Tachi versus katana in horseback fighting

[tsubame1]

Originally Posted by Chris Evans

2. tsubame1. Thanks for posting those pictures. Do you know when they were painted? The one on the left looks 19th century... I have a painting, I believe from the Kamakura era, that depicts a samurai afoot, with a two handed grip on his tachi, so they were essentially a two handed sword as I said at the outset, though they could be used with one hand. However, as a Japanese expert explained to me, who was very conversant with Euro sabres, it is very difficult to effectively wield a Japanese sword with one hand (the hilt!) and this is why Musashi's advice was not taken up all that enthusiastically.

I'm not specialized in painting, I'm specialized in weaponry. If you have transmitted your suggestions to your japanese friend, being the Tachi used with two hands from horseback, you should have been already advised of your error by him.
More, even if the pictures are affectively (not late) Edo products, I would suggest that being the Edo the period of Katana, if the artist was in error in his depiction, as you tacitly suggest in your statement, he would have been portraied the horseman with a two-handle grip rather then the single-hand one. This is, IMHO, a further evidence that they were and are well aware
on how a Tachi was used *by horse*.

And now, to stop this mirror-climb you're making, you force me to remember that the responsibility of proving your assertion is yours.
As seems you'r familiar with Kamakura-era paintings, likely worthing thousand of dollars, please post a Kamakura Era picture depicting a Samurai cutting
with a Tachi using a both-hands grip from horseback.

[Chris Evans]

tsubame1

I made two assertions, both in the context of this great big world and not that of isolated Japan;

a) The Japanese sword makes a lousy cavalry weapon; and
b) they did not understand cavalry.

You objected to this, but so far apart from obviously not liking my assertions, keep on reiterating that the Japanese did what they did because that is all they needed. This does not amount to any kind of serious argument or support for your objection.

The very fact the Japanese discarded their native sword and horse in their cavalry once it caught up with that of the rest of the world, in the 19th century, and that nobody else either saw fit to adopt their sword or horse when cavalry was at in its golden age, despite adopting the Central Asian curved sabre is proof enough of my view. The onus is still with you to prove the opposite. And to labour the painfully obvious, how the Japanese fought amongst themselves, isolated from the rest of the world is irrelevant in this discussion, save to undesrcore the fact that they never grasped the potential of cavalry.

And there I rest my case.

Cheers
Chris

[Chris Evans]

Hi,


1. These are the swords that the modernized Japanese cavalry opted for:

http://hometown.aol.com/machood/meiji.html

2. This is what a Meiji era cavalryman looked like when mounted.

3. Here is an interesting thread re Japanese cavalry in pre modern times

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Battle_of_Nagashino


Cheers
Chris

[Chris Evans]

Hi,

And this is how a 19th century Central Asian Tartar horse soldier looked like on his Mongol pony.

Cheers
Chris

[Valjhun]

Originally Posted by Chris Evans

Hi,
2. This is what a Meiji era cavalryman looked like when mounted.

This is not Meiji, but rather showa....

I'm following this debate with interest. It would be great to hear what Rich has to say.

[tsubame1]

No more Musashi and 2 hands cuts with Tachi from horseback ? Enough for me. Thanks for the interesing link to the already stated unreliable wikipedia and the nice pictures of almost 7 centuries later then the pictures I asked for.

[Chris Evans]

Hi Carlo,

Originally Posted by tsubame1

No more Musashi and 2 hands cuts with Tachi from horseback ? Enough for me. Thanks for the interesing link to the already stated unreliable wikipedia and the nice pictures of almost 7 centuries later then the pictures I asked for.

Oh, come on - I seems to me that you not only disliked what I wrote, but also Musashi and now Wikipedia - Hey, that link I gave was to a thread and not an article. - Peace Brothe!

I re-read our exchange and it seems to me that we were having what the Japanese sometimes call a parallel conversation, but alas parallel lines never meet.

I am, sorry for being tardy with the pics. Our broadband is down and I can only post at the moment with a 56K modem. Will scan in the pics as soon as I can. They are fairly large, because originally they were painted I believe on screens or walls and I only have an A4 scanner.

My original interest in illustrations was that in the ones that were painted in the Kamakura era, and which I have seen, the horsemen are not depicted with sword in hand - Only bows or pole weapons. This led me to speculate as to how often they used their swords when mounted - Of course they used swords, but how often?. Also foot soldiers are depicted with tachis. Looks like I'll have to re read the Tales of the Heike to refresh my memory.

Regards
Chris

[tsubame1]

IMPORTANT TO PHILIP. I've better checked the horses images and seems the page have messed them up.
TEHY HAVE TO BE READ UPSIDE DOWN TO MATCH THE CAPTIONS.
Apologizes for inconveniences and inaccuracy. It's the first time I've made such a mess in attachments, and can't explain how it's occurred.

[Chris Evans]

Hi Valjhun,

Originally Posted by Valjhun

This is not Meiji, but rather showa....

I'm following this debate with interest. It would be great to hear what Rich has to say.

No. That pic came out of F.J Norman's "The Fighting Man of Japan" published in 1905. Emperor Meiji died in 1912. The Showa era was from 1926 to 1989.

Norman was A Brit cavalryman who went to Japan in the 1870s to teach and previously served in India. He was probably the first occidental to seriously study their sword art. He considered the Japanese sword very good for unmounted usage - In that application, he thought it was better than the Euro equivalents, its shorter blade being less cumbersome, yet not lacking in reach because of its longer hilt. However, notwithstanding his admiration for the sword of the raising sun, he did think that both the weapon and its wielding could be improved. He also opined that on even flat ground, a top Western duelist probably could beat a Japanese swordsman, but only on such favourable ground.

Cheers
Chris

[tsubame1]

Originally Posted by Chris Evans

No. That pic came out of F.J Norman's "The Fighting Man of Japan" published in 1905. Emperor Meiji died in 1912. The Showa era was from 1926 to 1989.

Tachi and Katana were absolutely out of the game at this point, and by far.
The 2,5 centuries freeze in giapanese culture (Sakoku - chain the land)
left the Japan prostrated in front of almost everything came from west.
The adaptation of ancient sowrds to modern fittings gave us many strange examples of re-adapted weapons, being the remounting not a matter of
functionality rather a matter of tradition and proudness. Many maintained two-hands-long handle even if in western mount and others had their shape further mutilated in losing the curvature.
3rd picture is a comparative one with mass-production cavalry saber showed interestingly with the horseman, giving us the scale of the dimensions, grip and curvature. The horse here is smaller (seems a Kagoshima breed from Kyushu, the second FROM BOTTOM in my earlier list, see my previous post) then the one presented in your previous picture as many "everyday use horses" for non-officers weren't as tall as the ones for official pictures (but cheaper).
Seems japanese officers needed better mountings to not be dwarfed by their conterpart. All pictures from Fuller and Gregory's "Military Swords of Japan 1868-1945" ISBN 0 85368 796 x

English military trainer were of paramount importance in several aspect of the re-building of the Imperial forces. They were taken in so high esteem that 3 of them, being killed in the Russo/japanese war were, and still are, enshrined in the Yasukuni Jinja being the first and only westerner to be allowed to this.

The matter of value in fencing between katana and western blades is and will always be a huge can of warms that's preferable to leave to martial artists of both cultures.

[Chris Evans]

Hi tsubame1 (Carlo)

1, How do you prefer to be addressed? tsubame1 or Carlo?

2. You have a very valuable resource library on Japanese hoplology. Thanks for posting those pics. I will soon reciprocate with those pics that I promised.

3. The story on those curious rehilted blades with the overlong handle and kcucklebow: Story has it that many infantry and naval officers, who had kenjutsu training, could not master cutting with the more flexible Euro swords and simply reverted to their trusty old blades, but making a token attempt to fit in with expected appearances. This account may or may not be entirely correct, but has its parallels in Europe where many officers fitted blades of their preference to regulation hilts - Castle mentions this practice.

4. Western swords vs katana: This is a collectors and not a martial arts forum - You are right, this can be a can of worms, especially if it invites all kinds of cyber warriors to join and passionately argue their favourite view, whatever that may be. I only mentioned this to make clear that Norman was not prejudiced against the Japanese sword and clearly assessed it, in my view, fairly correctly.

Cheers
Chris