Posts: 96 Location: Tampere, Finland
Tue 24 Feb, 2015 2:14 am
Guess I can't keep my nose out of these... :)
The thing is most collectors of European swords just classify all Japanese swords as one. At least that's how I see it. Similar scenario would be if I talked about European swords and would not make any difference between swords used during the First Crusade and Late Renaissance.
There needs to be more specific dating, are we talking about Japanese swords in 1300's, 1500's, 1700's? Swords, armor, warfare, everything evolved in Japan over the years.
Mongolian armor had little to do with why katana were like they were during certain periods. Mongol Invasions happened in 1274 and 1281. They had an impact to the design of tachi and Japanese military tactics at the time. They were anticipating 3rd invasion to follow the two earlier ones. Then there was 60 years of civil war during Nanbokuchô period 1334 - 1392, which had very large effect on the evolution of the Japanese sword. Early Muromachi represents the transitional stage from tachi to katana. By the time of Ônin war 1467-1477 (another civil war) katana had mostly replaced the tachi as warfare had evolved. Ônin war was the start of Sengoku jidai, where the whole country was in turmoil and wars were fought until Japan was unified, and final rebellions supressed in early 1600's. Then there was peacetime during Edo period which lasted until roughly 1850's.
So for the evolution of katana I think most interesting years are from early 1400's into early 1600's. There are considerable changes to the sword during these periods. Even though I must agree that if you are not into Japanese swords the differences might seem minor. Personally I try to focus my own collecting to Kotô (pre-1600) swords, while I can appreciate Shintô and later swords they don't have the same historical significance to myself.
There are many legends and stories surrounding the Japanese sword. It must be thought through what a person for example living in 1600's might have believed. Superstitions were still very strong at that time. There have been accounts in medieval Japan where someone has ruined a perfectly good sword because he tried to cut a stone lantern in half (feats like that are mentioned in legends).
Making the sword sharp is not rocket science and I believe it was common knowledge for every seasoned warrior. Of course during the heat of civil wars, lots of new recruits were brought in and they had never seen war, might not ever held a sword before. There is also a counter-saying to that (that swords were so dull they didn't cut), some sources mention that some dulled their swords a bit when going into battle. This was done to protect the sword as you knew you would be facing armored opponents, so you wouldn't want super scary sharp blade (which for example many of todays trick cutters and tameshigiri contestants use). Thin & very sharp edge is easier to damage than bit sturdier edge. Yet it does not make huge difference to performance.
As for helmet cutting, you might want to look into kabutowari, I think Obata Toshishiro has the modern record:
http://www.shinkendo.com/kabuto.html Notice how the helmet is set at optimal height for this feat. I think usually when helmet cutting with Japanese swords is brought up people think anime-style helmet cutting. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=m0GjJyR6ZuA#t=737
Japanese armor has weak spots, like armors from other cultures. Nordic head of Tenshin shôden Katori shintô-ryû is a member of our nihonto group. At one of our meetings which focused on Sengoku jidai tanto he held a small demonstration for various ways of using tanto against armoured opponents of that period. For example even with yoroi-doshi (armor piercer) variant of the tanto you do not attack the strong portion head on, unless it's a desperate situation. You aim for the weak portion and pierce through there.
As for the Antony Cummins book, I would be bit cautious when looking into it. You can find much of his ninjutsu stuff online (his youtube channel for example), and I find him to be bit controversial person. Personally I do not like his representation style but I applaud his strong passion towards ninjutsu research.