# Communities > Modern-era Swords and Collecting Community > Modern Production Katanas >  evolution of the western katana

## Tom Kehoe

Folks,

As an owner of  both nihonto and modern production katanas, I've really become curious about something: Why aren't the modern "replicas" more like historic Japanese swords?

I'm not referring to things like hada and hamon; I'm thinking more in terms of the general look and feel of the blade. Most modern katanas feel much too heavy and off-balanced to me to be practical as weapons -- at least when used against an similarly armed opponent.  

And I don't believe that this is necessarily a function of quality: I've had the opportunity to handle some fine modern custom blades that  had similar handling characteristics. A while ago, I handled a beautiful Howard Clark katana that was weighted more like a nihonto no-dachi I had the opportunity to handle. Clark is a master swordsmith and can clearly make a sword of any design he chooses.

In modern "western" katanas, there seems to be a definite trend toward long, wide, heavy blades with no nikku and a low shinogi.  The boshis lacks the traditional cross section, bo-hi is frowned upon, as are high shinogis, and I've yet to see a shobu zukuri or unokubi zukuri that has an authentic appearance (I have not had a chance to handle any of the modern interpretations). 

This is not an absolute statement, of course: My bugei dragonfly has bo-hi and is balanced much more like a traditional nihonto katana: but the blade geometry is still flat and modern. And it is literally razor-sharp (you can shave with it), which traditional nihonto were not.

I assume these trends are being driven in large part by the interest in batto-do: but the more traditional configurations were famous for their cutting abilities, so what has sparked the change?

I'm not trying to incite anyone; I'm quite fond of my two modern katanas and work out with them daily. I've practiced martial arts for 35 years, and have collected edged weapons a bit longer than that. 

thanks for your time and consideration

tk

----------


## michael wilson

I am of the mind that todays blades are indeed influenced by competition cutting , tameshigiri etc  - with blades leaning towards 
flatter , wider sughata  without BoHi because rightly or wrongly a lot of people do not associate BoHi with a cutting sword  - 

 Another factor could be that a 21st century western male is a lot bigger on average than a 17th century japanese male  - this could influence blade length and weight but would have little impact on kissaki and boshi aesthetics .

I look forward to reading what the guys here think on the subject though  :Wink: 

Mick

----------


## Maximus L.

The ancient nihondo keep improving as time passed, they have different characteristic in different time frame to represent the skill of the smiths and the need of battlefield.

I believe sword smiths should keep improving the performance of katana, not trying to forge them to what they were, but rather to what they will be.

----------


## Timo Qvintus

What exactly is "western katana"? Is China western? Or are we talking about all production katana in general? I just wanna make sure I'd be on-topic with a question I've thought about for ages..

----------


## C. Dayton

If by Western you mean modern Katanas.  Yes they are being made heavier.

This trend is not only on Japanese style blades but also with modern Chinese jian, Medieval Sword and Viking swords.

I think it is most likley because most modern users (most of them westeners) tend to think a heavy blade has more quality. You can see a good example of this in Cold Steel's advertising for the Dragonfly Katana (a hefty 3lbs).

Antique swords in most cultures where under 2.5 lbs.  It does not matter the height of a person; a sword needs to be weighted for practical use, a too heavy sword would be slow and cumbersome in use.  Even through thinner, antique blades where quite robust due to techniques like San-Mai, inserted edge, and differential hardening.

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Timo,

>>What exactly is a "western katana?" 

excellent question: I'm referring to the modern katana-style swords, both production and otherwise, that are being sold here in the US and other western countries. The trends I've seen  I'm uncertain whether modern katanas being sold in Japan are the same or not. 

I've handled a few gendaito, but not enough to be able to draw any valid conclusions about overall styles. The few I've handled seemed much closer to traditional nihonto. 

tk

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Maximus,

Quite right: The japanese sword evolved considerably over the years, based in part upon who the japanese were at war with, and the fighting conditions that were being experienced.  Moreover, the different schools of swordmaking (Mino, Bizen, Yamato, etc.)  each had distinctive attributes.  

But I think most scholars would say that the Japanese sword reached it's technical apex during the Koto era (prior to 1596).  

It may be worth noting that in the back of Sato's "The Japanese Sword: A Comprehensive Guide" the author (who obviously doesn't care for Shinto and Shinshinto blades), complains that Shinto swords are too heavy and lack the elegance of the Koto blades. 

But I can't really say that I can correlate the style of modern western katanas with any particular school or period. 

If any member can, I'd love to hear from them.

Your point about evolution is a good one, the question in my mind is what's driving the evolution?  All traditional sword designs tended to be driven by compromises because swords had to be kind of "all around weapons" -- hard enough to hold a good edge, springy enough to absorb shock, long enough to generate effective cutting power, light enough to be able block nimbly -- and to be used for a long time if necessary.

The trends I have described in modern western katanas make me wonder they're evolving like a golf driver -- performing very well in one specific area, but at the expense of several other areas.  

tk

----------


## Tom Kehoe

C. Dayton,

Not sure where your statistic on the weight of antique swords comes from, but but it does seem about right to me.  

My original frame of reference for my consideration of swords is the practice of martial arts.  I've seen quite a few (even purchased one or two) swords that are so heavy you could cause tendon damage to your elbows by working out with them.  A couple of years ago I handle a modern Chinese broadsword that had to have weighed over four pounds.  You couldn't possibly have used it for any sort of  realistic combat. 

tk

----------


## C. Dayton

> C. Dayton,
> 
> Not sure where your statistic on the weight of antique swords comes from, but but it does seem about right to me.  
> 
> My original frame of reference for my consideration of swords is the practice of martial arts.  I've seen quite a few (even purchased one or two) swords that are so heavy you could cause tendon damage to your elbows by working out with them.  A couple of years ago I handle a modern Chinese broadsword that had to have weighed over four pounds.  You couldn't possibly have used it for any sort of  realistic combat. 
> 
> tk



My statistics comes from many sources including museum and encyclopedias. Also I study Chinese sword arts.  I am practically a sword addict and spend a lot of my free time researching antique swords from many cultures, mainly Chinese, Japanese, and medieval.

You remind me of a comment by Scott Rodell where one person asked if someone big should use a bigger sword.  Basically Scott stated that it does not matter how big a person was, his/her wrists are made of the same material and there is so much a person can use properly.

Where did you got that 4lbs Dao?
Chinese Dao historically are under 2lbs.


Something else that is affecting sword design is the ideas presented on hollywod movies and other fiction.  You have characters  like Conan that carry what looks to be 50lbs hunk of steel.  Then people start believing that swords should be thick and heavy.  Take for example Cloud's sword from Final Fantasy :EEK!:

----------


## michael wilson

I think I'll agree to disagree as in my limited experience size does matter  :Wink: 

Western smiths working in the japanese style will tend to make blades usually more in keeping with western JSA practitioners requirements  - you dont come across many custom daito with a 26" nagasa  - but look at nihonto site aoi art , 26"-27"
is an average length were as unless otherwise requested a lot of custom made blades are around the 29" mark .

I agree with you on that there is no need for bigger blades  - but it is a trend thats reflected by what people are commisioning and buying at present .

Disclaimer - _just my narrow take on things and one that needs improving by handling more high end blades_

----------


## Tom Kehoe

C. Dayton,

I did not buy the four-pound Dao. It was one of several swords in a   shop in Orlando that mostly catered to gamers. But it was not a costume sword -- the blade was real.  And it certainly may have been influenced by the Hollywood syndrome. That's certainly an influence on Paul Chen's catalog -- think of the zatoichi sword. 

It reminds me of the American "tanto." 

Who was the custom knifesmith back in the late 60s, early 70s, who introduced the tantos with the ugly square point? I can't remember. 

The "armor-piercing" design was picked up on by knifemakers all over the country, Cold Steel enshrined it, and today there's a whole new generation of "tactical" tantos that are even uglier than the misbegotten original misdesign. They have almost nothing in common with a genuine tanto, but that chunky design with the square tip and lack of taper has defined "tanto" in the minds of most Americans. 

tk

----------


## C. Dayton

> C. Dayton,
> 
> I did not buy the four-pound Dao. It was one of several swords in a   shop in Orlando that mostly catered to gamers. But it was not a costume sword -- the blade was real.  And it certainly may have been influenced by the Hollywood syndrome. That's certainly an influence on Paul Chen's catalog -- think of the zatoichi sword. 
> 
> It reminds me of the American "tanto." 
> 
> Who was the custom knifesmith back in the late 60s, early 70s, who introduced the tantos with the ugly square point? I can't remember. 
> 
> The "armor-piercing" design was picked up on by knifemakers all over the country, Cold Steel enshrined it, and today there's a whole new generation of "tactical" tantos that are even uglier than the misbegotten original misdesign. They have almost nothing in common with a genuine tanto, but that chunky design with the square tip and lack of taper has defined "tanto" in the minds of most Americans. 
> ...


Not long ago I started thread about the tactical/American Tanto:

http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=87014

Curiously the American Tanto looks exactly like an earlier version of the dao from the Tang Dynasty, the tang dao.  One of the interesting points in the discussion was how the Chinese and Japanese abandoned the early angled design in favor of more effective curved points, but in America we went from curved points to angled ones.

----------


## C. Dayton

Michael:

Nice point about the lenght.

The problem with modern katana (and other swords) is not much the size, but the weight.  Like the Cold steel 3lbs Katana and the 4lbs Dao Tom saw.


To be strong and long a blade does not need to be heavy.  

Take for example the Chinese Miao Dao which is longer than a Katana (up to 50") it has an edge of about 58RHC and a body able to resist bending. Yet is light enough to be used one one handed if desired.

----------


## Maximus L.

For practical use, I believe the size of the blade has more to do with the style of the user.

People who value speed and agility would surely choose lighter blade, while people who prefer slow but powerful attack will go with heavier blade, and people who care for both in equal degree will pick something in between.

Balance point also plays a big part in this subject, since further balance point from tsuba will make the blade feel heavier despite its actual weight.

As a reference, here's some examples of different bokken for different school in ancient Japan:

http://bokkenshop.com/eng/style.html

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Michael,

I think that's certainly a valid point. I'm told that for batto-do, the common way of  fitting a sword is that the point should just miss the ground when held in your hand with your arm at your side. So the longer your legs, the longer your sword would be.  

In the tradition I studied (not a JSA), short swords are measured as being the length of your forearm (elbow length), saber-length is elbow-and-a-half, and long swords are full-arm length.  That ensures the point doesn't strike the ground when swung from deep postures. 

Does anyone know how other JSAs measure appropriate length for swords? I would think that individual schools might have different methods here as well.

In your signature, you have the link to kuroda-sensei; Perhaps it's the camera angle, but when he is demonstrating his techniques with his student, his bokken appears to be a relatively small, slender blade (the shinken does look longer). His techniques seem perfectly suited to the length -- and it's  a joy to see such skill.

Forgive me for putting you on the spot, but do you train in this tradition, and if you do, how do you measure the appropriate length of a sword.

many thanks

tk

----------


## michael wilson

Thank you Tom and Mr Drayton  - 

Sensei Kuroda's Bokken appears short as if you look at the vid again hios lead hand is further along the length than what is usual ,

and no I do not train in JSA unfortunately  - but I do read a lot of books and have started compiling a collection of video clips of different ryu for my own education also I bug the hell out of a lot of Iaido and Kendo guys  :Smilie: 

Not a backyard samurai but more of a armchair samurai if you will  :Wink: 

I hope that does not render my opinion invalid  - I have owned many production katana and for a few years I was cutting soft targets on a daily basis  - I swore off backyard _tameshigiri_ 
when I realised it was only a poor imitation of actual JSA .

I agree with Mr dayton regarding modern manufacturers like cold steel having at one time owned 3 of their katana  - very heavy 
and poorly balanced and when compared to a shin shinto katana 
it was obvious they bore no resemblance what so ever to a real japanese sword as far as handling, feel and balance was 
concerned .

edited to add:  heres a great article on the thoughts of Nakamura Taizaburo regarding blade length and tsuka length for 
Iaido and tameshigiri  -   http://www.dragon-tsunami.org/Dtimes/Pages/articleh.htm 

Mick

----------


## Jeroen Zuiderwijk

My guess it's the "heavy cutting" culture. Most people who buy katanas, are actually looking for an axe, but want it shaped like a katana. What the market wants, the makers produce. Just as long as 95% of katana buyers want katanaxes, that's what's going to be on the market.

----------


## C. Dayton

Michael:

Don't worry your opinion counts as long as you are not a "mall ninja"  :Stick Out Tongue: 

As for backyard tamageshiri:  It is an art as long as it is properly practiced.  You don't have to be in a Dojo or wear a hakama. As long as you use traditional targets, proper form from a JSA and a well made sword you are practicing an art.

what is wrong is when a mall ninja buys a heavy katana goes to the backyard and starts chopping tree branches like a machete and says "I am practicing samuray sowde techniques"

Jeroen:

Problem is most companies are forgetting the real sword people.  The ones that practice forms and cut traditional targets.  With those heavy blades it is impossible to use correct techniques and practicing forms could cause wrist damage.

----------


## michael wilson

Another point I agree with C  :Wink: 

I picked up some real bad habits using CS warrior and chisa series katana  - instead of letting the sword track through the target using proper form and technique I was just smashing my way through using brute force and the weight of the blade  - then when trying to cut the same target 
with a more traditionally balanced sword around the 2 ound 2 ounce mark I failed to cut through the target - unknowingly I had sacrificed good technique for brute force .

I say each to their own but I am put off test cutting by my own experience and I think I would need JSA training before cutting again.

Back to the western influence on the katana  - 

are we talking big , heavy blades but still within traditional norms ? or are we also including these uber wide mat cutters in vogue at the moment ?

Jeroens comments about the makers giving the market what it wants was IMO spot on  - especially when you look at a sword like the cheness SGC line  - if thats the manufacturers giving the market what it thinks it wants  - well its taking it to the extreme I think .

Mick

----------


## Tom Kehoe

C. Dayton,

your tanto thread is interesting, and perhaps represents a variation on the same theme -- altough I think the American tanto is an even more extreme case of weird forces shaping blade evolution.

And Bob Lum might well have been the guy I was thinking of.  This picture reminds of some of the original American tantos I saw at knife shows way back when.

http://www.engnath.com/public/tantdraw.htm

tk

----------


## Mat Rous

> Michael:
> 
> As for backyard tamageshiri:  It is an art as long as it is properly practiced.  You don't have to be in a Dojo or wear a hakama. As long as you use traditional targets, proper form from a JSA and a well made sword you are practicing an art.
> 
> what is wrong is when a mall ninja buys a heavy katana goes to the backyard and starts chopping tree branches like a machete and says "I am practicing samuray sowde techniques"


Losing all the accoutrements of the art like Hakama etc means you take the art part of it away as well. 

As for modern Katanas. The super thin blades are marketed as "Historically based" but I don't think many of them would have been usable in reality. 

The length of blades has always been limited by cost not by what was historical as well - there are plenty of monster nihonto but they are too expensive to mass produce.

----------


## C. Dayton

> C. Dayton,
> 
> your tanto thread is interesting, and perhaps represents a variation on the same theme -- altough I think the American tanto is an even more extreme case of weird forces shaping blade evolution.
> 
> And Bob Lum might well have been the guy I was thinking of.  This picture reminds of some of the original American tantos I saw at knife shows way back when.
> 
> http://www.engnath.com/public/tantdraw.htm
> 
> tk



That one at least had  a curvature, now they are completely straight.

----------


## C. Dayton

> Losing all the accoutrements of the art like Hakama etc means you take the art part of it away as well. 
> 
> As for modern Katanas. The super thin blades are marketed as "Historically based" but I don't think many of them would have been usable in reality. 
> 
> The length of blades has always been limited by cost not by what was historical as well - there are plenty of monster nihonto but they are too expensive to mass produce.



Traditional katana where thin! and weighted at most 2.5lbs.  The lengh of the Katana specifically was at most 35 inches.  There where other ninhonto like the Tachi and Tsurugi that where longer.

Thin blades where quite usable in reality.  In real life combat swords rarely clashed like in movies, most duels consisted of a single strike.  Also the way ninhonto was made (differential tempering) if clashed the blades where susceptible to bending due to the soft spine.

Lenght is not such an important factor in terms of cost for modern mass produced blades, specially monosteel.  Materials for a sword are quite cheap, what costs is the labor that goes in to them.  Take for example the CAS/Hanwei line of Adam Shu swords.  they range from 28" model to a 34.5" and all cost exactly the same ;-)


As for the art, yes if you practice in jeans and T-shirt on your backyard you take some of the tradition away but as long as you are using proper instruments and techniques the art is intact.  If a violinist plays the same melody in the same way in a concert hall or in a dorm room does it takes away from his art?

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Quite right -- they were usually light enough to be easily wielded with one hand. But they still could have enormous cutting power.  

Test-cutting inscriptions are rare, but they exist, and there are swords attributed to cut three bodies in half with a single stroke. Not heavy blades, but lightweight ones meant to be carried everyday. And apparently they didn't buckle or bend under the impact.

On a separate note, I think the popularity of the straight-tanto shape is based more on its ease of manufacture than its usability.   

tk

----------


## michael wilson

I would have imagined there would be a wide variety of sughata and different nagasa available in Japan at the time of the samurai  - certainly there was far too much variety to nail down with a generalisation like  - _they were thinner back then_  or _they were heavier back then_

Just look at a site like aoi art  - there'll be blades on there from roughly the same period of the Edo era or earlier  - some will be slender , graceful blades at about 28 mm  - 29 mm motohaba but theres also some blades on there with a stout , beefy blade around 33mm wide  - it depends on the smith and the school and what was popular at the time .

I would expect arsenal issue blades to be a lot more sturdier than a court sword in those days .


Thanks

Mick

----------


## C. Dayton

> Quite right -- they were usually light enough to be easily wielded with one hand. But they still could have enormous cutting power.  
> 
> Test-cutting inscriptions are rare, but they exist, and there are swords attributed to cut three bodies in half with a single stroke. Not heavy blades, but lightweight ones meant to be carried everyday. And apparently they didn't buckle or bend under the impact.
> 
> On a separate note, I think the popularity of the straight-tanto shape is based more on its ease of manufacture than its usability.   
> 
> tk



The katana cutting 3 bodies in one strike is a myth popularized by Hollywood.  In real life no human being has the strength necessary to perform such  a feast.


As for the tanto, yes it is definitely easier to manufacture that shape than a real tanto.  That's why the Chinese abandoned the similarily shaped Tang Dao in favor of rounded points as technology advanced.

----------


## Tom Kehoe

From my experience, combat swords closely follow the modern design dictum: form follows function. Features evolve because they serve a particular purpose. I say "combat" because at various times, in various cultures, swords have been worn more as a display of rank or status -- and then their primary purpose is to make the wearer look impressive. 

During the peaceful years of the Togukawa shogunate, when swords were no longer a battlefield necessity, sword makers did all sorts of non-traditional things to sell new blades, and the realities of combat were no longer a primary concern.  

You'll see all sorts of things on swords from the shinto and shinshinto periods that were designed to appeal to a samurai's vanity (ostentatious hamons, solid gold tsubas, etc), and not his martial skills.

Mick,

You're right of course: there was a lot of variation (and I wish there was more variation in what's available on the market today).  But as a general rule, I think it's accurate to say that traditional nihonto were lighter on average than what is being produced today for the western sword market. I've handled a bunch, and the difference seems pretty clear, even with all the variation in sugata, tori and koshirae.

To me, here's an interesting question: How many times did the average samurai (pre-Edo era) actually use his sword?  And was cutting practice common during koto times?  When I say "common," I mean, would the average samurai cut targets on a weekly or monthly basis? I have not been able to find anything addresses this point.  Most of what I have read over the years indicates that kata was the primary practice routine.

I would think that these factors also would affect the weight/balance of the sword -- along with the favored techniques of a particular school of martial arts.  But unfortunately,  I have not been able to find any written accounts that tell me heavier blades were preferred for the bamboo-splitting cuts, etc.  Does anyone have a reference?

 tk

----------


## Timo Qvintus

> The katana cutting 3 bodies in one strike is a myth popularized by Hollywood.  In real life no human being has the strength necessary to perform such  a feast.


Then why are there inscriptions that state "3 bodies with one stroke" (or something similar) on nakago of antique nihonto that were tested by tameshigiri, ie. "tameshi-mei"?  :Confused:  
http://www.google.fi/search?hl=fi&q=...btnG=Hae&meta=

----------


## C. Dayton

> Then why are there inscriptions that state "3 bodies with one stroke" (or something similar) on nakago of antique nihonto that were tested by tameshigiri, ie. "tameshi-mei"?  
> http://www.google.fi/search?hl=fi&q=...btnG=Hae&meta=


Metal just as paper can hold whatever you write into it  :Wink:  I can make a sword and write in to the tang "100 bodies with one stroke" it does not make it true fact.

By laws of phisics it is impossible for a human being to cut 3 average sized bodies in one stroke.  The friction from the blade and loss of momentum due to impact would not allow this.  It does not matter how sharp the blade was.

Also witting the body count or ability to cut on a blade is not a very precise indicator of cutting power as the cutting ability is highly defendant on the strength and skill of the swordsman performing the cut.   Give the sharpest sword ever made to someone who has never handled one and I highly doubt he will be able to at least cut a 2" green bamboo.

----------


## Timo Qvintus

> Metal just as paper can hold whatever you write into it 
> 
> I can make a sword and write in to the tang "100 bodies with one stroke" it does not make it true fact.
> 
> By laws of phisics it is impossible for a human being to cut 3 average sized bodies in one stroke.  The friction from the blade and loss of momentum due to impact would not allow this.  It does not matter how sharp the blade was.


So you're saying that tameshi-mei are in fact "gimei", in a way? I'd like to hear a comment from some of our resident nihonto-experts on this..  :Ninja Master:

----------


## C. Dayton

> So you're saying that tameshi-mei are in fact "gimei", in a way? I'd like to hear a comment from some of our resident nihonto-experts on this..



Not all swordsmith where honest trustworthy people.  Just like today.     

Having a "body count" on the tang does not makes it a gimei.  Gimei is a forged signature, when the name of a smith that did not made the blade is written on it.

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Fact check:

I own a koto katana with a test-cutting inscription, "3 bodies across the chest with one stroke." Authenticated by NBTHK, attributed to Mihara Masachika of the Yamato den (There's another thread here with pictures of the sword).  The tester was one of the Yamanos, a family whose profession was test-cutting. Such practices are well documented. Gruesome, but well-documented.  Usually the swords were mounted in special handles for such tests. 

It seemingly was less a matter of strength, than of skill and the quality of the blade.

Here's a fascinating, but unsettling, article someone on the nihonto board was kind enough to send to me on the topic:

http://www2.una.edu/Takeuchi/DrT_Jpn...es/Tameshi.htm

tk

----------


## Brian Pettett

> By laws of phisics it is impossible for a human being to cut 3 average sized bodies in one stroke.  The friction from the blade and loss of momentum due to impact would not allow this.  It does not matter how sharp the blade was.


Mr. Dayton, your profile doesn't indicate your background, but have you ever seen a Toyama-ryu practitioner perform dotan-giri?  After seeing numerous people cut straight down through 5 or more double mats and finish by burying their blade in the stand, I have no doubt that a certified sword tester could perform a similar cut through three bodies.  Such a cut was - if I have heard correctly - performed through the spinal cord, between the hipbones and the ribs; not much there except soft tissue, which would part readily.  

Granted, I have no wish to see such an act verified in this day and age, but I wouldn't be as quick to make a blanket dismissal of cutting mei that were likely performed in front of official witnesses.  Keep in mind that such tests were done mainly for daimyo, who paid good money for such blades; there must have been at least some accountability in place.

----------


## Mat Rous

Likewise, the statement that "All duels involved no blade contact" is not entirely correct. You mention Hollywood myths, well it's a similar thing. Most Duels would not have been the "One cut" event. People fighting to the death generally got a bit sloppy in technique when their life was on the line I'm sure.

Also, the blade length/shape etc was very varied. There are plenty of long and thick blades out there. Plenty with "nicks" in the blade indicating contact.

If you practise you will know that there are several techniques which involve blade contact. Not "Blocking" but transitional moves that will entail blade on blade contact.

----------


## michael wilson

A lot of people are under the mis-conception that 
samurai duels were like the kyuzo duel  - one cut one kill - from seven samurai , I believe The Twilight Samurai duel scene would have been more accurate .

Even a fireside samurai like me knows of Uke nagashi ( catch and slide off ) 

As Gruesome as testing blades on torso's sounds  - its well documented and I certainly believe that 
specialists who performed this duty would have had no trouble cutting through three bodies across the chest. ( I wouldnt bet against somebody like big Tony Alvarez either if time travel existed  :Big Grin:  ) 


Mick

----------


## C. Dayton

Wow this thread became a Katana fanboy arena and completely out of the original topic.  :EEK!: 

I am not debating with anyone.  SFI is for everyone to share his/her opinion.

----------


## Dave Drawdy

> ... I am not debating with anyone.  SFI is for everyone to share his/her opinion.


 No, it is not.  SFI is here for education.  Sword testing is well documented.  

Dave

----------


## C. Dayton

> No, it is not.  SFI is here for education.  Sword testing is well documented.  
> 
> Dave


Shouldn't education be about the thread's subject?

And I said I am not debating with anyone, please respect my decision not to participate in this thread anymore unless it is to discuss the original Topic:

----------


## Dave Drawdy

> Shouldn't education be about the thread's subject?


C.,
   in your last few posts, you are perilously close to trolling.  You may consider this a polite warning.

Yes, we should return to the topic, if possible.  Modern production kats over the last several years were heavily influenced by
1) a design of a popular smith that was picked up by Cold Steel and used as their prototype
2) some designs coming out of Bugei as they developed their line
3) 'spin-offs' of both of those influences by two primary forges in China, and subsequent spin-off forges
4) a popular and effective 'mat-cutter' design whose cross section if not overall shape and dimensions have been copied into many current models
Two more recent influences outside of the standard 'chinatana' have been Citadel, apparently influenced by classic tachi, and MAS, which produced their line initially for their Korean stylists.  
A recent and very positive influence IMO has been some of the design work that Keith Larman, a highly respected polisher and mounter, has put into the latest Bugei designs.  This list is of course not all-inclusive, lots of variations out there, many times the variation is where to compromise, steel, heat treat, mounts, etc.  Some good user blades, but still caveat emptor.

Dave

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Not sure what you mean by the fanboy comment... 

If the evolution of what I called the "modern western katana" is being shaped by its current usage, then it's certainly relevant to discuss the historical usage of the katana.  



tk

----------


## KevinT

> C.,
>    in your last few posts, you are perilously close to trolling.  You may consider this a polite warning.
> 
> Yes, we should return to the topic, if possible.  Modern production kats over the last several years were heavily influenced by
> 1) a design of a popular smith that was picked up by Cold Steel and used as their prototype
> 2) some designs coming out of Bugei as they developed their line
> 3) 'spin-offs' of both of those influences by two primary forges in China, and subsequent spin-off forges
> 4) a popular and effective 'mat-cutter' design whose cross section if not overall shape and dimensions have been copied into many current models
> Two more recent influences outside of the standard 'chinatana' have been Citadel, apparently influenced by classic tachi, and MAS, which produced their line initially for their Korean stylists.  
> ...


Dave you're always cool in my book. Cause when you tell how the cow ate the cabbage we can see on the replay just how it went down.

----------


## michael wilson

Quoting names of well established kendoka or indeed mentioning blades one has had experience with -  production or nihonto , is not fanboyism by any stretch , its the nature of SFI and its members that from time to time an opinion is voiced that others disagree with  - in these cases facts are given and experience or sources are mentioned to re-inforce the facts .

there's no agenda here and Mr Dayton please continue to post in this thread in the spirit it was started in . :Smilie: 


Thanks

Mick

----------


## Timo Qvintus

...

----------


## C. Dayton

> Primarily, yes. However, as you posted false information, it needed to be corrected, so that upon later viewing such information would not be thought to be the truth.



Why you acuse me of posting false information?

Ask any physics or biology professor as I did and they will tell you my information is correct.  That's what I did and I am a Materials Engineer by the way.   

Specially the statement that a sword could cut 3 bodies across the chest where it would involve 6 humerus, 3 spinal colums, 3 externums and at lest 6 sets of ribs front and back.  That's a lot of bone.

I wonder if  Katana fans believe only the katana could do such feast or swords of other cultures could also do it.

And stop quoting me.  I said I am not discussing this anymore.  If you want to debate instead or go to this thread that is discussing this same topic you want to debate:

http://forums.swordforum.com/showthr...cutting+bodies

Leave this thread for the original discussion: Evolution of the western Katana


Geez I jsut made a simple comment and now there are like 5 people quoting me, and defending their points to dead.   At the end of the day a sword is just a sword and no one uses it to cut bodies anymore.  Get a life.


PS:

To the one that said I have not stated my background:  read the first page of the thread, I did stated my background.  And I did not say that sword duels "never" involved sword contact.  Is said it was not common as you see in movies that duelists strike their swords for 10 minutes before the kill.

----------


## Glen C.

> Primarily, yes. However, as you posted false information, it needed to be corrected, so that upon later viewing such information would not be thought to be the truth.


Sometimes providing truths with references is better than questioning the statments of others and initiating confrontations that cause threads to self destruct.

Here is one nakago count thread from the old days, unfortunately, the images are gone.
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=4658

Here is another related
http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?t=27856

To be honest, there are quite a few more of the same vein. Often mentioned also are the Obata vs helmet tests. I am not quickly finding comments that the practice of falsifying testing mei did occur but those two threads are a start. I thought it was Keith that mentioned it but I could be mistaken.

As to the evolution of the western katana, something I still see is the overall bulky thickness of many. Was it D. Opheim that (more or less) recently posted a picture of three tsuka, looking down at the thicknesses? I know I was somewhat amazed in viewing originals first hand and that really started with David R. Schlueter (of Odd Frog Forge) handing me an antique wakizashi saya at a show one year while chiding me about Hanwei baseball bats.  Further, I can recall quite a few American smiths and craftsmen that did get it quite a long time ago but were not as high profile as those promoting things like the Americanized tanto. Michael Bell would certainly come to mind there, even folk like the late  Bob Engnath.

I think in some ways the production katana market is still in the discovery phase, as more and more realize building from a two dimensional view doesn't reflect history. In a very large sense, that was a hurdle overcome by quality reproductions of European sword types a decade (and more) ago. There is still a sector of that market that doesn't get it and maybe that's where some get the idea that the equation has never been resolved. 

Most of my impressions of how modern Japanese style swords could be has been formed by seeing originals and watching Samurai Saturday on IFC and Japanese films in general. From that perspective, I think there have been some good strides in progress but there still could be huge improvements made. 

An unfortunate trend seems to be the regression of elucidation caused by the swarm of inexpesive swords of the past few years coupled with a great many novice handlers praising them and figuring gluing the kashira and ito back in place is a fix worthy of effort. What can I say? That is on the increase and will continue to drive the market for katanaesque swords. That leaves more cognizant discussion to help sort things out again but noise caused by squabbles over perceived authorative information makes the pertinent information dissapear in a mist of unpleasant discourse.

Cheers

Hotspur; _I say the knights win_

----------


## Keith Larman

The practice was very well documented by smiths, by witnesses, by those doing the testing as well as in some cases by the government itself (depending on the context). Sure, there are blades with BS tameshi-mei. But there are other blades with solid provenance showing a large number of bodies cut in a single stroke. And anyone who has ever seen a talented, powerful swordsman doing a modern dodan cut bury the thing into the base of the stand simply will not have problems with the tameshi-mei of some swords. 

Sometimes they were alive. Sometimes they were dead. Sometimes they were "ripe" for lack of a better term. But the practice occurred. And remember the point of the test was to stress test the sword. To push it to its limits. To determine if it was sharp, if it was durable, if it could handle such a thing. The test itself was set up to maximize the ability of the swordsman to cut. Obviously these are not "real world" scenarios, but they weren't done for those reasons. they were done to test the swords themselves. And some swords would survive some pretty incredible cuts (i believe the top number anyone holds any credence to is 7). But also realize that there were multple areas where one would perform these tests in terms of targets. And if memory serves the whole body tests were done dodan with the cutting going just under the rib cage, above the pelvis. 

And those guys doing the testing were renouned for both their form and strength. They were busy fellas and they had a *lot* of practice. 

Honestly, there are professional historians of the Japanese sword and this topic is not controversial at all. Like I said, this is not only *not* debated seriously, frankly there is no shortage of documentation on the topic making any argument relatively moot. A lot has been written in Japanese, a little translated into English, but it simply is a non-issue. 

Dr. Takeuchi wrote a very nice article on the topic summarizing a lot of things.

http://www2.una.edu/Takeuchi/DrT_Jpn...es/TAMESHI.htm

----------


## C. Dayton

Why don't people follow Glen example and keep this thread on topic.

And to end the argument of "3 bodies cut throught the chest"  once and for all:

Why don't someone get a dead cow from a butcher or slaughterhouse and cuts it through the chest with their Ninhonto?

Or better yet, 3 pigs of similar thickness to human beings.

Better to defend arguments with action than with words.

PS: Mythbusters should do a program about this.

----------


## Dave Drawdy

ok, this has gotten ridiculous.  There is no argument.  C., you are wrong.  As you seem unable to deal with this fact gracefully, I am temporarily closing this thread, to figure out how to clean up the off-topic nonsense.  And as my previous warning had no effect, your account privileges are on a short hiatus, pending review from my fellow mods.

Tom, as this is your thread, will leave it up to you if you wish it re-opened, cleaned up or not.  Please PM me or any of the other mods.  

Dave

----------


## Dave Drawdy

Per Tom's request, this thread is once again open for business, unaltered.  C. Dayton will be able to rejoin us in a few days, if anyone had been wondering.  For those of you still with us, and those joining us, please keep in mind that: 
a) this board is about education, we encourage intelligent and courteous discourse.  "Is too!", "Is not!", "Oh yeah?!" does not fall into that category.  
b) disagreement is not a personal attack.  This one causes lots of problems.  All of us are occasionally wrong, may have bad info, or may be passing on something we have read but have no personal experience of.  Relax, take a deep breath, open your mind to alternate possibilities.  The world is large and, oddly enough, there are people out there that may know more than we do, as a factor of life experience, research, or just being in the right place at the right time.  Pick their minds, much more profitable than arguing, IMO.  
3) if you see an argument brewing, and especially if the salient points have already been made, resist the urge to pile on.  If it is trolling, don't feed him/her.  
4) this is a moderated board.  we have rules and standards, even if they are enforced irregularly.  our preference is to let things move along and hope for the best.  benefit of the doubt and all that.  if you have questions, issues, requests, feel free to contact a mod.  If you don't like the response, contact another one.  We are here because we love swords, too.  We have our favorites and our blind spots, like anyone. 

Thanks, all, 
carry on, 

Dave

----------


## F.Zara

> Why don't people follow Glen example and keep this thread on topic.
> 
> And to end the argument of "3 bodies cut throught the chest"  once and for all:
> 
> Why don't someone get a dead cow from a butcher or slaughterhouse and cuts it through the chest with their Ninhonto?
> 
> Or better yet, 3 pigs of similar thickness to human beings.
> 
> Better to defend arguments with action than with words.
> ...



Although japanese swordsmanship is not my area of interest this test look quite interesting. 

 I would love to see someone do such test with japanese or Chinese swords.  This is would be more accurate test cutting than tatami or bamboo.

----------


## Dave Drawdy

F. Zara, and all, let's try and stay on topic, not hijack this thread again.  Feel free to start another one if necessary.  

Dave

----------


## Benjamin P.

A friend of mine put it this way....  

"...wanting "specialized" cutters or what people frequently call "monster" or "beast" cutters are all well and fine, and their personal preference.  When made by a skilled smith, the subtleties in the geometry allow for a deceptively versatile cutting tool. 

But in the production market, the story is a bit different.  After a certain point, it's kind of like an athlete who is *over-specialized* for a single sporting event.  If you've seen what Olympic athletes have become like over the last few decades, then you know exactly what I mean."

I don't know about you guys, but that kind of made a lot of sense to me....  :Smilie:   So, now I prefer more "well-rounded" swords... than the current market trend toward the "XL" flat and wide and forward-balanced swords.

----------


## Timo Qvintus

It just crossed my mind that PC hasn't made a XL-series version of the Orchid, right? I have one, and it's quite a bit different from all other production katana that I have.. (my collection doesn't include any XL-like blades, BTW).

----------


## Benjamin P.

Another "trend" I've also noticed is a strong desire for so-called "indestructible" or "near-indestructible" blades...  which is probably the reason for the relative success of companies like Cheness and the like.

Not to distract from the current topic of the thread... which is about trends in blade shapes and geometries...  I think that's also something interesting to consider.

Personally... and this is a purely personal preference...  I really like the idea that my sword has tangible limits that it should not be pushed beyond, which has so far discouraged me from playing samurai in my backyard or doing really dumb things with it....  I know that's true of any sword, even the fabled HC L6, but it's just something I've noticed.  A lot of collectors today, especially beginners, seem to want unusually forgiving swords....

When someone like Erik Tracy sensei or Dave Drawdy sensei train test-cutting with a magnificent sword like a HC L6 in their respective dojos, I'm guessing that they don't just rely on the blade's durability... but only as an added insurance just in case they make a mistake.  And hey, everyone makes mistakes, right?  It's not a question of if but when....  

I guess I'm just kind of weary and a little confused about why the "unnecessarily tough" (...or so they claim...) production market seems to be thriving....

----------


## Timo Qvintus

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a blade with niku and/or high shinogi more difficult to make and polish than one with flat surfaces?

----------


## Loren Mandarino

There are several factors that have led to the current type of blades being made. Probably the single greatest factor is that none of these swords are being commissioned or mass produced with the expectation that the future owner may need this blade in battle. Even the meiji era was close to a time and had hold overs from a time of battle so swords were would still have that ingrained in the smiths. We are currently so far from a time when a sword would be a major battle weapon that it has slowly been lost as a need taken into account when a smith goes to work. Another factor is that this is a modern day market and the consumer is far different than the traditional Samurai. There are modern metals, modern machines, and a modern mentality about "how cool can I look for the least amount of money." or "how quickly can I get a "real" samurai sword, I want it now I wqant it now". There are a host of companies looking to cash in on this particular consumer. 

Regardless of how much any of us study martial arts, or how far we have gone in JSA and regardless of how serously we take it, the idea that this item WILL be the difference between life and death just isn't a factor or consideration any longer, and it doesn't enter into the equation for the smith either. The smith doesn't have to worry about gaining a reputation that people using his blades are dying in battle, instead just can it cut, how is the hamon, and how big is it are the major points.

modern day Nihonto are made much more like antique Nihonto because the method has been passed down from then to now and the same method, materials, and pride go into it. If you only can make 2 blades a month to sell you better believe they are going to be 2 damn good blades. Increase that to 50 or whatever modern smiths do, there is going to be quite a variant in quality.

edited this out because I didn't notice the argument on page 2. didn't mean to get back into that

----------


## Chris Osborne

Well, it kind of reminds me of something Anthony Dicristofano said on his site........."The Japanese have a saying :  "juu nin to iro"  "ten people ten colors"  It means everybody has different likes and dislikes." Or as a car salesman friend of my dad's used to say, "there's an @$$ for every seat." 

As for the desire to have a so-called indestructible blade, well, some people just like to have what they feel is "high performance" or "the best", however ill-informed they may be. Doesn't matter whether it's home entertainment, car audio, guns, video game consoles, or swords, there will always be people like that and others more than willing to take their money.    

As for modern sword geometries, at least as far as blades made by most of the top guys, I'm not entirely sure that beefier, stouter blades when made properly are impractical. That's really kind of a relative thing, as practicality is dependant on what you want from something. I've seen some blades that are so thin and "elegant" that one decent sized nick in the cutting edge would mean the end for them. 

I believe history shows that during periods of war blades tended to be very robust, and the reasoning is simple. A blade intended for use on the battlefield would be expected to survive multiple encounters with hard targets within just one engagement, and hopefully still be intact and serviceable afterwards. Unfortunately, thin, lightweight blades just don't lend themselves well to that type of application. While that style of blade might be ideal for kata or the dojo, it would be anything but practical in a battlefield situation. I am talking about blades within reasonable limits, whatever those might be, as I do know there's some stuff that's just unreasonable, but generally speaking, I don't think that what's being made today by the top smiths is outside of traditional boundaries in regards to geometry.  

I think a major reason for the impression of older blades somehow being lighter and more "elegant" is that many of them have simply been reduced considerably over the years and in many cases are but a shadow of what they once were in regards to size. When viewed today, they could possibly give a false impression as to the heft of traditional blades, although many fine examples of exceptionally robust blades are still quite prevalent.

----------


## Mat Rous

Very good post Chris!

You wouldn't happen to have some pictures of the robust blades? It's strange the perception exists that all Japanese blades were slender and light. 

I've heard stories of huge battlefield blades kept by some collectors.

----------


## Chris Osborne

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a blade with niku and/or high shinogi more difficult to make and polish than one with flat surfaces?


More niku yes, slightly so. Shinogi-takashi or raised shinogi no. Generally blades with raised shinogi are easier to polish as it's much easier to maintain crisp geometry on them. The hardest blades to maintain geometry are those with flat shinogi and lots of niku, as there is very little pitch between the  Ji and shinogi ji. One slight bobble while polishing will wipe out the shinogi on a blade like that.

----------


## Keith Larman

> More niku yes, slightly so. Shinogi-takashi or raised shinogi no. Generally blades with raised shinogi are easier to polish as it's much easier to maintain crisp geometry on them. The hardest blades to maintain geometry are those with flat shinogi and lots of niku, as there is very little pitch between the  Ji and shinogi ji. One slight bobble while polishing will wipe out the shinogi on a blade like that.



True, but sometimes working on the "inside curve" of a blade with a very high shinogi poses its own challenges. Especially if the smith likes to flare out at the kissaki. Many polishers will simply rip that out rather than deal with it. Keeping it is a royal pain.

----------


## Chris Osborne

> Very good post Chris!
> 
> You wouldn't happen to have some pictures of the robust blades? It's strange the perception exists that all Japanese blades were slender and light. 
> 
> I've heard stories of huge battlefield blades kept by some collectors.


No I don't unfortunately, but I did see several at the Tampa show. Interestingly enough, the beefiest blade I saw there was a shinsakuto by Komiya Yasumitsu on Ted and Keith's table, I absolutely loved that blade. 

http://moderntosho.com/sale/Yasumitsu.htm

----------


## Chris Osborne

> True, but sometimes working on the "inside curve" of a blade with a very high shinogi poses its own challenges. Especially if the smith likes to flare out at the kissaki. Many polishers will simply rip that out rather than deal with it. Keeping it is a royal pain.


Good point Keith, I've done a few of Howard's blades that had a great deal of flare at the kissaki and it was very difficult.

----------


## Chris Osborne

Let me clarify one point from my earlier post. I was specifically referring to blades made for a battlefield environment. There were certainly long periods in Japan's history when they were not at war, and certainly blades more suited to a one on one confrontation where long term durability might take a back seat to speed and agility were made. I simply think that thinner as well as more robust blades are both historically accurate in terms of geometry, and that both are relative to what one want or expects from a blade given whatever medium is being used in it's manufacture.

----------


## Keith Larman

With respect to the "bigger" question of western interpretations of these things, you guys need to keep in mind that what you see on these forums is just a tiny bit of the larger world out there. Lots of folk don't post. Lots of things aren't seen on these forums. 

FWIW here's a sword I need to send photos of to a customer of mine (yeah, I'm behind). It is a big, modern, robust cutter. No niku, virtually no taper, tall and wide. Cuts like a demon...



The sword was made in... 

Japan.

Traditionally made sword made for an experienced martial artist. As a matter of fact the smith is apparently the one who worked with Hataya in designing the so-called Hataya Kotetsu line so popular here among some practitioners. That big, wide, flat design is something we've seen for years in Japan made specifically for martial arts practitioners. It is a nihonto. Traditionally made. 



And there are a lot of blades somewhat like that being used in japan by experienced sensei who cut a lot. This is a "big" sword and feels "big" in the hands. And it cuts very, very well.

Now here's a shot of "Big" Tony Alvarez doing a dodan cut at a blade show quite a few years ago now. I hope he doesn't mind me posting it. Here he is mid-cut...



And here is a shot after he walked away...



This "form" for tameshigiri is based on the old dodan cutting tests on bodies. If I remember correctly those are double rolls. 10 of them. And Tony did cut through the bottom roll and it would have been totally cleaved if he hadn't had the sword slightly angled point down by the end of the cut. The sword was buried about a 1/4 inch into the stand preventing it from completely severing the 10th target. Pretty good cut I think.

And the sword he was using was... 

A Howard Clark 1086 sword. A robust sword with a conventional Kamakura-esque shape. Healthy niku, conventional dimensions (normal width and height given the style). Nothing like the "big cutters" folk insist on using.

The irony here is that Tony's big Howard Clark is more "conventionally" shaped in some sort of historic sense than the nihonto I posted photos of above. 

I've done some swords that were made specifically to take advantage of the modern metallurgy. Mr. Drawdy's big monster hira is a great example of that. That sword basically started with Howard and me having a conversation about what would be possible. And wanting to do something a bit outside the conventional lines. 33" of hira zukuri tasty L6 goodness...



But I've done more swords that were vastly more in-line with conventional historic precedence. Many experienced JSA practitioners want a conventional shape. Light to moderate niku, traditional shaping, more traditional balance. I delivered one to a visiting sensei at the last west coast tai kai and he giddily went out and took my freshly polished and mounted sword and attacked a bunch of tatami. Big grin on his face. Nice, gentle niku, conventional shaping, nice taper... Cool sword. The L6 was just the icing on the cake... 

In designing new swords for Bugei I've been trying to stick with traditional parameters. And there is demand for that. Not within the sub-800 sword market, but among those who are going into the higher end of things, well, the demand is there. Because some know the difference and are willing to pay more for more attention to detail and a stronger semblance to traditional parameters. 

Talking about trends is one thing. But I hear so many different things depending on where I happen to be standing. In this forum the focus seems to be on inexpensive but tough sharpened bars of steel. That happen to be mostly sword shaped. At the big tai kai's I don't tend to see any of the cheap swords. I do see them at small tai kai, but usually among karate students who are first learning iai as an adjunct to their karate. As they transition into more traditional arts the sword usage tends to change. 

Just realize that the same things happen in Japan, just on a different level due to restrictions on what can be used. Some push for the most specialized weapon they can get. Some want the most traditional weapon (whatever that may be). And everything in between.

The "evolution" of the Japanese sword is ongoing, even in Japan. Not necessarily in terms of methods as there are restrictions. But the same pressures on shapes are being experience there as are here. 

And then when you walk away from the world of the traditional martial artist or traditionalist collector, well, that's an entirely different ballgame... And a topic for another day.

----------


## Tom Kehoe

> True, but sometimes working on the "inside curve" of a blade with a very high shinogi poses its own challenges. Especially if the smith likes to flare out at the kissaki. Many polishers will simply rip that out rather than deal with it. Keeping it is a royal pain.


Keith,

I've noticed that sort of flare that you're talking about on some swords (my bugei bamboo has a really pronounced one).  Is there a name for that? The japanese seem to have  a name for every feature of the blade, but I haven't been able to find a reference to that.  Is that common on modern blades and does it serve a purpose?

thanks for the expertise

tk

----------


## Keith Larman

I've never been able to find a term for it. I have heard people use terms that I know were incorrect (terms applied to particular *parts* of the mune for instance rather than about the "flaring" of the mune). 

What causes this is the traditional methodology used to form a kissaki. If you assume a traditional construction methodology like kobuse, to form the kissaki you need to find a way to "push" the edge steel back and up. So they cut the and of the billet diagonally opposite where you'd form the kissaki (if that makes any sense). Then the smith will forge that back causing the skin/edge still to go back towards the mune. If I get some time I'll try to find a photo of the process -- I have one somewhere. Anyway, that forging methodology tends to cause a flare of sorts to form. It can be rather significant especially if the blade has a high shinogi. So basically the "width" of the blade at the shinogi comes back to the mune at the point the ko-shinogi terminates at the mune. So that width is maintained and since the mune is thinner than the width at the shinogi, the mune "flares" out a bit at that point. 

So it is a side-effect of traditional shaping.

Most production swords (as well as many modern makers) don't form the kissaki that way. So most don't have that flare. 

Not all traditional blades have the flare for a variety of reasons. Swords with parallel shinogi-ji surfaces that have been polished a few times tend to lose them assuming they had them originally. Especially if there was damage to the tip and the entire tip structure was reshaped to repair it (not uncommon). 

But many new swords will have them depending on the style the smith is working in.

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Some really interesting comments here. 

I think it is unequivocal that, as Chris points out, the size and weight of nihonto changed over the years as the conditions for which they were intended changed. I would be fascinated to learn how martial arts practice changed during the generations that sword geometry changed. Clearly, if you're slashing at foot soldiers from a moving horse, you need a different sword than if you're going shoulder-to-shoulder with another trained swordsman. Especially if drawing the sword quickly is a factor.

I have a harder time with the idea that the notion that the "lightness" of koto swords is the byproduct of the swords being over polished. Collectors are certainly sensitive to "tired" blades, and, as has been referenced in earlier posts, there are telltale signs of such a state -- loss of niku, indistinct hamon, strained grain, etc.

The idea that "lightness" is one of the attributes of a fine blade is pretty well documented. I don't discount that there are many over-polished old blades, I just question that they are the source of the idea that a fine nihonto has a certain "lightness" to it. If anyone has any references on any of these issues, I'd love to read them.

tk

----------


## Timo Qvintus

Does traditional construction/lamination allow for a "lighter" sword, while maintaining the essential characteristics? Just a thought..

----------


## Tom Kehoe

I don't know, but it's a good question. I would certainly think that certain modern alloys are denser than traditional tamahagane, and that certain alloys might even be intrinsically heavier, but would that make a difference in a sword blade? 

You can immediately tell the difference between a carbide router bit and a steel router bit by the weight and even the difference in texture, but those are two completely different materials.

And as others have pointed out, there certainly are nihonto that are heavier than others. 

But I suspect that those who point to the evolution in katana usage are  on the right track. 

I'm reminded of a show  I went to in 1999 in Tampa. The Token Kai had a special viewing of 11 swords, all judged juyo or tokubetsu juyo. Each was laid out with a little silk pillow so that you could handle and examine the bare blades under good lighting. I had never actually handled such a blade before that, and I was stunned by how light they were, as a group.  I have the catalog from that show, but unfiortunately it does not list the weight of the blades.

Six had bo-hi of some form or another. Significant funbari on several. All the katana were sihnogi zukuri. Most were quite slender. One in particular really struck me. It was a shortened naginata, with a wickedly long and thin kissaki. By examining the mune, you could see that the kissaki was a separate piece of steel mortised into the end of the blade body. The color difference (perhaps accentuated by polishing) in the steels really accentuated the joint on the mune, although the joint itself looked like it had been cut by a laser.

I wish there was some way of determining the difference in hardness and toughness of that kissaki from the rest of the blade.

tk

----------


## Keith Larman

The weight thing is a topic that some are adamantly in favor of, others completely dismissive. I've had the same experience of noting that really nice, older blades feel different sometimes in the hand. But personally I think it has more to do with the subtle factors of shape than with some sort of inherent mass difference. Really, are our hands that sensitive to differences that we can pick up small differences in weight? Disparate materials, sure, but different alloys of steel? I'm not so sure.

Also, I've handled a lot of blades over the years and the one impression I've had many times is that the feel of weightiness of a sword in hand is often quite deceptive. This is a complex shape with all sorts of different tapers combined with a curving object. That simply creates a different feel. Add in the fumbari at the base of early Kamakura blades with more taper at the kissaki, smaller points and more taper overall and the blade will most certainly feel very different than a blade of similar length and motokasane from say the Muromachi period. The Muromachi blade will feel like a beast in comparison.

But in the end, I really don't know. I've often picked up a really nice blade, felt it in hand and heard myself say "oh, old blade". The weight, the "look", the feel all add up to that.

However, for a long time we had a tachi by Mukansa smith Ono Yoshimitsu on moderntosho.com.  It was patterned after a Heian tachi right down to really nice utsuri dripping down from the shinogi ji (polished by Fujishiro as well which doesn't hurt a blade's looks). The difference was that it was robust with the healthy shape and niku of a blade that hadn't been polished 10 times. So it was very much like holding a blade that fell into a time machine 1300 years ago popping up today. And if you picked it up and held it... it still felt very light in the hands... We had the experience of people picking it up, drawing it from the shirasaya, then their eyes bugging out. It was impressive to see what appeared to be such an old blade that was so healthy. Once we told them it was modern made they'd look suprised for a second, look again, then go "oooohhhhh." Interesting how that worked...  :Wink:

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Keith,

That's fascinating -- at least it is to me.

You're right -- my observation that fine old nihonto often feel "lighter" in the hand may not just be a function of weight, but of balance and other factors as well. 

Let me pick your brain about a similar matter, if you don't mind: To what degree do you think the sword's polish affects it's cutting ability? Polishing today seems to be regarded mostly as a cosmetic matter, but I wonder how much it can really change the functionality of the blade.

My curiosity stems from my experiences as a woodworker with traditional Japanese handtools. The Japanese planes and chisels are simply the finest in the world; nothing else cuts the way they do. The trick is, they have a distinct cutting angle and edge geometry, and they only cut the way they're supposed to if they're sharpened and polished properly. If they're not polished properly, the drag on the cut is noticeably greater.

So what I'm getting around to is, would modern production katanas' cutting ability be affected by a more traditional polish?

thanks for your thoughts

tk

----------


## Mat Rous

Am I right in remembering that a lot of swords were not as heavily polished as they are today? I'm sure I read that online somewhere.

With regards to weight and size. It is worth remembering that Japanese people of the pre Meiji era were a lot shorter than modern Japanese people. A 68cm blade would have been fairly long for them proportionally. The weight would have been heavier for them than us that's for sure.

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Mat,

I think you're right. Seems to me that I remember reading the same thing about the polish somewhere, but I don't remember where. 

On your other point, I was reading an article in the JSSUS journal about the evolution of battle tactics in Japanese history. The article noted that during the kamakura period, single combat on he battlefield was common, and the favored stroke was called kesa-kiri -- a diagonal stroke starting at the shoulder, through the chest, and emerging above the hip. 

That's got to be a tough cut. According to Rich Stein's site, tachi blades started out long and heavy in the kamakura period and got progressively lighter until they started resembling modern blades shapes.   Now if you were designing a blade with that cut in mind, I suspect you would make it long and beefy. 

Sword sugata lightened up, got heavier again, and then evolved into the modern katana. The interesting thing is that the kesa-kiri continued to be a highly favored cut into the 1800s, long after the modern katana arrived.  As Keith's images above suggest, a well-shaped katana is capable of fearsome acts of cutting.

Does technique enable the shorter, lighter sword to be just as effective a cutter as the older heavier blade?  I don't have the experience to guess, but it's an interesting point to ponder.

tk

----------


## Dave Drawdy

> ... Does technique enable the shorter, lighter sword to be just as effective a cutter as the older heavier blade?  I don't have the experience to guess, ...


 Yes.  And now is as good a time as any to start gaining that experience, exploring these issues with some training.   :Smilie:   Central Florida has some good options for that.  
(edited to add)
ok, sorry, that was a bit off-track perhaps.  But I do feel that getting out on the floor with a teacher can shed a great deal of light of what a sword can and cannot do.  


> Sword sugata lightened up, got heavier again, and then evolved into the modern katana.


 succinct, perhaps somewhat accurate, but not at all complete.  Sword length rules were tightly regulated and changed several times during and after the Edo period.  the various major schools (smith lines) are still active.  Yamato den blades are still nice and heavy, still produced today.  What people use is a factor of personal taste, traditional within a style, what is available, financial capability, enforced rules or regulations (depending on the time, context) and training. Deciding that shorter blades were more likely because people were shorter is a bit glib, and rather insulting, IMO.   
Speaking strictly of modern production katana, I really don't see any evolutionary forces at work, other than cheap being the driving marketing force.  Historical accuracy or attempting to work within a specific school is pretty rare.  Blade development, exploring steels and processes, is something that some individual smiths are doing.  And it is really interesting, but not likely to have much affect on mass-produced cutters.  .  

Dave

----------


## Mats Gustavsson

This thread is really intresting, more please

----------


## Richmond McCluer

I have been reading this thread as it has gone on and echo what Mats says - this is interesting, and illustrates SFI at it's best as a learning and discussion tool.

----------


## Keith Larman

Since I'm taking a break from polishing as my Thermacare back wrap heats up (I love those things), I have a few things to comment on. This is going to be relatively stream of consciousness because I don't have much time. So I apologize in advance if I go off on too many tangents...

With respect to blade shape and the various (very good) depictions of blade changes over time, you need to keep in mind that these are very rough generalizations. Let me try to explain that a bit...

Last year at the West Coast Tai Kai Mike Yamasaki (Ricecracker.com and a member of the NBTHK-AB board) put out a fantastic display of swords with tameshi-mei. Seven or so swords if memory serves. And I think all of them were made in the so-called "kanbun" shinto timeframe. And if you look at the various books and guides you'll see that one really distinctive thing of this time period was the virtually straight blade. I've heard all sorts of explanations of why this was, but you will see these in virtually every guide. 

However, every single one of the Kanbun Shinto era blades on display had a fairly conventional 2/3rd to 3/4" sori. Someone at the presentation commented on that and Mike pointed out that while there were smiths making virtually straight katana during this period, many, many more were making them the way they had been for a while already -- i.e., the pretty typical shinto era shaping of moderate sori, chu kissaki, etc... 

So the point of this is that if you find a straight shinto era katana it was probably made during the Kanbun era. However, that doesn't mean that most anything else couldn't have also been made at the same time... Heck, right now some smiths are making bigger, wider, heavier cutters due to some degree of popularity of the design. But that doesn't mean there aren't many, many more being made that are quite different.

So to put a college "logic class" spin on it, while all dogs may be animals, it does not follow that all animals are dogs... 

So sword shapes distinctive of certain times are important to know because they can be points to help you understand what you're looking at. But it is only one small starting point of a vastly larger picture. 

And fwiw a few token kai's ago someone had a really interesting Sokan katana that was flat as a board... Kanbun shinto shape to be sure, but Shinshinto smith... In a craft with 1000 years of history that is full exceptions, exceptions become the rule. It sure makes life interesting...  :Wink: 


On polishing and cutting ability... That is a complex issue actually. I've long found it interesting that one thing Hanwei has done very well over the years is get a reasonably traditional cross section on most of their blades. Bugei wanted big, Kamakura styles early on. Lots of niku which reflected where James Williams was at that time in terms of what he wanted to see in his swords for training. So he was pretty adamant about that. No bevels, no flat blades, but actually quite robust blades. And that became the norm for most all of Hanwei's blades for quite some time.

But if you look around at other production blades and even some custom blades I've seen, one thing that often suffers is the shaping. My very old article on Niku on Rich Stein's site came about from me trying to understand shaping and how it all fit into the larger scheme of things (and actually started as a post here on SFI). Anyway, from my understanding of the quenching process the smith leaves a fairly thick "blunt" edge to help prevent fractures. After yaki-ire the traditional method is to get down on a really coarse stone and start rolling in the niku. Basically you cut in the edge angle you want then work on "pushing" the center of the niku up the surface of the ji. Depending on style, shape, etc. that location, magnitude, etc. will vary. But suffice to say it shouldn't be centered down at the edge. 

So what does this have to do with anything? Well, a blade made with the edge cut in but the niku not "pushed" up traditionally can still cut and cut very well. It can obviously be just as sharp at the edge. But users will sometimes notice that the blade kinda "clunks" at it goes through some targets. They don't tend to get that satisfying clean cut that one would associate with a really good sword. The problem is that the shaping just isn't quite subtle enough to get a really smooth pass through. So while both will cut, one cuts "better", cleaner, with a smoother feedback to the swordsman.

Obviously this isn't an issue on a totally flat blade. No niku, no clunking. And super thin flat ground blades tend to cut really well.

But a well polished blade with properly shaped niku can be thicker (hence much stronger with respect to lateral strength) and still cut with much that same satisfying "thwack" feel. But it requires that subtle attention to detail both by the smith making the blade and by the polisher being willing to fix it if it isn't right to begin with. And it is a lot of work if I have to address it at the polishing stage. 

So does a good shaping matter? Sure. How much it matters is really a difficult question to answer. And that answer begs a lot of other questions. 

Remember this is a highly refined blade shape that evolved over a long period of time. Also remember that the way a sword cuts also involves what you're cutting and how you're cutting it. Nothing in isolation. If you're cutting water bottles and pool noodles in the back yard you'll probably develop some certain sort of form and most any blade that is reasonably sharp and not over-thick will cut them really well. But if you're cutting traditional targets with a traditionally shaped blade you cannot also ignore the cutting style of the practitioner. These things all evolved together. The low niku (almost secondary bevel) shaping some get with their swords probably work just great especially if the swordsman is using it like a baseball bat. And the edge is probably well supported for that sort of use. But talk about proper form with the types of targets traditionally used and the importance of the shaping will become more manifest.

Hope that all makes sense because I need to get back to polishing. I'm way too far behind on too many projects.

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Keith,

thanks for taking the time out for such a thoughtful reply. One of the things I love about this forum is that folks with unique experiences are so willing to share.

tk

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Dave,

couple of thoughts....

I have significant experience with the use of sword and knife in other martial arts, but the JSA cutting practice is somewhat unique, and something I intend to become more familiar with.  I was down at the Tai Kai this past weekend (as a spectator) and found it quite interesting.

>>Deciding that shorter blades were more likely because people were shorter is a bit glib, and rather insulting, IMO. 

   This was not my comment.  And while it may be glib, I suspect there's an element of truth in it.  Sword length generally correlates to the style or technique, and because of that, the physical size of a person is a factor. In the style I studied, sword length was a factor of arm length, which allowed me to use longer swords than many because of my orangutan-length reach <g>.

 Another member here sent me a link to website with comments from a Japanese sensei suggesting that the proper way to measure a sword was from the palm to just above the ground level. So at least some JSA employ similar standards.  So it may be a legitimate observation that, all else being equal,  katanas targeted at Americans would be longer because Americans tend to be taller.  

But as you point out, there are numerous other factors as well. 

The point of my admittedly over-generalized assessment was that blade length and style had to generally correlate to usage; new enemies, new tactics, and the rise of firearms. 

I said Sword sugata lightened up, got heavier again, and then evolved into the modern katana.

You responded, succinct, perhaps somewhat accurate, but not at all complete.

That may be an overly kind assessment.  In re-reading my post, I realize that I used a very poor choice of words.  I was referring to the general changes in blade shape over 600 years that led to the development of the katana. I really didnt intend to characterize how the katana itself developed during the koto, Shinto and shinshinto. 

Sorry for the confusion

tk

----------


## Mat Rous

> Deciding that shorter blades were more likely because people were shorter is a bit glib, and rather insulting, IMO.   
> 
> Dave



Hi Dave, I think you may have misinterpreted why I wrote and attributed it to Tom.

To clarify, I was talking about proportional size and weight, not "They were short so the blades were shorter". As always, it's a general comment to elicit debate, which seems to have worked considering Keith's marvellous response.

Glib is a bit harsh really as we are merely talking ideas through.

----------


## michael wilson

Ive often wondered why the military gunto sword of the pre war era had a nagsa of only 25" - 26" 
when there is a wealth of earlier blades in existence around the 27.5" length  - I hope its safe to assume the average 20th century japanese male was taller than his 17th century counterpart so why the digression back to shorter blades ? 

A little off topic and I do apologise for that but it does tie in with the current conversation .

Thank you 

Mick

----------


## Dave Drawdy

> ... "Deciding that shorter blades were more likely because people were shorter is a bit glib, and rather insulting, IMO. " 
>    This was not my comment.  And while it may be glib, I suspect there's an element of truth in it. ...


Hi Tom.  Yes, I knew that was not your comment, that was just a drive-by, target of opportunity.  My comments about training were not specifically directed at you, again just taking an opportunity to try and put some of the discussion in the context of actual use and training, which I believe changes things.  Mat, yes, 'glib' is a bit harsh, I apologize.  
All, my problem with the characterization of shorter blades for shorter people is that those who do not train will take it as a bottom line, and a start point, when it really should not be.  The start point should be in class, in training, a) learning the specific requirements of a style or school and, more importantly, b) learning what you are capable of with training.  Case in point, we cut in class last night.  Almost everyone has their own cutting sword, a fairly wide spectrum, mostly modern production katana, most initially driven by what is affordable within the guidelines of what is acceptable.  Eventually getting to what is 'right' is a really interesting learning curve.  Yes, we go with "in a relaxed grip, from the palm to just above the ground level" as a guideline.  But it is just a guideline, subject to difference in relative arm length (orangutang? :Smilie: ), body size and composition, some gender issues, affordability and availablity (blades longer than 2.5 shaku tend to be more expensive).  Someone just starting training cannot handle the heavier blades preferred by some of the more seniors.  No muscle in the right places, no sense of where the sword is or where their body is in the mechanics of moving and cutting.  One senior recently moved from an (award-winning) high-end production cutter to a lighter, better balanced, custom (very sweet).  One of the customs I use is incredibly slim and light, cuts like a laser, but demands focus.  Someone new would not be able to consistently track the blade in the cut (and I'm not consistent with it yet either).  Another is the monster hira that Keith mentioned, about 5 inches longer than my normal blades, demands all kinds of focus for the draw and noto.  Not something I would recommend for beginners.  Our dojo cutters are around 27 inches, used by students tall and short, experienced and new, and length is less an issue than disparity in weight and  balance.  And all of those factors are affected by what training makes possible, natural.  Those of you that have seen Ueki sensei train, very thin, elderly Japanese gentleman, swings an enormous blade, no problem.  My first sensei, about 5' 6", loved longer blades, joked about putting luggage cart wheels on the end ot the saya because they were so long.     
    So, yes, length may be a factor, and perhaps on average taller people use longer blades, but I really don't see a causal or determining link there.  But that's just my opinion.  Sorry for the rambling, I spend way too much time thinking about this stuff.   :Smilie: 

Dave

----------


## Dave Drawdy

in a doomed attempt to get back on track ... 


> ... blade length and style had to generally correlate to usage; new enemies, new tactics,


 Maybe, in general terms, but again, I'd argue that local usage, clan preference, ryu requirements, affordability and availability played a greater role, especially after the warring states period.  Most modern blades for users are for iaidoka or the growing band of backyard cutters.  Still not seeing 'evolutionary' forces at work, just personal preferences, again leaning towards inexpensive and (lately) towards 'cheater' geometry.  The 'evolution' seems to be more of an individual journey of the smith, with whatever fallout may eventually reach a broader base from educated users and raised expectations.  I think the Yoshimitsu family are perhaps an aspect of those evolutionary forces.  Research, experimentation, pushing envelopes.  

Dave

----------


## Keith Larman

Let me toss in a note of agreement with Dave on the issue of length. One point I was trying to make in my earlier discussion is that the variations are actually quite large even though you *can* identify trends within those things. The problem is that the generalizations tend to be the things we focus on even if the reality is there is a rather large deviation from that norm. 

Or as one of my mentors told me back when I was working in a research environment -- while the statement that the average human being has a single testicle and a single ovary is true in general, it is of little help when it comes to understanding any individual human. 

Folk often talk about all these ideal means of measuring for a sword. That's cool if you have that as an option. So most will get measured to get a ballpark idea. Then they go out and try to find something close to that (usually constrained by availability and budget). Over time as they "mature" as practitioners their abilities and preferences almost *always* change as well. Some will "upgrade" at that point. And on it goes.

But most today (and probably most folk throughout history) likely had little choice with respect to what to use. You use what you had. Of what the armoury handed you. Or what you could afford. And then you worked really hard to get good with it.

That said around certain areas groups would have their "preferences". So most of what was available to the fellas doing Yagyu Shinkage-ryu around Owari Province would be geared to some extent to their preferences. And that might be somewhat different from the guys from the Kagoshima han in Satsuma or the fellas hanging out in the court in Edo. 

Usually what happens is that the new guys buy what their teachers are using because obviously those are the best swords for what they're doing.  :Wink:  

It is a really complicated issue but at the same time really quite simple. Complicated in that there are a large number of factors involved getting to that point. Simple in that usually the choices a new practitioner will have that are really appropriate, cost effective, available, etc. are very, very limited. And it varies from dojo to dojo, style to style, etc.

And to me... I don't really see all that much evolution going on. I see some gravitating towards larger blades (as in long and heavy) because of perceived "power" of those things. But that's something that folk figure out over time. I see others going for things that are somewhat "optimized" for certain targets. That's fine too, but I think the case there is overstated. Remember that the overwhelming majority of purchasers of production swords have zero traditional training. So what the market demands there is pretty much just a reflection of modern consumer culture. What the experienced guys want tend to reflect the personality and preferences of their sensei. And that is a small scale thing that has little to do with overall evolution. I've personally seen the pendulum swing a couple times. 

Where I see evolution in the western version of the katana is where smiths take the time to *both* work on the ideas of modern metallurgy, materials and methods along with a good, strong foundation in traditional shaping and design. Combining those two things makes for some interesting results. Trying for traditional "looks" with traditional substance or modern fine tuning seems like putting eye-liner on a pig. Going for material performance only without attention to shaping, balance and traditional normsl of usage is the same thing as well. 

Most of what I hear folk complaining about as unfortunate directions swords are taking aren't talking about good swords to begin with. And those swords are generally not the ones being used in training contexts anyway. That doesn't mean they don't have their place -- of course they do. But those inexpensive swords do chip away at the ability of the higher end makers to make ends meet. But that is probably as it should be -- why force someone who only wants a sword to cut water bottles with to pay a lot extra for traditional shape and features they aren't even equipped to notice in the first place? The market evolves, the makers evolve to make ends meet, but the Japanese sword already has a 1000 years of momentum built up. I've seen some interesting blips of variation and innovation, but really, what makes a "good sword" in a training or historic appreciation setting hasn't really changed much at all. 

Hope that all made sense -- I'm typing through a migraine haze right now.

----------


## michael wilson

*just personal preferences, again leaning towards inexpensive and (lately) towards 'cheater' geometry.* 

Dave if you consider what you have said up to now to be rambling ,
then please sir  - ramble on . :Wink: 

I am sure all the guys involved in this thread are thinking the same as me in that I can lap this stuff up all day long  - great thread -  I am so pleased you kept it open earlier on  - cheers .

BTW  - your comment above , I am glad you said it as I am sure its crossed many other minds recently -  I think the current influx of them is just the market playing to the backyard cutters in the gallery.

Mick

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Dave,

you're not rambling, you're just passionate about your art. I think most people here appreciate that.  In fact, I think that's why many of us ARE here -- we're passionate about these things, and it's hard to find kindred spirits. 

I don't doubt your observations about blade usage and trends. And I think there's a video of Ueki-sensei on youtube, doing some very impressive cuts with what appears to be quite a large blade.  And he handles it very easily.

Keith,

sorry about the migraine, but thanks for the post. Perhaps some of those interesting trends in custom makers will spill over into the production market  (like it did with Hanwei's L6 blades). 

tk

----------


## Mat Rous

It's all good as they say  :Wink: 

As I mentioned in a different thread, I had a go with a SGC on some nice old, Japanese Wara. It was horrible to cut with - no balance and decidedly not good for cutting with. For something supposedly designed for Wara and Goza, it was useless.

The Tori cut well but there were a few cuts from people who lost their angle and the thin blade meant it "Zipped" down into the target before stopping halfway through. 

Interestingly, the much maligned, Cold Steel Warriors cut easily.  :Wink:

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Mat,

I'm not really familiar with the Cold Steel swords -- why are they much maligned?  And what is their edge geometry like?

BTW: I was reading an article over the weekend that noted your point about the length of gunto, but it didn't offer an explanation. 

tk

----------


## michael wilson

Hi Tom 

The gunto point was mine mate - any chance you can remember where you saw the article ? :Smilie: 

Thanks

Mick

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Mick,

apologies. too little sleep last night. brain functioning on autopilot this morning. 

I thought it was in a journal, but actually, it was in a book I picked up this weekend -- "Cutting Targets with the Japanese Sword,"  by Richard Babin and Bob Elder (who reads and contributes here).  

Let me plug this book: There's an amazing range of information in this book on the construction  of swords and how that relates to cutting (especially interesting in light of this thread). He has one chapter on gunto, and a second that discusses how to tell if a blade is collectible, which delves into the attributes of gunto.

you're probably already familiar with these pages 
http://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~t-ohmura/

mostly in japanese, but some in english. 

tk

----------


## Keith Larman

With respect to Gunto lengths, I've never been exactly sure why it keeps coming up. 

Gunto were mass produced. Fittings, saya, etc. were done in a large assembly line fashion. So there was a standardized size.

Most who were issued gunto had precious little if any training whatsoever with the sword. For many of them it was probably the first "real sword" they'd ever held. 

Most can't draw a sword worth a darn regardless of length. But if the sword is longer, well, form and training become more important as the length increases. Gunto being relatively short are easy to draw but still large enough to be a good length for use. 

And finally, some bureaucrat sitting behind some desk is probably the one who rather arbitrarily set the length. 

The length of WWII mass produced gunto has precious little to do with what length is "correct" for someone training in a traditional art. Or for a smith making swords. Gunto were coarse tools spec'ed to a certain size for any number of reasons, many probably petty bureaucratic reasons at that.

----------


## michael wilson

Keith, I wasnt tryng to sway the thread around to gunto  - as I agree its an entirely seperate animal altogether , I guess I was just thinking out loud when the conversation swung around to blade length and wether or not its a factor in the evolution of the sword .

If I have anymore gunto questions I'll start a thread in the appropriate forum   :Smilie:  

Thanks

Mick

----------


## Dave Drawdy

actually, this is probably the right forum for most gunto, as they were mostly modern production blades.

Dave

----------


## andy jones

Hi guys,
          My opinion for what its worth, please don't shoot me down in flames too badly. many moons ago, I got my brother a mass produced gunto blade of 26",which was purchased very cheaply(that was its apeal) as a bare blade, he had it mounted by our local koshirae maker, and used it for training. I have used this sword for training myself, it is very choppy in it natural cut, and as a result it will sail through most targets, with realative ease, and little skill, from my point of veiw its an axe, in the hand this sword is not unlike the feel of a lot of the modern mass produced heavy cutting swords, and apart from being shorter and slightly uglier, the blades overal form is the same as a lot of the ones I have handled. So being that the gunto was evolved more or less for officers with a relatively low level of skill(the good swords men mostly taking traditionaly smithed blades), have production swords evolved to do the same? I think that the cutting culture of most clubs at the moment is very important to most manufactures, if you go back about 15 years, affordable cutting swords were almost non existant in the uk, don't know about elsewhere, but they do all seem to be designed for mat cutting. I have had a couple of PC katana, and they were great for mats, but when used on targets from the local butchers, they didn't cut like my old sword. So I would say that Modern martial arts katana is a sport tool, which is fine if you want to be able to cut a stationary target twice a second, if however you train from the point of veiw of this is a combat art, I train authenticaly as if I were going to battle one day, that will never come, these swords are far from what you need, more people practise the first way, until they get to advanced levels of skill and thinking, and this is what the big producers are making for, no point in making a product you can't sell lots of.
    If you look at the instructors out there at the moment, if they are good, they tend to have the sword they like, and they take many forms short, long, fat, thin, broad, shallow, long point, short point. If you look at students they seem to be more interested in what new at the moment. until reacently, I have been more influenced by what is available for my pocket money, so I have something to train with, than finding the ideal sword for my style. If the guy in the shop lets me try a few, its a case of, can I left side noto with it, does it feel good in the hand, how does it move, can I afford it. So really look around, you will find that the guys that really know what they are doing, are either using an older blades or have had their swords custom made to personal tastes, after all its an extention of your arm, and your arm is different to mine.

----------


## Tom Kehoe

Andy,


My understanding (and if any of the genuine experts here want to chime in, that's great), is that gunto were really not intended to be weapons -- they were more badges of office for the officers. That's not to say that they weren't sometimes used as weapons,  but that's not what they were principally designed to be. 

What do you mean when you describe your sword as "choppy?" 

tk

----------


## Gary S

My first Japanese sword was an oil tempered gunto that was a good deal lighter than a lot of shinto and shin shinto I've handled since.
  I also have a WWII gendai made in the Okayama prison forge that while a pretty beefy blade, (kinda like a 26 inch Nambokucho-era sword) handles marvelously well even with one handed cuts. I've also owned an oil-tempered gunto with koshizori, significant fumbari and bohi. Granted, I've also seen gunto that look like the worst variety of the CAN CUT IRON swords advertised on ebay (minus the cheesy fake swirly hada of course). My point is there are a lot more variations of gunto than there seem to be in the modern production ring.

----------


## andy jones

Tom, 
      Don't think of myself as an expert, and appreciate that there are a lot of people with more experience here than I. By chopy, I mean high point of ballance, or point heavy, when cutting the point whips out when stopped. sword has a natural tendancy to pull and extend the arm, making a correctly drawing of the cut difficult, and not a comfortable movement as found with a lower point of balance. On the other side point heavy swords chop in rather than cut, if they are kept sharp, they will split tatami with little effort, resulting in a clean looking surface, but the remains on the stand are normaly arced over rather than straight and unmoved( as you would find with a correct cutting action).
   My comparison made to my old blade, was in ref to a shin shinto katana I used to use, the gunto was my brothers.

----------


## michael wilson

Interesting comments Andy  - I appreciate them.

Ive spoken to a few UK JSA guys  who remember the 'bad' old days when all that was available was remounted gunto or the most poorest of stainless steel wall hangers .

They talk about the choice we have now on the production market for affordable user blades  - with a joky air of _you dont know how lucky you are_   - I often think it may have been easier back then when options where more polarised and hype ,hollywood and demand had not driven costs 
through the roof  :Wink: 

Mick

----------

