Naginata (薙刀) - The Samurai's Glaive
Naginata (薙刀) - The Samurai's Glaive
A typical foot soldier of the early Kamakura period carrying a naginata, from the Heiji Monogatari Emaki (平治物語絵巻).
When it comes to Japanese (and in particular, Samurai) polearms, there are few examples as iconic as the naginata (薙刀), also written 長刀, always erroneously translated into English as the Japanese halberd (which technically it is not, at least in it most common variation: the correct translation is glaive) .
The naginata is a polearm with a curved blade of various shapes, usually in between 30 to 100 cm, mounted on an oval shaft of 90-180 cm by means of a lengthy tang inserted into a slot in the haft, and held in place by pegs.
This polearm has been the main weapon of foot soldiers from the late Heian period to the early Muromachi period, it was wielded from horseback by the Samurai in the 14th and 15th century and was still used for home defense through the late Muromachi and Edo period.
It is also one of the prominent weapon depicted in art, and due to its long service it changed significantly throughout the ages. In this article I will talk about its history, usage and variations of said weapon.
A group of horsemen of the early 14th century, armed with long naginata, charging against infantry; from the 清水寺縁起絵巻.
History
It is hard to pinpoint when the naginata started to appear, but it is likely that it was developed due to the new tactics and warfare of the Heain period.
With the dismantling of the rather inefficient Imperial army and the rise of the feudal warlords, horse archery and mounted warriors had become the predominant threat on the battlefield.
These warriors were supported by the respective retainers on foot, who carried bows or polearms; in this context, they fought in small bands, rather than in organized ranks, in order to harass the enemy horsemen or other small infantry groups.
Unlike the hoko spear, which was still used in this period, a naginata was much more suited to deal with multiple enemies and against horsemen, and it was good at thrusting and cutting as well as having a lot of heft in the blade which made the weapon a heavy hitter - just like a halberd indeed.
All of these features were useful in those small skirmishes, and it is very likely that the naginata evolved from the teboko (手鉾), a single edge variation of the hoko, since medieval sources used the word interchangeably with konaginata (小薙刀).
There are almost no extant examples of naginata blades that predate the mid-Kamakura period, and none that can be reliably dated to Heian times.
The earliest clear reference to a naginata in the written record is a chronicle entry from 1146, which describes a warrior reaching for a weapon “commonly called a naginata.”
A document dated three months later reports the investigation of a raid on an estate in Kawachi province, in which the perpetrators carried off “20 head of good oxen, 3,000 sheaves of cut rice, 20 haramaki armors, 100 swords, and 10,000 naginata.”
Both sources write the word “naginata” phonetically, leaving little doubt that the weapon must have been around by this time.
However, there are earlier references to naginata in the sources. A diary entry from 1040, for example, mentions what may be a naginata carried by a warrior in the capital. In this case, “naginata” is written with characters that mean “long sword” (長刀), which was the standard orthography until the fifteenth century.
Another warrior with a naginata, from the 男衾三郎絵巻.
Similarly, a diary entry from 1097 speaks of what may be a naginata, using a similar orthography (長剱); a document from 1124 depicts a police official “drawing a naginata”; and a diary entry from 1110 describes foot soldiers parading through the capital bearing “uchimono - 打物,” an alternative term for naginata in later sources.
But it is difficult to be sure whether any of these are indeed early references to naginata or simply literal allusions to very long swords.
The phrase “drawing a naginata” in the 1124 document raises additional questions in this regard, since the verb used in later medieval sources to describe unsheathing a naginata is “remove” (hazusu - 外す), rather than “draw” (nuku - 抜く), which is normally associated with swords.
Nevertheless, these weapons started to become prominent in 12th century and remained the most common battlefield weapon until the 15th century, when organized infantry wielding pikes started to appear again in Japan. It is worth to say that while it is often associated with the sōhei (僧兵) warrior monks, in that period of time, the naginata was simply the most prominent weapons on the battlefield and these monks were armed in the same manner of their Samurai counterpart. The weapon was also used to show the heads of the enemy during the march; unlike with spears, in this case were laced rather than impaled.
A group of sōhei warrior monks with naginatas, unknown emaki.
In the battlefield context of ranks&formations of the late 15th and 16th century, the naginata wasn't the ideal weapon except for the small bands of samurai that fought behind the pikes walls; however in this period there was the development of the yari in all of its variations which simply outclassed the functions of the naginata, leaving the weapon for a very small niche of warriors.
Shape and Usage
As explained above, the naginata is a polearm with a curved blade; most blade were in between 30 to 100 cm but rather long 150 cm or more blades existed too.
The blade cross section is either shōbu zukuri (菖蒲造り), a very long and slender blade with a fine and tapered kissaki and no yokote line, kanmuri otoshi zukuri (冠落造り), which is similar to shōbu but the thickness of the back (mune - 棟) becomes thinner and tapers down from the mid blade up until the end, or unokubi zukuri (鵜の首造り) which is identical to kanmuri otoshi but the back becomes thicker again towards the tip . In the last two cross sections, the back edge could be sharpened as well. All of these cross sections are well suited for thrusting, highlighting the double role of the naginata.
Most blades cross sections usually present a ridge, although some naginata had a hirazukuri (triangular with no ridge) cross section, but are quite rare.
A unique feature of the naginata is its groove near the tang, which is often lacquered, called naginata-hi (薙刀樋).
In this picture taken from the web, H and G are respectively the cross sections of Unokubizukuri and Kanmuri otoshi zukuri.
Furthermore the blade shape could be divided into two broad categories as well; if the blade has a strong warp and gets wider towards the tip, the naginata is called tomoegata (巴型). This naginata was common during the the Heian and Kamakura period, and was heavily optimized for the cut; its very curved edge was also likely better at dismounting enemy horsemen. In fact, by that period, the naginata was the main foot solider polearm. This is also the most prominent naginata in artworks.
A tomoegata naginata; see the heavily curved and wide tip. This example is rather moderate compared to more extremely curbed ones.
If the blade on the other hand has a shallow curve and its rather slender and thin in its look, it is called shizukagate (静型). These blades started to appear around the mid Kamakura period and were the main ones used during the Muromoachi and later period. During the 14th century, naginata also starts to increase their length and so shizukagate naginata are usually longer. This style is also somewhat similar to the blades used for the nagamaki (長巻).
A shizukagate naginata in the same museum; you could see the less curved and thinner tip.
These blades aren't optimized in the cut and could fulfill the role of thrusting polearms much better compared to the tomoegata type, which gradually started to decline. The rise of popularity of this style is likely to attribute to the new development in armors of the 14th century; in this context a weapon capable to snipe the gap of the armor was much more desirable.
A comparison of the two stereotypical blade, taken from this website
Around this period, naginata were also used by mounted Samurai in order to deal specifically with infantry while charging on horseback and so the length of the blade was increased too, both because the horsemen needed a longer reach and because the foot soldiers could harass the enemy from a safer distance. Extremely long naginata were popular during the Nanbokucho wars; they were fitted with a blade as long as 180cm with a relatively shorter handle; these naginata were called Onaginata (大薙刀) but quickly went out of usage in the 15th century.
Two Onaginata, from the 清水寺縁起絵巻. Notice the large tsuba on the pole.
Always during the 14th century, a new style of naginata was developed and used in Kyūshū; it is called tsukushi naginata (筑紫薙刀).
Unlike the common design in which the blade was fitted onto the shaft with a long tang, in this case the blade was mounted laterally with a metal ring that wrapped around the pole.
A tsukushi naginata with its scabbard.
This is more similar to a bardiche rather than a glaive, and the design allow the blade to be in line with the shaft ( although many tsukushi naginata had a curved edge that extended past that line). It was probably born out of an axe design, and it is also know as nata naginata (鉈長刀). These style could have the same cross sections and blade shapes of the regular naginata, but they could have a blade that extends below the ring as seen in the picture below.
Three types of tsukushi naginata and a hoko spear on the last picture; taken from 武器袖鏡. 初編.
Few unique designs that are worth mentioning, although rarer, are the ones that incorporates side hooks or small deformations on the back of the blade. This might have being inspired by the Chinese guandao (關刀) of the same period. They usually have tomoegata blade and the side hook could be sharpened as well.
A 16th century naginata with the aforementioned design; notice the additional "hook" on the back.
Another fairly rare design which is seen in the Heiji monogatari scroll (平治物語絵巻) is a naginata with a clip point, a tip that tapers in profile towards the end of the blade. This feature is to enhance the thrusting cability of the weapon, and it is quite rare: as far as I am aware, it is only found in artworks of the Kamakura period.
A closeup of the picture; unlike the other naginata of the same scroll, this one doesn't present the extreme tomoegata.
During the late Muromachi and Azuchi-momoyama period, while the naginata started to decline on the battlefield, it was still used to some degree for home defense especially in the following Edo period; it wasn't uncommon to see girls and women train with this weapon in this age to fulfill that role.
The blades of these periods are the ones that we are the most familiar with; usually short, thin in width and with a strong curvature towards the tip and most of the time they were fitted to a long shaft.
Always in the late 16th century, occasionally instead of using a long tang a socket was used to mount the blade: in this case we speak of fukuro naginata (袋薙刀).
A typical fukuro naginata in the 16th century shape.
Since the decline of usage of this weapon, just like with the nagamaki, many naginata, especially the longest ones, were cut down at the tang and slightly at tip and refurbished into a sword; this process is called naginata naoshi (薙刀直し). Unlike the most common shinogi zukuri design, the naginata naoshi has a slender tip and it is essentially identical to the shobu zukuri.
Since the style was extremely popular in the 16th century, swords were directly made resembling a naginata naoshi instead of cutting old naginata.
A naginata naoshi wakizashi.
The naginata was mounted on hard wood shaft in between 90 and 180 cm, which was often lacquered and decorated and was fitted with its own scabbard.
Just like any other Japanese polearms, it was fitted with some type of hand guards; the most common was the circular tsuba (鍔) but side parry hooks of various shapes used to deflect and grab called hadome or kagi(鍵) were common too.
A four side parry hook; the majority of them were essentially a crossguard, although complex structures like the one above were used too. Below on the right, a ishizuki.
At the end of the shaft, an iron cap of various designs was used; it is called ishizuki (石突) and could spot various shapes: among the most common a halfmoon, a squared flat surface or a pointy tip that could be used to pierce as well.
Warriors from the 14th century carrying bows and naginata; from the 秋夜長物語.
A 17th century picture from the 大坂夏の陣図屏風 ; despite its decline compared to the other centuries, the naginata was still used during the Sengoku period as we can see in this emaki.
The naginata was definitely a very important weapon for the feudal warriors of the Heian, Kamakura and early Muromachi period, be it on foot or on horseback due to its great versatility.
I hope that now after this long reading, all the insights of these weapons are known to the reader! Please feel free to share the article and for any questions, leave a comment!
Gunbai.
A typical foot soldier of the early Kamakura period carrying a naginata, from the Heiji Monogatari Emaki (平治物語絵巻).
When it comes to Japanese (and in particular, Samurai) polearms, there are few examples as iconic as the naginata (薙刀), also written 長刀, always erroneously translated into English as the Japanese halberd (which technically it is not, at least in it most common variation: the correct translation is glaive) .
The naginata is a polearm with a curved blade of various shapes, usually in between 30 to 100 cm, mounted on an oval shaft of 90-180 cm by means of a lengthy tang inserted into a slot in the haft, and held in place by pegs.
The naginata is a polearm with a curved blade of various shapes, usually in between 30 to 100 cm, mounted on an oval shaft of 90-180 cm by means of a lengthy tang inserted into a slot in the haft, and held in place by pegs.
This polearm has been the main weapon of foot soldiers from the late Heian period to the early Muromachi period, it was wielded from horseback by the Samurai in the 14th and 15th century and was still used for home defense through the late Muromachi and Edo period.
It is also one of the prominent weapon depicted in art, and due to its long service it changed significantly throughout the ages. In this article I will talk about its history, usage and variations of said weapon.
A group of horsemen of the early 14th century, armed with long naginata, charging against infantry; from the 清水寺縁起絵巻.
History
It is hard to pinpoint when the naginata started to appear, but it is likely that it was developed due to the new tactics and warfare of the Heain period.
With the dismantling of the rather inefficient Imperial army and the rise of the feudal warlords, horse archery and mounted warriors had become the predominant threat on the battlefield.
These warriors were supported by the respective retainers on foot, who carried bows or polearms; in this context, they fought in small bands, rather than in organized ranks, in order to harass the enemy horsemen or other small infantry groups.
Unlike the hoko spear, which was still used in this period, a naginata was much more suited to deal with multiple enemies and against horsemen, and it was good at thrusting and cutting as well as having a lot of heft in the blade which made the weapon a heavy hitter - just like a halberd indeed.
All of these features were useful in those small skirmishes, and it is very likely that the naginata evolved from the teboko (手鉾), a single edge variation of the hoko, since medieval sources used the word interchangeably with konaginata (小薙刀).
There are almost no extant examples of naginata blades that predate the mid-Kamakura period, and none that can be reliably dated to Heian times.
The earliest clear reference to a naginata in the written record is a chronicle entry from 1146, which describes a warrior reaching for a weapon “commonly called a naginata.”
A document dated three months later reports the investigation of a raid on an estate in Kawachi province, in which the perpetrators carried off “20 head of good oxen, 3,000 sheaves of cut rice, 20 haramaki armors, 100 swords, and 10,000 naginata.”
Both sources write the word “naginata” phonetically, leaving little doubt that the weapon must have been around by this time.
However, there are earlier references to naginata in the sources. A diary entry from 1040, for example, mentions what may be a naginata carried by a warrior in the capital. In this case, “naginata” is written with characters that mean “long sword” (長刀), which was the standard orthography until the fifteenth century.
Another warrior with a naginata, from the 男衾三郎絵巻.
Similarly, a diary entry from 1097 speaks of what may be a naginata, using a similar orthography (長剱); a document from 1124 depicts a police official “drawing a naginata”; and a diary entry from 1110 describes foot soldiers parading through the capital bearing “uchimono - 打物,” an alternative term for naginata in later sources.
But it is difficult to be sure whether any of these are indeed early references to naginata or simply literal allusions to very long swords.
The phrase “drawing a naginata” in the 1124 document raises additional questions in this regard, since the verb used in later medieval sources to describe unsheathing a naginata is “remove” (hazusu - 外す), rather than “draw” (nuku - 抜く), which is normally associated with swords.
Nevertheless, these weapons started to become prominent in 12th century and remained the most common battlefield weapon until the 15th century, when organized infantry wielding pikes started to appear again in Japan. It is worth to say that while it is often associated with the sōhei (僧兵) warrior monks, in that period of time, the naginata was simply the most prominent weapons on the battlefield and these monks were armed in the same manner of their Samurai counterpart. The weapon was also used to show the heads of the enemy during the march; unlike with spears, in this case were laced rather than impaled.
A group of sōhei warrior monks with naginatas, unknown emaki.
In the battlefield context of ranks&formations of the late 15th and 16th century, the naginata wasn't the ideal weapon except for the small bands of samurai that fought behind the pikes walls; however in this period there was the development of the yari in all of its variations which simply outclassed the functions of the naginata, leaving the weapon for a very small niche of warriors.
Shape and Usage
As explained above, the naginata is a polearm with a curved blade; most blade were in between 30 to 100 cm but rather long 150 cm or more blades existed too.
The blade cross section is either shōbu zukuri (菖蒲造り), a very long and slender blade with a fine and tapered kissaki and no yokote line, kanmuri otoshi zukuri (冠落造り), which is similar to shōbu but the thickness of the back (mune - 棟) becomes thinner and tapers down from the mid blade up until the end, or unokubi zukuri (鵜の首造り) which is identical to kanmuri otoshi but the back becomes thicker again towards the tip . In the last two cross sections, the back edge could be sharpened as well. All of these cross sections are well suited for thrusting, highlighting the double role of the naginata.
Most blades cross sections usually present a ridge, although some naginata had a hirazukuri (triangular with no ridge) cross section, but are quite rare.
A unique feature of the naginata is its groove near the tang, which is often lacquered, called naginata-hi (薙刀樋).
In this picture taken from the web, H and G are respectively the cross sections of Unokubizukuri and Kanmuri otoshi zukuri.
Furthermore the blade shape could be divided into two broad categories as well; if the blade has a strong warp and gets wider towards the tip, the naginata is called tomoegata (巴型). This naginata was common during the the Heian and Kamakura period, and was heavily optimized for the cut; its very curved edge was also likely better at dismounting enemy horsemen. In fact, by that period, the naginata was the main foot solider polearm. This is also the most prominent naginata in artworks.
A tomoegata naginata; see the heavily curved and wide tip. This example is rather moderate compared to more extremely curbed ones.
If the blade on the other hand has a shallow curve and its rather slender and thin in its look, it is called shizukagate (静型). These blades started to appear around the mid Kamakura period and were the main ones used during the Muromoachi and later period. During the 14th century, naginata also starts to increase their length and so shizukagate naginata are usually longer. This style is also somewhat similar to the blades used for the nagamaki (長巻).
A shizukagate naginata in the same museum; you could see the less curved and thinner tip.
These blades aren't optimized in the cut and could fulfill the role of thrusting polearms much better compared to the tomoegata type, which gradually started to decline. The rise of popularity of this style is likely to attribute to the new development in armors of the 14th century; in this context a weapon capable to snipe the gap of the armor was much more desirable.
A comparison of the two stereotypical blade, taken from this website
Around this period, naginata were also used by mounted Samurai in order to deal specifically with infantry while charging on horseback and so the length of the blade was increased too, both because the horsemen needed a longer reach and because the foot soldiers could harass the enemy from a safer distance. Extremely long naginata were popular during the Nanbokucho wars; they were fitted with a blade as long as 180cm with a relatively shorter handle; these naginata were called Onaginata (大薙刀) but quickly went out of usage in the 15th century.
Two Onaginata, from the 清水寺縁起絵巻. Notice the large tsuba on the pole.
Always during the 14th century, a new style of naginata was developed and used in Kyūshū; it is called tsukushi naginata (筑紫薙刀).
Unlike the common design in which the blade was fitted onto the shaft with a long tang, in this case the blade was mounted laterally with a metal ring that wrapped around the pole.
A tsukushi naginata with its scabbard.
This is more similar to a bardiche rather than a glaive, and the design allow the blade to be in line with the shaft ( although many tsukushi naginata had a curved edge that extended past that line). It was probably born out of an axe design, and it is also know as nata naginata (鉈長刀). These style could have the same cross sections and blade shapes of the regular naginata, but they could have a blade that extends below the ring as seen in the picture below.
Three types of tsukushi naginata and a hoko spear on the last picture; taken from 武器袖鏡. 初編.
Few unique designs that are worth mentioning, although rarer, are the ones that incorporates side hooks or small deformations on the back of the blade. This might have being inspired by the Chinese guandao (關刀) of the same period. They usually have tomoegata blade and the side hook could be sharpened as well.
A 16th century naginata with the aforementioned design; notice the additional "hook" on the back.
A closeup of the picture; unlike the other naginata of the same scroll, this one doesn't present the extreme tomoegata.
Another fairly rare design which is seen in the Heiji monogatari scroll (平治物語絵巻) is a naginata with a clip point, a tip that tapers in profile towards the end of the blade. This feature is to enhance the thrusting cability of the weapon, and it is quite rare: as far as I am aware, it is only found in artworks of the Kamakura period.
A closeup of the picture; unlike the other naginata of the same scroll, this one doesn't present the extreme tomoegata.
During the late Muromachi and Azuchi-momoyama period, while the naginata started to decline on the battlefield, it was still used to some degree for home defense especially in the following Edo period; it wasn't uncommon to see girls and women train with this weapon in this age to fulfill that role.
The blades of these periods are the ones that we are the most familiar with; usually short, thin in width and with a strong curvature towards the tip and most of the time they were fitted to a long shaft.
Always in the late 16th century, occasionally instead of using a long tang a socket was used to mount the blade: in this case we speak of fukuro naginata (袋薙刀).
A typical fukuro naginata in the 16th century shape.
Since the style was extremely popular in the 16th century, swords were directly made resembling a naginata naoshi instead of cutting old naginata.
A naginata naoshi wakizashi.
The naginata was mounted on hard wood shaft in between 90 and 180 cm, which was often lacquered and decorated and was fitted with its own scabbard.
Just like any other Japanese polearms, it was fitted with some type of hand guards; the most common was the circular tsuba (鍔) but side parry hooks of various shapes used to deflect and grab called hadome or kagi(鍵) were common too.
A four side parry hook; the majority of them were essentially a crossguard, although complex structures like the one above were used too. Below on the right, a ishizuki.
A four side parry hook; the majority of them were essentially a crossguard, although complex structures like the one above were used too. Below on the right, a ishizuki.
At the end of the shaft, an iron cap of various designs was used; it is called ishizuki (石突) and could spot various shapes: among the most common a halfmoon, a squared flat surface or a pointy tip that could be used to pierce as well.
Warriors from the 14th century carrying bows and naginata; from the 秋夜長物語.
A 17th century picture from the 大坂夏の陣図屏風 ; despite its decline compared to the other centuries, the naginata was still used during the Sengoku period as we can see in this emaki.
The naginata was definitely a very important weapon for the feudal warriors of the Heian, Kamakura and early Muromachi period, be it on foot or on horseback due to its great versatility.
I hope that now after this long reading, all the insights of these weapons are known to the reader! Please feel free to share the article and for any questions, leave a comment!
Gunbai.
FINALLY! about time the Naginata gets covered on this blog--- And it's great to see you are bringing even brand new lesser-known information on this iconic Samurai weapon rather then just what's been said before... Tremendous research my friend!
ReplyDeleteI am bit surprised however that you did not use iconography paintings from the late Sengoku Period which feature 16th-17th century Samurai wielding Naginatas such as at the Siege of Osaka in 1615, solidifying that the use of the weapon did not completely die out on the battlefield...
https://www.kunst-fuer-alle.de/media_kunst/img/41/g/41_00206859~japanische-geschichte_siege-of-osaka-1615---japanese-screen.jpg
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/DE327B/detail-of-part-of-a-folding-screen-which-depicts-the-siege-of-osaka-DE327B.jpg
Thank you!
DeleteAbout those picture, you are right; I have to say that the more I read it, the more I feel it is not 100% complete: I think I will add more details in the next two days.
Yesterday when I uploaded it, it was late in the night and I knew something was missing but I wanted to publishing it nevertheless. It also doesn't help that blogger screwed up with the font dimension, and I have to fix that too; I hope that it is still visible.
No problem!
DeleteAnd don't worry about it!--- The important thing is that you got the important information out on the Naginata and that's what matters, still it definitely doesn't hurt to expand on something...
Oh yeah I forgot to show off another image... Here is another iconography painting which depicts both of Uesugi Kenshin and Takeda Shingen's Samurais wielding Naginatas at the Battle of Kawanakajima in 1561, the 16th century (obviously)...
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/BattleKawanakajima.jpg
Thank you, I hope so!
DeleteIn any case that ukiyoe is from the 19th century; however if I remember correctly Uesugi Kenshin owned a Nagamaki (among many other weapons), although it is hard to say if it saw actual battles or not.
Oh yeah you are right that this Ukiyo painting is from the 19th century, but considering that we already have some iconography paintings from the 16th century which depicts Samurai with a Naginata, it wouldn't be out of the question that some of Kenshin and Takeda's men may have ended up using the weapon at their Battle of Kawanakajima...
DeleteEspecially in some war manuals like in Koyo Gunkan (which you told me in our previous convo) does still recommend a Naginata to use on the battlefield due to providing the same reach and range of the Yari, but also because of it's versatility in combat.
And yes I think recall that hearing that Kenshin owned a Nagamaki, but I don't know if he ever used it in battle though. However I do know that the Nagamaki was in fact Oda Nobunaga's favorite weapon and he did use it on the battlefield on some occasions...
How long did it take for you to make this article?
ReplyDeleteYou brought the Tsukushi Naginata as example, that is pretty rare, I mean rare because almost nobody ever talked about it in forums. I remember one remark that the Naginata cannot deal powerful blow like an axe because the blade didn't have the shaft behind it, this Naginata answer that remark.
There is another scene of the late 14th century scroll showing a fully armored Samurai attacking with a Naginata if you want to use it.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/47/ef/4e/47ef4efbe85603af0d05273ebfc8f062.jpg
I appreciate it that you begin with the most often spouted stereotype before moving on to the more usual and rarely talked about aspect of Japanese warfare.
Do you know the Kumade, a hook used for grabbing opponent from horse or in mounted combat? I noticed it is also pretty old, appear in Kamakura depiction alongside Naginata.
I fail to understand how/why having a shaft behind the blade will add anything to the power...
DeleteThank you!
DeleteIt took quite a bit, two weeks of research and 3 days of writing but I still have to add few details.
Yes indeed, the naginata is somewhat underrated especially when it is often described as "a sword on a pole". The tsukushi naginata is one of those design that is almost unknown.
However, about axe vs naginata, I have to agree with @春秋戰國, that claim doesn't make sense. An axe is a percussive weapon which has the majority of its mass towards the blade, and could concentrate the amount of force in a small area since the axe head is quite small.
On the other hand, it gets unwieldy due to this feature.
A naginata has a longer blade, which is also likely to be heavier compared to an axe blade, but its weight is distributed in a different way thanks to the long tang as well. Still the point of balance is towards the tip, and I'll bet that a two handed strike with the very wide blades could potentially hit as strong as an axe. On the other hand, it has more cutting range since the blade is longer. It is really more similar to a glaive, some types of bills/halberd and to some extent to a bardiche.
Yes, that is also my opinion that the shaft behind the blade did not add anything to the impact. Considering that remark is from a Samurai vs Viking thread, I think it show how far little things can be brought out to give bad image of Japanese weaponry.
DeleteThe Naginata would have a high velocity at the tip and combined with the curved blade would give a powerful cut.
I am curious as to how the Naginata used in mass combat.
For cavalry I think you can just hold it still to your side and let the speed and curved blade slice through your target.
For infantry, maybe it can be used for slicing horse legs as they pass by.
I also see some depiction of curved Naginata used for stabbing.
Overall, I never see a formation of soldiers with Naginata.
There is also this image that the Naginata is a woman's weapon, but seeing how it was used for centuries by man in battlefield, I think that is an Edo myth.
DeleteIt is also unique for Japan to have more polearm in use and depiction during that period than spear.
Can it be that the popular view that Japanese don't use armor piercing weapon is due to low exposure to accurate period weapon and depiction?
Can it be that armor piercing weapons are actually the popular one and the weapons seen in popular view are not popular?
We can find armor piercing weapon in the Kamakura Period and it look just as pointy as European weapons of the period if not pointier.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d5/4f/50/d54f50a017fd7c684d070a48e722a15f.jpg
It is a Kamakura sword from 1256.
This are Kamakura bodkin arrows.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_arrow_of_the_Kamakura_period.JPG
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_arrow_of_the_Kamakura_period_(2).JPG
This is a Tanto which said in Pinterest to be used by Takeda Shingen.
http://www.sho-shin.com/sukemune2.jpg
Dane axe is supposed to have relatively thin and light axe head too, by the way.
Delete@ 春秋戰國
DeleteGreetings good sir... I often see you around this blog a lot, so I decided to check out some of your work on the Chinese military warfare after hearing some good stuff about it from others... And I have to say--- the work you put into it is outstanding... Please keep up the good work!
You and Gunsen have really helped fleshed the complex and rich nature of Chinese and Japanese warfare that is often misudnerstood amongst the circles of historians and average internet users, so I am eternally grateful to you both <3
@Joshua Gani
That's actually what I think is well...
9/10 out of 10 whenever I see a Samurai being thrown into a debate fight against a Knight, Viking, Spartan, and Roman Centurion of equal skill... Samurai always gets place below all of them because of misconceptions like
1. Japan having poor or limited quality steel
2. That most of Japanese armor was made of wood, bamboo, leather, and lamellar and having no chain-mail of their own... Even though we have documented records of Samurai having chain-mail like the Kusari and references to their 16th century Tosei-Gusoku armors being made of Iron and Steel
3. And lot of them under the impression that Samurai never had any armor-piercing weapons that could penetrate chain-mail and even plate armor when have records of them having such weapons to counter armors like these with the Sankaku Yari (thanks to Gunsen correcting me on this), Yoroi-Doshi, Tsuruhashi, Masakari, armor-piercing arrows, heavy caliber bullets from muskets and even the Kanabo... A lot of them know about the Kanabo, but think that is the only weapon Samurai had to counter armor and nothing else...
With newfound research like these on their weapons, tactics, and equipment... A late Sengoku era Samurai should be able to best the Viking, Spartan, and Roman after a close fight while a Knight from the Hundred Years War/War of Roses era or from the same century is the only one that would give him a real challenge... But that's just my opinion...
@Joshua
DeleteOh yeah and... Another misconception that still persists regarding Samurai
4. That Samurai never used shields nor have they ever encountered fighting opponents who used shields thus would easily lose to even a Viking, Spartan and Roman with a shield... Even though Samurai did use shields which were called Tedate and because of their familiarity with the concept of a hand-held shield, we have records of them doing rather formidably well against the Mongols, Chinese, and Koreans forces during the Mongol Invasion of Japan and Imjin War respectively in close-quarters fighting who were known to employ shields at the time and on many occasions, bested them in combat AFAIK.
@Joshua
DeleteWell the Naginata is definitely not a good weapon to be used in a formation and with many people around you. In that case you are forced to use it like a spear, because you don't have space to perform slashes and cuts: in this scenario, being a top heavy weapon, it won't be as nimble as a spear and you won't be able to use its advantages. This is why you don't see formations of naginata.
About usage, there isn't much pre-Edo info available; it was probably used like a long saber on horseback, while on foot it was used to slash the horses and occasionally hook the enemy with the aid of the curvature. It is also very good at thrusting even if the tip is not in line with the shaft.
However much of its strength is in its cutting power, especially when it comes to the heavy versions.
About being a female weapon, this is true for the late Edo/Meiji period; but not because of any particular reasons. It was use to some extent by women during the Muromachi period in order to defend the house when their husbands were in a campaign, but that's all.
The concept of armor piercing weapons itself is highly misleading in my opinion. A bow for example is an armor piercer weapon, to some degree, or a spear too: but you aren't specifically using them against armor, you will still aim for the gaps.
Thrusting oriented weapons and percussive weapons are clearly good against armor because they can bypass it but the best strategy is to hit the non-armored zones nevertheless.
In any case the Japanese had those weapons, like any culture that used armors, and when armor developed, weapons did that too.
In any case, at any given period, the most prominent weapons used in Japan were anti armor ones of you will: the bow, the arquebus and the spear.
By the way, the weapons you linked: the first one is a naginata naoshi which might be of the 15th-16th century, with the original blade made in the 13th.
And that tanto is the famous osoraku tanto; it is said that Shingen owned one.
Btw, Great Ming Military is a very nice blog, and I often use it for references since information on Chinese military content in English is usually very "meh" with the excpetion of few blogs like that one.
DeleteAnyway, I will stay away from those debates on forums; 9/10 are fanboy wars which honestly get toxic after few posts. I think that those comparisons are good occasions to learn more, but they are on average very silly with their hypothetical scenario; but if you have the patience to endure the fanboys and found them funny nevertheless, I have no problem at all ;) just be sure to not get mad because someone is not willing to give up on his ignorance.
@ Gunsen
DeleteOh no worries, Gunsen--- I can handle it hahahaha!
All that matters is getting these newfound information and research gets spreaded so that most of the misconceptions that people often have about Samurai would disappear (even if not entirely)... And so far it is working...
Your blog on Samurai warfare and weapons came at just the right time...
When Ubisoft is still supporting For Honor and will adding a Samurai hero with a Masakari Axe around April
And with the release of new Samurai and Ninja games coming out like Fromsoftware's Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice and Sucker Punch's Ghost of Tsushima... Besides historians and history enthusiasts like you and me, gamers can now gain access to more historically accurate information on Samurai warfare and weapons then ever before thanks to your blog : )
I agree, Gunsen History blog is the best blog I have ever comment in in the internet. The information is very helpful too.
DeleteThe level of downplaying of the Samurai is remarkable, however it is not surprising, I once see a remark where a full body steel Central Asian armor was said to be equal to just the bronze cuirass of the Companion cavalry. I mean I dislike the old plate armor is clumsy myth alongside the anime katana myth, but I also dislike it if Japanese and Asian equipment are downplayed without reason in comparison to European ones.
VS match are interesting in that it reveal the flaw and explore the unpleasant weakness in our favorite warrior culture. While there are a lot of insults, we can also see sometimes remarkable similarity and contrast in different systems.
What is interesting is that a Kofun warrior in full armor are never used in a VS match even though we get a lot of period equipment found, I wonder how they would fare against later Samurai.
Here is my experience on European vs Asian armor.
People often did not realize that the advantage of European armor over Asian ones in 15th-17th century is not as big (and it is debatable) as the advantage (mostly not really debatable) of Asian armor from 5th century to 12th century or European (Greek) armor advantage (debatable because other than Assyrian, we have few info on other Asian armor at this time) in 700-500 BC.
The earliest thing I notice when Asian armor become competitive to European ones is when full body Central Asian armor start to appear in 4th century BC. It become the same in 4th century and in general superior to European ones in 5th century with the appearance of Kofun/Korean plate armor and full body armor start to be used by infantry in East Asia. European armor starting to catch up in late 13th century.
The 14th century is an interesting century of rapid change, armor included. It is an interesting period of balance between Europe, Mongol and Japanese armor, all of those change rapidly, so that the one in 1400 is almost completely different than in 1300.
We can still have parity in armor even until late 14th/early 15th century, the most advantage that European plate armor have would be in the period of 1450-1550, at that period European plate armor is reaching one of its peak and Asian armor(with the exception of the Japanese) seems to lighten overall.
That is why nobody want to make a VS match of Sassanid cataphract vs Germanic chieftain, Kofun warrior vs late Roman legionnaire, Sogdian/Central Asian warrior vs Frankish cavalry, Jin Iron Pagoda vs 12th century knight and so on. I think the outcome would be even more certain than putting Knight vs Samurai or Ninja.
It is interesting that while European iron/steel torso armor can be equal or inferior (there is some rare exception) during most of history pre-plate armor, face armor seems to be emphasized as we can see in Corinthian helmet, Vendel, Russian, great helmet and so on. Even when the warrior is lightly armored like the Vikings, they still rather wear face armor than protect the limbs.
However for most of European history, face armor is not a common part of the total armor use and for iron torso armor, a mail or scale shirt is probably the most common for a large part of European history. European torso armor did not really surpass Asian ones until the use of solid steel cuirass in late 14th century.
By the way, this is the unidentified metal parts thought to be Kfoun Period Wakibiki.
DeleteThey are too large to be horse shoe, although I think they look very similar to later Japaense neck armor.
https://webarchives.tnm.jp/imgsearch/show/E0058583
https://webarchives.tnm.jp/imgsearch/show/E0074698
https://webarchives.tnm.jp/imgsearch/show/C0057259
If they are really Wakibiki, the Kofun Period armor just need to have a mask to have full protection.
I do however found interesting helmets like these.
http://www.sakitama-muse.spec.ed.jp/index.php?page_id=683
https://webarchives.tnm.jp/imgsearch/show/C0046127
Maybe they are made to deflect arrows coming from the top? Because some helmets have what seems like additional separate armor attached to their helmets that are put at a very steep angle. Speaking about that there is also the oddity that Kofun Period helmet are often very angled on the front and have a ridge, while later Japanese helmet are mostly rounded.
@Strider thank you! I'm planning to write an article on Sekiro and the new videogames as well, I think everyone might be interested in it!
Delete@Joshua thank you and thank you for sharing all the information on eastern Asian armors!
About those museum pieces you linked, although they look similar to the illustration of that book, the museum listed them as agricultural tools; namely hoes and plows.
I don't know wether or not wakibiki existed in the Kofun period to be honest; I should found something done by Y.Sasama on the subject.
In any case, about those helmets, those are definitely the forerunner of the fukigaeshi.
Very interesting ideed.
@Gunsen
DeleteOh hype!--- I am currently playing Sekiro as we speak and I am loving it!
Even for a fantasy game, I am actually finding a ton of historical authenticity and references that are a nod or that parallel with the real Sengoku Period history, it's astonishing
So I definitely look forward to seeing your thoughts on the game in the future : )
@Gunsen History
DeleteThank you for translating those pieces, I think it's alright if those are not Wakibiki, the pauldron of Kofun armor will still cover those are anyway.
How are those helmets related to later Japanese helmet? They look so different even compared to other helmets from around the world.
My consideration on European vs Asian armor is that an Asian polity can create or buy their own cuirass in European style, however I highly doubt that a European polity of the period (especially outside the Roman Empire) I mention can buy or create Asian armor of those period, let alone equip an army with those in mass.
After seeing and thinking more about Kamakura Period armor, I think the only period where there are no depiction of full body armor is the period from 600s to 1100s, the period from the last Kofun depictions to the appearance of the Haidate in the late 1200s to complete the whole Gusoku.
If you look at the Kamakura Period Ashigaru, he is pretty much equipped already like some 15th century European man at arms. The Kote is the Jack plate, Do-maru is the brigandine, the Suneate already cover the legs either on the front or completely and the thigh is protected by the Haidate, if we want it to be complete.
I am currently making an album of my armor study, if I can make the memory small enough, I can send it to you or others who want it by Email.
@Strider Hiryu
I am watching the gameplay of Sekiro, it certainly has a pretty good Sengoku Period look.
The fighting mechanic is also fluid compared to games like For Honor or Kingdom Come: Deliverance.
That is actually a thing I noticed, the melee fighting mechanic of games in the 2010s are really clunky and telegraphic.
Compare it to a 2004 game, Knight of the Temple, this game really destroy the myth of clunky knight in my mind.
Even though it's just a game, it got me thinking, if plate armor are clumsy and stiff, then that myth would not work for knights in mail armor, which is completely flexible. The armor design is also really interesting a mix between real life and fantasy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zgpowh4Jmco&t=90s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBQmud56r0M
The team create the motion by using the movement of a real person. If the attack are telegraphic or flashy, it is because of the person doing it, not the mechanic.
It would be fun, if different people in different armor explore the motion of each and then capture it in game animation.
Knight of the Temple 2 (2005) actually has the first half-swording I ever see in video game, not For Honor. However this game is made by a different company and therefore have a clunkier animation and more colorful and unrealistic aesthetic and design.
You're welcome!
DeleteThose helmets actually are somewhat related to later Japanese kabuto; the first one has a shikoro, a rim and something similar to fukigaeshi. The second one might be a hood as far as I know since I cannot see the sides; in any case, haniwa figures are very interesting but we might miss what is armor and what is decoration since we are not used to the details they should depict.
Luckily there are few extant helmets of that period.
I would also argue that by the Kamakura period, although we have some depictions, haidate were very rare. Beside, the average foot soldier (which wasn't actually an Ashigaru but a direct retainer of his samurai) usually didn't wear neither suneate, haidate nor a full helmet. Occasionally you see warriors with kabuto and osode on foot but they are rare.
Those soldiers started to be equipped with suneate, full helmets and (seldom) suneate in the mid 14th century rather than in the 13th.
Still, unless they were shield bearer, they had quite a bit of armor indeed.
Also yes send me an email, I'm quite interested on that album, thank you!
@Joshua Gani
Delete"European torso armor did not really surpass Asian ones until the use of solid steel cuirass in late 14th century."
Doesn't the samurai tosei gosoku use a solid steel cuirass? I mean its literally featured in this blog.
@Joshua Gani
DeleteI should have been more specific. I meant that there were popular designs using solid steel cuirass like Hotoke dō, not that all tosei gosoku used solid steel cuirass.
Also, I realize you are a prominent member on this blog, so of course you would know of that article. My apologies. Still, my question stands.
@ARMCHAIR SKEPTIC
DeleteSorry, that I too a long time to reply, I am currently busy working on my compilation.
Yes, the Tosei Gusoku use solid steel cuirass. I even heard from Gunsen that there are reference to it during the Nanbokucho Period in the 14th century.
When I make that remark, my mind is comparing 14th century European armor with 14th century Asian armor, not with all period of Asian or European armor.
The main force for non-European armor that can compete with European ones in the 14th century are Mongol and Russian.
The Russian armor in the 14th century have vambrace, lamellar/scale/coat of plates over mail and face mask.
Mongol armor progress rapidly from being light in 1300 to rivalling European knights in 1400. The most striking aspect of Mongol armor in this period is the layering of laminar over brigandine, not mail, and I don't know if this layering is superior to a globose solid steel cuirass or not.
Their armor is more complete than the Russian. They have laminar upper arm/thigh armor, long sleeve brigandine that cover the armpit, laminar/lamellar aventail, mask, mail veil, solid plate greave and so on.
@Gunsen History
I am working on the album compilation, I just found more and more info on the more obscure part and I keep adding things until it become far longer than before.
Also nice article on Sekiro.
Thank you!
Delete@Gunsen
DeleteI found out that while the Japanese make some copy of European cuirass, they never do it with European helmet like a close helmet.
I remember there is a 17th century full body Dutch plate armor given ss gift by the VOC to the Shogun, so we know there are complete example of European armor there.
The Ottoman also never copied European armor even though they have a large arsenal of captured European armor.
Maybe it is because in the age of firearm the most important protection is for the chest. Excessive face protection against bullets will not really be effective.
DeleteLimb armor is always thin even in plate armor, so it will not protect against bullet. Most of the threat limbs would probably be cuts anyway and mail is already sufficient in that regard.
Considering that the main use of the Naginata is for slashing, how far would it damage a period Japanese armor?
Yes it doesn't seem that the Japanese were interested in close helmets at all, despite arguably having access to them. In fact although it is usually said that they only copied the European armors, it is fair to say that they modified it too; every nanban kabuto has a Japanese shikoro for example.
DeleteAbout the Ottoman, I know that there is a depiction of Turkish soldiers wearing European breastplates:
https://www.quora.com/Was-European-plate-armor-ever-used-by-the-Ottomans/answer/Pieter-Buis-1?ch=10&share=dd9fa91a&srid=3z2sJ
About the naginata damaging the Japanese armor of the period, slashes and cuts could potentially decrease the structural integrity of the armor, but not that much: you will need plenty of strikes before being able to effectively ruin the armor.
Also, during the 14th century, new development to the lacing system were made in order to prevent edged weapons to damage the armor; I will talk about it in a future article for sure.
This is the European armor said to be given as a gift to the Shogun.
Deletehttps://collections.royalarmouries.org/object/rac-object-3018.html
Considering they make metal articulated animals and also metal statue forged from a single plate with no seam, it is a bit odd that none of them use such technique even with Edo Period decorative armor.
Yes, I think Japanese armor of the period should be able to withstand Naginata strike. I am still confused at how pre-Sengoku Japanese wars are fought. I mean shouldn't massed foot archers be able to deal with Samurai mounted archers, but then it would become combat between foot archer than between mounted archer.
That suit might not be the only one, all things considered.
DeleteWell some Edo period armors arguably had complex structures, like the famous Tengu armor which has articulated lames in lieu of mail in the elbow region. Others have sliding rivets in the do and so on, but again most of the Edo period armors were decorative.
Pre Sengoku wars, especially prior to the mid 14th century, were fought by smaller armies. Cavalry groups could dominate in any case because the infantry was disorganized and focused on their own lords, so you didn't have massed archery nor pike walls. I'll need to write an article on that too!
Which armor have the sliding rivet in the Do?
DeleteThat would be interesting.
The tactic of the 15th and pre-musket Sengoku Period would be interesting to cover as it is not the mounted archery tactics of the previous period nor the pike and shot of the late Sengoku Period.
If the O-yoroi is no longer worn, would the warriors be more susceptible to arrow?
Here there is an example:
Deletehttps://pin.it/xnlbn7ujrqclp5
I will write an article about that, in the future!
Well yes and no; in one hand the Oyoroi is totally arrow proof, but later lamellar were made with all steel lamellae and plate speak for itself, also with the lack of mounted archery you are less likely to receive a very close hit by an arrow. So I would say that later armors were indeed arrow proof too.
I found this armor which have the Do and Haidate said to be from 1550.
Deletehttp://www.bushidoboutique.net/armour1.html
The Do and Sode is following 15th century shape. The Haidate is already Kawara Haidate, not Hodo Haidate.
If it is authentic, then it probably appear before the musket is widely used, so what would be used to would it fare against bows?
I think warfare in early 16th century Japan would certainly follow the 15th century one, but different from late 16th century. Before muskets, would pikes be used already? In Europe, it is certainly used before shot and pike become common.
What ranged weapon are strong enough to kill such armored forces from afar?
I mean if European warfare have no guns, the main killer would be crossbow, lances, pikes and halberds. The same would apply in Japan, but armor is better than before while bows have their limits on killing capability compared to guns.
As you night know, dating with accuracy Japanese armor is very hard. Honestly I don't think that neither the Haidate nor the Do are 16th century; the Do is in the yukinoshita style, and while it is similar to the 15th century do is made with larger vertical arranged plates. Yukinoshita were made around the 1560-80s but more important than that the breastplate has two rings on the chest which is an Edo period feature. The same goes for the hiadate, the shape is more likely late 16th-early 17th century as far as I am aware although I might be wrong. Nice suit in any case!
DeleteAn armor like that would be pretty much arrowproof because of plate although it is hard to say it without knowing the thickness of the plate.
Still, arrows are usefull in 15th and 16th century context because they were used to wounds and suppress enemy formation since they were shot en masse. A cluster of arrows might kill very few armored men, but some arrows might end in some gaps and all of them will slowly break the morale: that's the strenght of an arrow's barrage.
As I said, arrows were used to wound and incapacitate rather than kill; pikes were already being deployed by the 15th century: this is the time period in which Ashigaru and mass formations started to appear. It is also worth notice that not many warriors were well armored.
This is a modern depiction of Kumade in action.
ReplyDeletehttps://i.pinimg.com/originals/46/3a/2e/463a2edd968dd8999278bbe7b487bda1.jpg
Also this is the modern picture of the Kofun Wakibiki I am trying to find.
https://s9.rr.itc.cn/r/wapChange/20172_5_13/a7l92g06919165709405.jpg
I remember it is a steel part shaped just like a Wakibiki and maybe have holes on the end.
Thank you!!
DeleteI'm aware of the Kumade, and it will have its own space in my blog; there are few artistic depictions of it and it's likely to be the forerunner of the sodegarami. Quite interesting but not as practical as it may seems except for naval warfare, to some extent.
Actually I am more interested in that thing written as "船槍".
Delete@春秋戰國
DeleteI will read it as "funayari" or "buneyari". As far as I am aware, there is a museum piece named like that but is a normal yari, and then there is this picture of a book (second from the right):
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/30/81/db/3081dbf6c98ca008c3a3ce90c17267b0.jpg
As the name suggest it, it migh have been used to help in boarding enemy ship, like the kumade. I don't know if it ever see actual use outside naval warfare.
However, it is remarkably similar to a reversed jumonji yari which is also called karigata yari - I think they are the same weapon indeed.
Are there surviving example? I am interested in the spear head design.
DeleteAs far as I know, there are few fakes out there but nothing authentic unfortunately.
DeleteHowever the blade should be like a reverse jumonji or chidori yari, with either a diamond or a triangular cross section, if this can help.
Great article!! I always thought that the leaves of the naginatas did not reach lengths greater than 50 cm. I always learn something new in this blog!
ReplyDeleteAh, a doubt (one of many) afflicts me. About the nodachi.
I understand that it was a weapon to use against riders mainly, but is there any case in which its longer variants have been used against pike formations as was done in Europe with the Zweihander?
Thank, I'm happy that you discovered something new!
DeleteWell nodachi fell out of favor after the 14th century, although they were occasionally used in the 16th.
As far as I know, even in Europe there is a debate about the use of greatswords against pike.
In Japan, I don't think it was used with that specific purpose in mind, although you have Samurai behind the pike formations which might have had a nodachi, so it is totally possible that something similar happened.
I suspect that Nodachi remained in common use for much longer than commonly thought, if Wokou pirates operating in Ming China is any indication.
DeleteThat's true; the problem with the nodachi is that is a very broad category; any sword with a blade longer than 90cm.
DeleteHowever, during the Sengoku period there was no regulation on sword lenght, so even if the smaller uchigatana started to be used more and more, longer swords were still carried along the uchigatana.
There is a 16th century emaki that depict a street brawl, and many men involved are carrying nodachi at their waist. It is quite possible that while the very long ones weren't used anymore on the field, the "shorter" ones in between 90 and 120cm might have been still common and used as "regular swords".
I never really knew the operative life of the nodachi. I assumed that it fell into disuse in the Edo period, because it is not a very comfortable weapon for self-defense, unlike a katana. At least, it is not the most comfortable thing to carry it for the streets.
ReplyDeleteFor some reason people on the internet tend to fall into an absolute when it comes to dealing with these issues, saying that nodachi were ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY used against riders. The same with the zweihanders, only with the pikes instead of riders. I should not be surprised anyway ...
Oh, by chance do you have information about the diplomatic exchanges between Europe and Japan? I understand that some Shoguns of the Tokugawa clan and Hideyoshi, if not bad memory, sent swords and armor as diplomatic gifts. Actually, I found info on the subject, but I do not know how accurate is the things that are in Spanish / English. Things in Japanese I just can not read them.
The nodachi is a very interesting weapon and I will talk about it in the future. Actually, back then the differences between a katana and a small nodachi was very blurred until the Edo period, when laws were made in order to establish the lenght.
DeleteAbout diplomatic missions, there is a fantastic article made by Ian Bottomley; you can read it here:
http://samuraiantiqueworld.proboards.com/thread/234/japanese-diplomatic-armour-europe-bottomley
Yes, in the martial arts community and on the internet there is usually a lot of controversy about the length of the swords and at what point one thing ceases to be called in one way and begins to be called another. I think the fact that certain things are written with the same kanji but with different pronunciation does not help much (I think tachi and katana are written with the same, correct me if I'm wrong)
DeleteRegarding the article that you sent me, the link is broken ...
Yes I know, although 99% of those discussiona are linguistic issues.
DeleteEarly Kofun-Heian period chokuto tachi were written 大刀 (although now has a different reading - daito), Heain onward period tachi were written 太刀 while katana is written 刀.
About the link, it's weird, it's working for me... In any case, try to google "Japanese diplomatic gifts of arms and armour to Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries, by Ian Bottomley", the article is availabe on some forums. If you aren't able to read it write me an e-mail so I will give you the full text!
@Francisco Souza Aguirre
DeleteHi! The idea that an efficient cut and thrust greatsword would have been wasted on exclusively cutting pike has always seemed strange. Even though that is untrue, I am still pretty confused about its use in cutting pikes int he first place.
1) I have seen skallagrims channel where he spent half an hour hacking at a wooden pole with various cutting swords, including an Albion knetch. Cutting pikes doesnt seem to be a very efficient strategy, especially since said pike would be moving around trying to skewer you.
2) Wouldn't an axe / halberd be more effective then?
3) Perhaps that was merely a secondary advantage for zweihanders to deal with pikes? If so, would pikes be better suited to deal with pikes? A zweihander lacks reach as it cannot possibly be 6 feet long...
4) What is the difference between a zweihander, among various contemporary greatswords that would make the design alone more suited for cutting wood?
Sorry for the late response...
Delete1) I guess that cutting a long wood stick should not be so difficult if it is held very strongly (not always the case), although I think that if greatswords were used against spades, they would probably use them to push them out of the way. Open holes in the formation basically. I find it a more logical idea
2) I do not think that an ax is more effective, mainly because the part that can cut is only at the tip. With a sword you have a much larger surface
3) Well, the zweihanders stopped being used towards the end of the 16th century. In general it is said that the doppelsoldner were a kind of support unit of the pike squares. Open gaps so that one formation collapses thanks to the push of the other.
4) Beyond the morphology, none really. Nor was it better to cut wood than others. In general, simply the look. Some had flamberge blades, others did not. Zweihander is a very broad term also, it means "two hands" in German. I think the Germans used that term for all greatswords.
With regards to the Naginata with hooks that resemble Chinese Guandao, I am not sure that they even exist. This example supposedly from 16th century Japan looks a little fishy to me.
ReplyDeleteHere's why:
1.) The blade profile, while not too different from Naginata, fits well within parameters for Chinese Guandao/Yanyuedao (偃月刀). (note: some cartoonishly wide Guandao blades exist too.)
2.) The flames on the sides of the blade are not typically what you see on Naginata.
Typically Japanese blade engravings or Horimono, are typically found on Katana, not Naginata. These engravings are often Buddhist motifs such as Vajra daggers, Sanskrit Characters and the like. However, I have seen flame engravings like this on Chinese Guandao/Yanyuedao.
https://i3.read01.com/SIG=3uvrhn9/304a76327257576e644a.jpg
(Kinda hard to see, I know, but it is there.)
3.) The hook has a hole punched out with a ring attached. This practically screams of Chinese aesthetics to me. While some Guandao are found with just the hole, or a hole and a ring, Originally these were attached to bell tassels, called guà líng dāo yīng 掛鈴刀纓 in Chinese, lit. hanging bell sword tassel. Hanging tassels are uniquely Chinese and likely never found on Japanese blades, as far as I know.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcSuUsYT-ehfxoXsA1jGvxnlLmGOUekwmExXgt1nHM6n73hJQ_cW
As a side note, The little swirl that comes off of the hook, is also a Chinese aesthetic.
4.) As far as I can see, This blade has no Hamon. That is a huge red flag for me, telling me it was "NOT MADE IN JAPAN." Because of picture quality I also can't tell if it has Hada, or folded steel grain-patterns, but I doubt it. The lack of these 2 things are very convincing to me that it is not Japanese, but I could be wrong.
5.) Nearly every standard Naginata I have seen has a brass Habaki. As you can see this blade currently does not have one. Did this blade ever have one? I have no clue.
6.) Naginata have a specific type of edge geometry. Unokubi zukuri is the most common, and sometimes Kanmuri-otoshi zukuri. This blade, to me, does not resemble that structure at all (ex: no shinogi-ji). But I would need to view the blade from several angles to truly determine this.
7.) What tells you that this blade is 16th century? Judging from the degree of polish on the blade, I can conclude nothing besides the possibility that it was made recently, which I'll admit is a poor way to judge, considering how carefully swords are preserved in Japan.
If there is a signature or date on the nakago, that would tell me a lot more. But by looks alone, I honestly couldn't even hazard a guess on when this was made. (precisely dating swords is a very tricky business)
TLDR, I can find nothing that identifies this blade as Japanese in its design/manufacturing process, form, or aesthetics, and nearly everything suggests to me that this is simply a Chinese Guandao, made in China, and perhaps exported to Japan. I also have doubts whether or not it is from the 16th century.
These are just my thoughts on this particular piece. I am by no means an expert on this (my main focus is Chinese weapons after all), so feel free to correct me if I got anything wrong or if my opinions are unjustified. Please let me know if you have more examples of this type, and maybe that would convince me.
Hello sir and thank you for leaving a comment!
DeleteYou raised good points and I do agree with you, this weapon was indeed influenced by Chinese design.
However, this particular example is singed by Horikawa Shinano Kami Kunihiro, hence why we can say that is is Japanese and when it was made. Otherwise I would have been skeptical as well, but it's good that you asked for more references!
Here a picture of the signature of the blade (I think it's quite easy to see that it's from the same weapon):
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/6d/53/52/6d535212a7d1cfdec6a87ed7553551a2.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/43/77/e4/4377e48ecd4c7c5cbcff244b16360ff5.jpg
Also recently while I was looking for new pictures I found this example as well:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/67/ab/fd/67abfd09e8c7a713b86eab1f88968870.jpg
This is from the Edo period (it's from a Kogire Kai catalogue but I can't remember exactly the issue since I only took a screenshot).
I Do believe that Knutsen has few examples of these styles of blade in his book of Japanese polearms, but I can't confirm that one.
Very interesting. Thanks for the additional info and pictures. I honestly had no idea these existed. I am more than willing now to change my position on this. Thank you for your quick and respectful response.
DeleteGreat stuff. Do you think you could write on the chigiriki flail as well? I couldn't find a lot of information on them. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteThanks!
DeleteI know there isn't a lot of info on the chigiriki mainly because it was a very "niche" weapon used during the Edo period; at the moment I'm working on late Kamakura arms and armors to cover the Mongol invasions but I will definitely write something about this flail as you are not the first one asking for an article, so I will see what I can do ;)
Hi! This is my first comment on your blog.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I'd like to thank you for making such an amazing and interesting blog.
Second, there's something I'd like to ask you about the "Bisento" weapon. From what I've found so far, it's either a polearm with a foggy description (in some cases even a sword) or, essentially, a Chinese counterpart of the Naginata (according to the Japanese wikipedia page on "Guan Dao" which makes a lists of "Daito" (written 大刀 ) standing for various Chinese glaive weapons such as the Yanyuedao and Goliaodao (I hope I got them right), described with a pronounced curved blade (hence the name "Brow-edged blade"), a tsuba-like guard, and from what I've seen in pop culture it tends to be considered an heavier/bigger counterpart of a normal naginata (Or sometimes, more unlikely, some sort of machete on a stick). Seeing however certain designs such as the "O-naginata" (which pretty much fits the above-mentioned description) I'd like to know if you could find more info on this weapon, if it is actually a souped-up naginata or just the Chinese equivalent of the Naginata.
Thank you very much in advance!
Hello and thank you!
DeleteTo my knowledge, the Bisento (眉尖刀) is not really a Japanese weapon per se. I know it appears in Song Dynasty 武經總要 with that specific name, but I have never seen Japanese historical sources talking about that - not even Edo period manuals (tho I haven't seen all of them).
My understanding is that the weapon itself would be classified as a Naginata or Onaginata, so there's no need to use another name for that.
It might also be a Chinese borrewed weapon that was used in Ryukyuu back then, but definitely not something that was used in Japan nor called like that by the time naginata were used.
Uhm, I see, kinda like the "Zanmato" wasn't actually a sword but just the Japanese translation of the "Zhanmadao"? Anyway, thank you very much.
DeleteExactly, the Zhanmadao analogy fits quite well!
DeleteBut wait, there's more! The Japanese wikipedia page on Naginata (yes, I know, my sources suck XD) mentions, at the bottom, a "日本式眉尖刀" (Japanese-styled Meijiandao), which was apparently based on the Chinese one, which apparently features a thicker, heavier blade but was used only in certain Ryuuha of martial arts and probably never on the battlefield. So, a weapon of "martial arts" but not a proper weapon of war.
DeleteI admit I run into this info by sheer chance and I'm not sure how much reliable it is, though I remember seeing on the internet wooden training Bisento labeled as such and different in design from the wooden naginata, so I think it's plausible (probably more recent than most claim, but plausible).
Well I'm still skeptical since no items with that name is mentioned within period sources or later Edo perido manuals afaik.
DeleteAlso be aware that are many """"schools""" that have weird stuffs in their repertoire such as otsuchi hammer which were definitely not weapons and thus didn't need a system of kata - so yeah it could be a modern fabrication