Tsuba thickness

[Ken-Hawaii]

I just received a nice old tsuba that I picked up from eBay, but was astonished to find that it is less than half as thick as other tsuba in my collection, 0.23 mm versus an average 0.51 mm for the other three I have sitting on my desk.

 

However, when I showed it my wife (also a sword-swinger), she asked the interesting question: Why are not all tsuba only as thick as this skinny one? All it needs to do is to stop your hand from sliding forward onto the blade, & perhaps to stop a strike.

 

So my first question is whether there is a standard for tsuba thickness &, if so, why? And the second question is whether most tsuba are "overbuilt" for their function?

 

Ken

[cabowen]

balance issues?

[ROKUJURO]

Ken,

 

there is no standard thickness I have heard of. As far as I know, TSUBA (MIMI) can vary between ca. 2 mm (or even a little less in KO-TOSHO) and more than 10 mm in some AKASAKA.

 

Concerning the function: we are actually disussing this subject in the TOSOGU section.

[Ken-Hawaii]

Jean, I can't spot the function discussion in the Tosogu forum - what's the topic name? Thanks!

 

Ken

[John A Stuart]

"Tsuba base iron". The topic was about the iron/steel tsuba are made from and deviated to, 'what is the function of tsuba?'. As was being discussed, the diameter or thickness of a tsuba determines its weight. Why would there be such a range in these parameters? If we consider that as the weight of the tsuba increases the center of gravity lowers towards the hands, this may be a trait desirable to augment the efficiency of manipulating the sword. Certain swords for certain swordsmen of certain training would require characteristics that would be changed by increasing or decreasing the weight of the tsuba. However, I do not believe this was the tsuba's primary function. If we look at swords throught history, it becomes clear that guards on swords have differing function. If we look at swords from the Roman period, through the Migration period, La Tene and middle ages we see either no guards or cross guards with little hand protection. Most of these swords can be characterised by being double edged, pointed and used as slashing weapons or for stabbing short thrusting motion, particularly the Roman gladius. It wasn't until the Rennaisance period that complicated guards as seen on rapiers, backswords, transitional swords and etc. became the rigeur de jour coinciding with the long lunging thrust and diminished use of the slash (note diminished; sabres, cutlasses, broadswords, backswords and etc. were still slashing weapons). The point is, small or no guards, slashing weapons; large complicated guards, thrusting. The Japanese sword is a slashing weapon and fitting in with the above small or no guards for hand protection. Any protection for the hand incidental. So why the European crossguard or the tsuba then? To form a demarcation between blade and hilt, to facilitate mounting, to stop slick hands from sliding bladewards and to facilitate drawing and sheathing the sword. As European swords became longer and heavier with the development of plate armour, balance had to be achieved using weighted pommels. This did not occur in Japan and the tsuba was the prime variable in weight distribution for the Japanese sword. John

Oh, I should mention, the prime variable other than the blade itself, which can be rebalanced by other means. J

[Geraint]

Hi Ken,

0.23mm? That's really thin!

[Thierry BERNARD]

Hi Ken,

0.23mm? That's really thin!

 

thin but not exceptional! I have several katchushi tsuba whose thickness is less than 3 mm

[Ken-Hawaii]

Yeah, Geraint, by far the thinnest tsuba I've ever seen or held. But it's definitely thick enough to do its primary job of, as my wife said, keeping my hands from slipping off the tsuka onto the blade. Whether it would also functionally stop a sword strike is another question, but as the hands are seldom the target in any strike I've heard of in nearly 30 years of sword-swinging (wrists/kote are another story), I'm going to posit that even my skinny little tsuba will do what it's intended to do.

 

John, I have to agree with Jean that tsuba thickness simply doesn't change a katana's balance enough to make any functional difference. I've swapped tsuba on all of my iaito, as well as on the Nihonto I use in Shinto-Ryu training, & although I can usually tell that there's a difference in balance, I guess I have enough experience that it doesn't make any difference in my swinging technique. I'll comment on that forum, too. Thanks.

 

Ken

[John A Stuart]

That is something that could be tested. Like you did with the length/ time studies. The fastest sword I have are my smallswords, the slowest my claymore. Smallsword weight rearward, claymore weight forward, even with huge weighted pommel. John

[Geraint]

thin but not exceptional! I have several katchushi tsuba whose thickness is less than 3 mm

 

Agreed Thierry, but at the size quoted Ken's tsuba is approximately one thirteenth as thick as yours. :D

[John A Stuart]

I am sure Ken means 2.3 mm. unless it is the thinnest tsuba existant. John

[Brian]

Ken,

You don't state what style or school of tsuba it is.

If a tosho tsuba, then that thickness isn't unusual. See http://home.earthlink.net/~jggilbert/oldiron.htm and check out some of the thicknesses. That is pretty standard for a lot of these tsuba. But depends on what your tsuba is of course.

 

Brian

[Ken-Hawaii]

Sorry about that, Brian. It's Tosho, probably Ko-Tosho, & yes, John, it's 0.23 cm, not mm as I'd stated. A couple too many Black Velvets after dinner, I'm guessing....

 

Ken