Katana? Tachi?

[george trotter]

Last year some time we had a discussion on whether a blade was nagamaki or a naginata...it was a bit inconclusive...an ad was posted wherein the Japanese seller advertised a nagamaki, but the accompanying origami called it a naginata (or maybe the other way round), showing that such terms seem a bit flexible.

Anyway, here is a similar matter:

I notice in a NTHK kanteisho paper that a WWII dated gendaito tachi is classified as "Katana" but "signed tachimei".

In contrast a Japanese publication on Imaizumi Toshimitsu (1993) shows his WWII tachi as "tachi" and signed "tachimei" and in various Japanese Sword Exhib. prizewinner lists the swords are ID'd either as "tachi" or "katana" with their mei and nengo given the appropriate way round and again this is so in the ONO and other books on gendaito.

Can I ask: is the NTHK example likely to be a "one-off" or is there a convention regarding this...which is right? if a WWII sword is signed tachimei, is it a tachi or a katana.

Regards,

[cabowen]

Likely just an oversight. I wouldn't read too much into it....

[sanjuro]

Just an opinion, but isnt a world war two sword merely classified as a gunto and therefore neither legitimately a tachi or a katana. I realise this may incline some of our gunto collectors to go up in flames, but just hold your fire for a moment. The comment is not made in order to confront or to offend collectors of these artifacts, nor do I wish to denigrate in any way this classification of swords. Rather, I seek some clarification here for myself. I have always viewed gunto (swords made for the second word war) as a type quite separate from the traditional tachi or katana of older vintage, not conforming to either as it were, regardless of how they were signed. Am I in grave error in this belief??????

Just to explain a little further, I have never seen a gunto in its original and intended mountings, mounted as a katana. As far as my experience of them goes, they are either handachi style or sometimes tachi style in their mounts. Possibly this is where my confusion stems from.

[cabowen]

WWII era gunto, or military swords were worn edge down, which would make them tachi, technically. A sword is called a tachi or katana based on how it is worn, which is usually indicated by where the signature has been placed....

[george trotter]

Hi Keith,

yes I understand your point, but in my opinion, when talking of traditionally made swords they are all nihonto...then we catagorise them

Koto, Shinto, Shinshinto/gendaito (and post war shinsakuto / kindaito I think). Within these periods come the classifications tachi, katana. I don't think there is a classification of "gunto" that takes WWII nihonto out of this group. There are a large number of non-nihonto which are called showato (possibly incorrectly) which are I suppose really within the mass produced group of military equipments called gunto, which includes non-traditional made sabres, nco swords, naval dirks, non-rust swords, sho and seki stamped swords etc etc.

A traditionally made nihonto is just that, a nihonto imho.

 

On the point of these WWII nihonto being described as katana signed tachi-mei, I don't know what to think really, it may be a "slip" as you say Chris, but I have noticed this a few times so it may be something more. I'm not going to worry over it, I was just curious (here is another example http://www.nihontocraft.com/Mino_Gendai.html which seems to be a translation of a Japanese article...scroll down to the last example "A two stamp Mino Gendaito" by Seki Kanehide...you will see it is also described as katana, but further down in the article is stated as signed tachi-mei).

I am surprised really that this happens. If there is a "convention" regarding the calling of these swords as katana signed as tachi, I'd like to hear about it. To me, to be strictly correct, a daito (over 60cm) signed as a tachi should be a tachi...especially as I don't recall seing any paper/article where a sword is described as a a tachi signed katana-mei.

Regards,

[runagmc]

George, I have notice this too, and I think it's done by some people almost on instinct or reaction. I think for some people the word 'tachi' is subconciously linked to koto tachi, which in most cases, were very different in suguta from a WW2 tachi. I think a lot of people call WW2 swords katana without giving much thought to it. I think you and Chris are right, and no matter the period of the sword, if it's worn as a tachi and signed tachi mei it should be labeled a tachi...

[David Flynn]

G'day George, as you know our little group, here in Sydney, we class tachi mei as tachi and Katana mei as Katana. So we call one signed as a Tachi, tachi mounted as Gunto etc. Whether this is correct or not, this is how we, categorise them.