô and other guardian deities which symbolizes the keeping at distance of enemies of the Buddhist teachings and the catching of new believers.

 kensaku

kurikara (倶梨伽羅) – According to legend, the guardian deity Fudô-Myôô (不動明王) once had to fight a deity from another religion, the dragon king Kurikara, written with the same characters as stated above. He changed himself into a flaming sword but Kurikara did the same and the fighting went on without a winner. But then Fudô-Myôô transformed into the dragon Kurikara, wound himself around the opponent’s sword, and ate it from the top. Also referred to as kenmaki-ryû (剣巻龍, lit. “dragon winding around a sword”). There are quite many kurikara interpretations but basically we differentiate between three approaches that follow the shin-gyô-sô mentioned at the beginning, i.t. shin no kurikara (真の倶梨伽羅, “full” or “realistic kurikara”), gyô no kurikara (行の倶梨伽羅, “more or less abbreviated kurikara”), and sô no kurikara (草の倶梨伽羅, “abbreviated,” “stylized,” or “abstrac kurikara”). A shin no kurikara is often seen on blades of Nobukuni, Heianjô Nagayoshi, of the Sue-Bizen school, at Awataguchi Ikkanshi Tadatsuna, Hizen Tadayoshi, Echizen Yasutsugu, Higo no Daijô Sadakuni, Suishinshi Masamune, Hosokawa Masayoshi, Taikei Naotane, and at the shinshintô and gendai Gassan school. A gyô no kurikara can be found on Nobukuni and Heianjô Nagayoshi blades, at Kagemitsu, the Sue-Bizen and Sue-Sôshû schools, Echizen Yasutsugu, Kotetsu, Hizen Tadayoshi, Taikei Naotane, and Tairyûsai Sôkan (泰龍斎宗寛). And a stylized sô no kurikara is typical for the Hasebe school, Nobukuni, Heianjô Nagayoshi, the Kanabô school, the Sue-Sôshû and Sue-Bizen school, the smiths around Osafune Kanemitsu, Awataguchi Ikkanshi Tadatsuna, Echizen Yatsuugu, Hizen Tadayoshi, the shintô Hôjôji school, Ômi no Kami Tsuguhira (近江守継平), Harima no Daijô Shigetaka (播磨大掾重高), Yamashiro no Kami Kunikiyo (山城守国清), and Taikei Naotane. And please note that Heianjô Nagayoshi often combined a gyô no kurikara and a sô no kurikara or two differently stylized sô no kurikara distributed on the two sides of one blade. The same peculiarity is seen at the Kanabô school. But it has to be pointed out that sometimes it is hard to say if a kurikara is shin or already gyô or gyô tending to . A variant or certain characteristic interpretation of a kurikara is the so-called harami-ryû (孕龍, lit. “pregnant dragon”). Here, the body of the dragon is somewhat at distance from the sword and with a curve of the thigh which makes it look like as if the dragon is pregnant. Such a harami-ryū is often found on swords by Nagamitsu and his Osafune main line successors. ComparisonKurikara.

ShinNoKurikara

 shin no kurikara

 GyoNoKurikara

gyô no kurikara

 SoNoKurikara

sô no kurikara

 harami-ryu

harami-ryû

myôgô (名号) – Names of deities engraved onto sword blades, for example of Hachiman-Daibosatsu (八幡大菩薩) oder Marishiten (摩利支天). Known for engraving myôgô are for example Kagemitsu, Kanemitsu, the Sue-Bizen smiths, Heianjô Nagayoshi, Horikawa Kunihiro, Echizen Yasutsugu, and Yamato no Kami Yasusada (大和守安定).

 myogo

rendai (蓮台) – The rendai is the lotus-shaped platform or lotus blossom seat beneath a Buddha image. A rendai was engraved to sword blades by itself or in combination with other horimono, for example a suken or bonji.

 rendai

ryû (龍・竜) – Plain dragon that do not wind around a ken. A very common variant of the “plain” dragon is the horimono subject tamaôi-ryû (玉追い龍), the lit. “gem hunting dragon” (see picture below). According to Japanese mythology, the god of the sea in the shape of a dragon (ryûjin, 龍神) had two magical gems – the “ebb stone” kanju (干珠) and the “tide stone” manju (満珠) – with which he controlled the tide. Later he presented them to his son the demigod Hoori no mikoto (火遠理命). A legend says that later empress Jingû (神功天皇, 201-269) was in the possession of the two gems and as she was not able to control the tide, she crossed the sea, had her enemies drowned and conquered Korea. Historians assume that already back then elements of the Indian Cintāmaṇi (Jap. nyoi-ju, 如意珠) were adopted, a wish-fulfilling jewel equivalent to the philosopher´s stone in Western alchemy. A tamaôi-ryû is for example relative often seen on blades of Kurihara Nobuhide (栗原信秀) and of the shinshintô/gendaitô Gassan school. And dragons in general are typical for Nobukuni, Umetada Myôju, Horikawa Kunihiro, Hizen Tadayoshi, Awataguchi Ikkanshi Tadatsuna, Kotetsu, Taikei Naotane, Tairyûsai Sôken, as well as for the mentioned Kurihara Nobuhide and the shinshintô/gendaitô Gassan school. Another characteristic dragon horimono has to be mentioned, that is that of a jôge-ryû or nobori-kudari-ryû (上下龍) where two dragons are egraved on each side of the blade, one facing upwards ( or nobori), i.e. towards the tip, and the other one facing downwards (ge or kudari), i.e. towards the habaki. A nobori-kudari-ryû might be found on blades of Umetada Myôju, Horikawa Kunihiro, Hizen Tadayoshi, Echizen Yasutsugu, Kotetsu, Awataguchi Ikkanshi Tadatsuna, Nanki Shigekuni, and at the shinshintô/gendaitô Gassan school.

tamaoi-ryu1

tamaoi-ryu

sankozuka (三鈷柄) – Trident vajra hilt. Such a vajra hilt is a weapon which is used as a ritual object to symbolize both the properties of a diamond (indestructibility) and a thunderbolt (irresistible force). The vajra is essentially a type of club with a ribbed spherical head. The ribs may meet in a ball-shaped top, or they may be separate and end in sharp points with which to stab. The sankozuka has now three ribs unlike the dokko which has one rib or prong. A ritual ken sword with such trident vajra hilt is referred to as sankozuka-ken (三鈷柄剣) accordingly. A sankozuka-ken horimono comes in many different interpretations. As a rule of thumb it can be said that at the Nobukuni smiths, the tip of the sakozuka-ken is quite deeply cut and the engraving is often combined with a bonji on top. At the Sue-Sôshû school, the tip of the ken is rather pointed whereas it is more roundish at the Sue-Bizen, Sue-Mihara, and Sue-Seki schools.

 sankozuka

santai-butsu (三体仏) – Also referred to as sanzon (三尊). Buddha triumvirate with Buddha in the middle accompanied by two Boddhisattva. On paintings the triumvirate is usually depicted side by side but on a narrow sword blade the figures are engraved below of each other.

 santaibutsu

shiketsu (四橛) – A shiketsu is a utensil used in esoteric Buddhism. It is a kind of post, mostly of copper, which symbolically encloses the four sides of an elevated platform on which religious and/or ascetic practices are performed. The shiketsu is a rather rarely seen horimono and might be found on the opposite side of a kurikara, for example on Sue-Bizen blades.

 shiketsu

suken (素剣) – Lit. “plain ken.” Simplified horimono of a ritualistic ken sword which just depicts the outlines of the blade. Suken can come alone but are often accompanied by other engravings like a sankozuka hilt, tsume claws (see tsume-ken), a rendai base, or a bonji. Also it can be interpreted as relief in a hitsu. A suken is one of the classical horimono and thus also found on pretty early kotô. As it was very common, it is again hard to name any particular school or smith who was “famous” for adding a suken. Noticeably wide suken with an obtuse-angled tip or two such wide suken arranged in takekurabe manner are for example seen on blades of Nanki Shigekuni (南紀重国) (see bottom two pictures below).

suken

NankiShigekuni

tsume () – Lit. “claw.” The claw-shaped protrusion often seen on suken. But a tsume can also come by itself or in combination with other horimono, e.g. gomabashi.

 tsume

tsume-ken (爪剣) – A suken with a tsume claw at its base.

 tsume-ken

 

In conclusion I want to say that horimono-kantei is a field of reseach on its own and I have to admit, I haven’t been into engravings that much to elaborate on the subtle differences of the claws and scales of kurikara dragons of the depth of suken for example. But that is on my list of future studies to do and I will present results of research of course here on my blog.

Asking for Masamune tantô feedback

Still working on my Masamune book and I am “struggling” with a Masamune tantô that was published in Token Bijutsu 196 (May 1973). Therein, Honma Junji introduces the tantô in his series titled Kantô Hibi Shô (鑑刀日々抄), p. 31. The blade is signed “Masamune” and Honma says in the very brief description of the piece that the signature is unfortunately a so-called soko-mei (底銘), i.e. the tang lost some substance what weakens the mei more or less, but that it looks apart from that legit.

Now my question: Was this tantô described or discussed later again, and if so, where? Thank you!

 * Edit: “Problem” solved. Thank you.

MasamuneTanto