11.6 Japanese Swords
11.6.1 The Myth and the History of the Japanese Sword
|I started this enterprise because I
wanted to know more about a few things concerning iron, steel and swords. I'm a
materials scientist after all, and I should know a bit more than just the
essentials about iron and steel, even so my speciality are semiconductors.
Somehow the project went out of control. By now I have written around 370
modules, far more than anticipated. Now I'm about to write the last modules
about sword making. I'm now getting to the ultra-famous
Japanese Sword! The climax is near!
You know what?
bored because the making of a Japanese sword just doesn't contain
much new stuff. Pretty much everything of basic metallurgical interest connected to the making of
Japanese swords has been covered before.
Note that I'm not saying that a Japanese sword isn't a supreme weapon or a major piece of art. I also have no problem asserting that it counts among the best swords a smith can make with bloomery-made iron and steel.
I do state, however, that the same can be said for a well-made Iranian wootz shamshir with a kirk nardaban pattern, a Roman pattern welded sword, a Frankish all-steel sword and many other swords. In other words: when considering Japanese swords, art appreciation is often more important than metallurgy.
fascinated for a number of reasons. Most prominent, perhaps, because
the "Japanese" look at "their" swords primarily as pieces
of art and not weapons, indeed. The art created by a smith, no less! Important
features of the piece of art called, for example, a katana, are how the smith
manipulated finer details of metallurgy to achieve certain delicate features
visible on the blade if you know how to look. The attention to details, in
other words, is just way above anything encountered elsewhere, as far as we
My fascination is real - I actually acquired a "Daisho" from the Edo Kanbun era (1661 - 1673); more about that here
|So what is so
special about Japanese swords or katanas? I'll give you a whole list below but
the first point is simple: they are still around in prime conditions! The same
goes for (wootz-bladed) shamshirs, tulwars, and so on.
In contrast we do not have a single old pattern welded sword that still looks like new. All you see in most cases is a piece of heavily corroded steel and that makes it difficult to admire that thing as a masterly piece of the smiths art. One needs to bear in mind that a typical pattern welded sword is about 800 - 400 years older than the typical nihontos or shamshirs from 1200 or later.
|Looks do count, as the fashion industry knows. Good looking models routinely do make more money than knowledgable and useful engineers. The Tizona of El Cid is probably just as good in a fight as Japanese swords from about 1050 AD or later but she is just not as showy. The Tizona neither is highly polished nor does she sport a "hamon". We don't know if she has the hardened martensitic edge necessary for a hamon but it is quite likely for swords of her age and prominence.|
|A Japanese sword just looks great.
Some sports cars are described that "even standing still they seem to
break the speed limit" and a Japanese sword gives you a similar impression
as to what it can do. In its highly polished glittering splendor it already
looks much sharper than your regular
dull-bladed straight sword. Japanese swords just look good, even the old ones.
That is the first point for understanding how a whole mythology could develop
around the Japanese sword. It does look like a deadly awe-inspiring weapon and,
being perfectly preserved and polished, it looks just great.
What else is there? Quite a bit. I only give you a few of the salient points; the Net is full of details. Note that much of what follows also applies to wootz swords; I mentioned this already. Here is my list of all the particulars that work together for producing the myth of the Japanese sword:
|Enough. There are plenty of books and innumerable Internet sites dealing with the Japanese sword. And there are people in Japan right now who smelt iron and steel the old-fashioned way, and smiths who forge sword blades just as their ancient forebears. That is a wonderful thing, to be sure. It is not an unique thing, however. Patrick Barta from the Czech republic does all of that for pattern welded swords, and several Americans (and others), foremost Al Pendray, successfully try their hands on making and forging wootz steel.|
|A few Remarks About the History of the Japanese Sword|
|The Japanese have (of course) an elaborate system for classifying their swords according to history. Here is the general outline:|
|Looking a the Jokoto swords one finds, first of all, not all that much and second, straight double-edged "spatha" type blades. Here is one known as "ken" (or "tsurugi") type:|
|The next picture, often encountered in the Net but with no clear description, shows mostly Japanese swords but also one or two Chinese swords from the 6th century. Note that they are single-edged; technically they are backswords|
|There is no clear descriptions because the
Metropolitan is a bit vague about these treasures 2). There also seems to be little
known about the metallurgy of these swords (couldn't find anything in a short
search) but they are likely less sophisticated than their 6th century
pattern welded counterparts in Europe.
These swords embody the Jokoto (or chokuto) swords mentioned above. Their blades might consist of (faggoted?) quench-hardened steel since this technique (known to the Celts and Romans) was first used in the 6th century in Japan.
Generally speaking, the early Japanese sword, or the technology for making it, supposedly came from China and / or Korea. I'm not debating that but considering that China's steel products were made from cast iron and not from bloomery iron / steel, it is not clear to me why Japanese swords were made from bloomery steel only up to this very day.
|Next we have the koto sword (9001596). If you look at the
picture above or the
full scale rendering,
you see a number of koto swords. They look more or less like the rest, and they
have about everything that metallurgically defines a Japanese sword.
No. Don't send me now hate mail or worse. I know of course that there are huge differences between koto, shinto, shinshinto, and so on - if you only look at Japanese swords. But if you look at all swords, all of the above qualifies just as "Japanese swords". And that's why I will only give a few highlights with regard to these blades.
|Koto. Old swords from around 9001596
The typical sword of that period is the tachi. It is somewhat longer but otherwise quite similar to the later katana. Many katanas, in fact, were made by shortening an old tachi. A tachi was always worn suspended from cords on a belt with the blade facing downwards. Early models had uneven curves (i.e. not given by parts of just one circle or one "radius of curvature") with the deepest part of the curve at the hilt. It was in essence a cavalry sword.
The making of koto swords marks the climax of Japanese sword forging. Masamune (c.12641343), widely recognized as Japan's greatest swordsmith, made kotos around 1288 - 1328. Here is the so called "Ikeda Masamune". It was a tachi but later shortened to be a Katana.
|Shinto. New swords,
These are considered inferior to most koto. Manufacturing complexity was lower in this period. Katanas appear and they are now worn stuck through a sash or belt and paired with a smaller blade, the wakizashi, to form a "Daisho" (literally: "long - short"). The blade faces upwards in both cases.
The quenching technique had been fine-tuned to produce intriguing if occasionally ridiculous results, in particular in the Edo era (1684 -1763). As a Japanese source states in somewhat ungrammatical but rather clear English: "This means that Samurai corrupted".
Literally "new new swords" 17811876.
Going back to the koto style; "shinshinto" can also be interpreted as "new revival swords". Shinshintos are considered superior to most shinto, but still inferior to koto.
|Gendaito. Modern swords, 18761945.
Shinsakuto. Newly made swords, 1953present
Forget them. The one remarkable thing about shinto and later is that all these swords were still made from bloomery iron and steel. The Japanese sword manufacturing business never switched to blast furnaces and steel fined from cast iron. If that makes the swords better is open to doubt. That this makes the swords a hell of lot more expensive is a fact.
|1)||The text of the Metropolitan to the
ken (slightly shortened):
This ken was discovered in one of Japans most famous early burial mounds, known as the Eda Funayama Kofun (burial mound), located in Kumamoto Prefecture, on Kyushi Island, in southern Japan. The mound, which was excavated first in 1873. Swords of this period are extremely rare and show the earliest stage in the development of Japanese sword blades.
The ken, a sword with a straight double-edged blade based on Chinese prototypes, was used in Japan from at least the third century until the sixth century. At the end of that period, the double-edged sword was gradually superceded by the single-edged type, from which all later Japanese swords developed.
|1)||There is only one text for one of the
swords. As far as I can make out, it is the one in the middle:
Sword with Scabbard Mounts. Date: ca. 600. Culture: Chinese. Medium: Iron, gilt bronze, silver, wood.
This sword is said to have been found in an imperial tomb at Mang Shan, north of Luoyang, Henan Province. The P-shaped scabbard mounts, probably derived from long swords worn by nomadic Sarmatian and Sasanian horsemen, served as a prototype for the Japanese tachi (slung sword). The ring pommel takes the form of two confronted dragons.
The rest only caries descriptions like:
Sword with Scabbard Mounts. Date: 6th century. Culture: Japanese. Medium: Iron, gilt bronze, gilt copper, silver.
© H. Föll (Iron, Steel and Swords script)