A question of usage

[sanjuro]

Hi All.

 

I have a question concerning the usage of the term 'Gokaden', and wondered if any of our learned scholastic types could assist. :D

 

The term 'Gokaden' is something that we are virtually all brought up with in nihonto circles and I wondered when it was first coined. My thinking is that it would have to be at the earliest around 1350 to 1400, since the last of the schools (Mino Den) did not actually exist until the Yoshino period. I can find no indication in the books I have currently available, as to the first usage of the term and wondered if any one out there has a reference that indicates its origin or at least its first appearance.

 

Any assistance gratefully accepted.

[Nobody]

The term itself does not seem to be so old. NBTHK says that the term "五ヶ伝 (Gokaden)" has been used since Meiji period.

Ref. http://www.touken.or.jp/history/index.html

[sanjuro]

Koichi San.

 

Thanks for the fast response. I had to read the translation a couple of times to get the meaning out of it, but it appears to be a much more recent term than I had imagined. We live and learn........

 

Thanks again Your assistance as always is most appreciated.

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Keith,

 

Kokan Nagayama gives some explications in his book page xviii (preface)

[sanjuro]

Jacques.

 

As much as it embarasses me to admit it, I dont have the book in question. It is on my 'must have' list along with other volumes (and also a larger bookcase) that I covet, but the budget for books competes with the budget for sword restoration. (The eternal dilemma). At the moment, the polishing of swords is winning hands down.

 

If you would be so kind, an extract of the appropriate preface would be considered a great favour and be most welcome.

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Here is.

 

[sanjuro]

Jacques.

 

Thank you. Very interesting..... It would seem that Hon'ami Koson would prefer to have six traditions and include Shinto swords as the sixth, and yet many of those swords were forged in the manner of the other five traditions. He also states that the five traditions were not clearly described in the Meiji period. Since then of course there has been much clearer definitions of the Gokaden published.

Far be it from me to argue with Nagayama, but I think I would prefer my traditions remain at five, with shinto swords a completely different class of sword altogether. Different material being my main point of differentiation. I guess I'm a traditionalist at heart. :D

 

Again, my thanks for posting this vital link in the chain of information.

[Brian]

Keith,

If you really are a traditionalist, then you wouldn't follow the Gokkaden at all....it is really a made up concept to allow for those pretty little boxes we collectors like to fit things into

It didn't exist way back then, and I doubt categorizing all the workmanship was a priority. I think back then you followed what you were taught, and when you met someone else with a different style, you either tried your hand at that and experimented a bit..or stuck with your own tradition.

 

Brian

[Jean]

Extract from Nakara's book translated by Paul Martin (p 129):

 

The Goka-den method of kanteï was devised by Hon'ami Koson and his teacher Hon'ami Ringa between the end of the Meiji period and the beginning of the Taisho period. Later, Koson popularized the system by publishing it and introducing it at sword meetings all over Japan.

.....

This was perfected and published in Koson's book Nihonto no Okite to Tokucho (The rules and characteristics of Japanese swords)

 

Edit to add, the author concludes:

 

What I would really like to emphasize here is the need to stop relying on it, as it should only be used as a guide

[sanjuro]

Yes Brian. Point taken. I agree with what you are saying, at least in a purist sense. In fact each school and each smith way back then was producing swords that were unique to the individual. However, since the gokaden was introduced, and exists as a sort of a stylistic benchmark, it allows for and states some basic description of each style with which we are all reasonably familiar (or at least we should be). This I think is its greatest benefit, as a general guide. Since it exists as a reference point at least for koto blades, it would be pointless to ignore it.

I guess I'm only a traditionalist up to the point where ignoring the convenience of a broad ready reference like the gokaden might be considered foolish. Traditionalism has its place, but I'm not about to pursue it to the point of idiocy!