[Zach Stambaugh]

I am wondering why the Japanese swords never seemed to develop a set of quillons or more complex guards than the simple tsuba. I have seen pics of some traditional katanas and tachi that were fitted with knuckle bows or partial bel guards during the japanese conflict in which they took Manchuria from russia. Was this due to some idea that a more protective guard would be cowardly, or am I just mistaken.

I realise that there was great variety of furniture. however i have also noted that the cutting swords of neighboring countries like china did have more developed hilts. (ie. butterflyswords, Indian gauntlet swords, dadao, etc.) also some ken period swords i have seen pics of have hilts similar to tai chi swords that could have easily developed into the cruciform style. any ideas why they didn't?

perhaps, the guard would have interfered with their kote (gauntlets)????

(note, I am not trying to start a 'which is better'...)