PDA

View Full Version : Which koryu weapon?



Lil Dave
5th July 2000, 07:48
As I have done reading concerning the traditional weapons, very little is said as to what makes one weapon superior to another in certain circumstances, or what the different weapons are designed to be used for. Can someone give me info on this, or a source where I may find this? I am generally interested in all weapons, but more specifically in the differences between the katana, yari, and naginata. Thank you.

Lil Dave
5th July 2000, 07:52
Sorry, but I guess my sources do say a little: The katana is useful in a large variety of instances, the spear and naginata more for battlefield and outdoor use because of size. What about slicing is good as opposed to the thrusting of the spear? Why would someone want to duel with a spear or naginata if the katana seems to be so good at, well, everything? etc,etc.

Yamantaka
5th July 2000, 09:45
"[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lil Dave
[B]... what makes one weapon superior to another in certain circumstances?..."

Hello, Dave!

I think you are giving the answer yourself : each weapon depends on the circunstances. Archery is involved with long distance; naginata and yari are used in slightly shorter distances; sword for even shorter distances; and tanto for close combat. Distance is what makes one superior to the other "in certain circumstances..."
IMHO, of course.
Best regards
Yamantaka

Jason Backlund
5th July 2000, 10:47
All of these weapons were of battlefield origin, and all of them had their place. Although it is really far too complicated to answer in this forum, here is a short and dangerously simple explination.

You mentioned katana, yari, and naginata. Before the advent of the Nihonto (Japanese sword), the weapons used by warriors of Japan were of Chinese origin. These were mostly straight double edged swords and spears. The primary techniques for the use of these weapons were parrying and thrusting. But, when it came to close quarters, those crazy warriors just couldn't resist the urge to try and chop someone's head off with their 'Chinese' style swords (aka- tsurugi/ken). These swords, however, were either too soft and didn't hold sharp edges, or too hard and brittle and were easily broken.

Legend has it that around the year 800 CE (AD), a guy named Amakuni fixed this problem with a new forging and tempering process that eventually led to the single edged, curved Japanese tachi and uchigatana (katana/wakizashi).

This led to the use of the spear, tachi, and tanto or koshigatana as the primary weapons on the battlefield. The foot soldiers would use spears to keep the enemy from their general who was mounted on horse. Also, it's a lot easier to get to the guy on the horse with an eight to nine foot spear than it is with a sword. Meanwhile, the general on the horse would either use a short spear (koyari) or a tachi as his primary weapon. Which he could primarily carry with one hand, while still holding the reigns (ofcourse, he could guide the horse a short distance with his legs if he needed both hands in a fight).

Anyhow, somewhere along the way, some genious, tired of only being able to thrust with the spear, decided to take these wonderful Nihonto and attach them to the ends of spear handles (not really, because yari are considerably longer, but you get the idea). This weapon, called Naginata, was much more versitile for the individual, as you could not only thrust with it, but cut and chop things off with it as well.

However, despite its versatility, the naginata is hard to use well when standing in a formation of a hundred of your fellow lancers. There you are limited in how far to the left and right you can swing your weapon. Therefore, as a matter of conventional tactics, the yari was never really retired from the battlefield by the naginata.

Oh, and you mentioned katana, and so far I've been talking only of tachi. Katana are worn inside the obi, hence one explination of the name uchigatana (inside sword), although not the only one. But, anyway, because of how they are worn, they are more secure than tachi and don't bounce around when you have to run ten miles to the local battlefield. For this reason, and because they were cheaper, katana became fashionable for foot soldiers to wear. Eventually everyone started to pick up on this trend.

So, by the end of the civil war period, and the beginning of the Edo period (1600), we had bushi wearing katana and also training in the use of yari and naginata. Without wars to fight, however, they started engaging in duels to test their martial prowess. Occaisionally, they would set up duels using yari or naginata. For the most part however, most duels were done with katana. This is because it was custom, and the priveledge of the bushi to carry katana with them. But, without any battles to fight, there was no need to lug around yari and naginata.

Basically- (In war) yari are easier to use in numbers and to keep the enemy at a distance. The naginata is more versitile, and allows for good techniques done both at a distance and at a relatively close range; but isn't used well in a group full of your friends. The tachi and katana were used while on horse or if you lost your primary weapon during the battle (or if an enemy gets closer than the range of your Yari- it was fairly common to abandon it and perform what was historically the first use of batto no kata).

(In dueling) The katana is the only way to go!

I left out a host of valuable weapons and applications, but I hope this helped.

Jason Backlund
Kobushin Kai
Yamagata Ryu Bujutsu, Matsubara Ryu Bujutsu

[Edited by Jason Backlund on 07-05-2000 at 04:49 AM]

Dale
8th July 2000, 12:14
I would personally prefer to use a hanbo or katana as opposed to naginata or bow. This is due to the fact that I have not been trained in the latter and would therefore probably be slaughtered.

A selfish and simplistic response? maybe, but I'm sticking to it!


sorry for the lack of substance


Dale Elsdon

Aric
8th July 2000, 21:51
In terms of battlefield... length is superior. The reason is that in order for a swordsman to defeat a spearman he must get past the spear head to hit him with his shorter weapon.

The superior length of the spear gives it the advantage of initiative. It's like serving in tennis. You get to hit the ball first, therefore you have the chance to score first. So with a longer weapon, you have the chance to strike before you opponent can even enter his range of attack

So as a general rule, length makes a superior weapon. Now, the naginata and spear are of roughly equivalent length. In this case, according to Musashi, the spear is superior, given equal training. I think the reason is that the spear is simpler. Thrust, thrust thrust. The tsuki is a deceptively difficult attack to avoid.

The use of katana or tachi on battlefields is known to be somewhat more scarce than spear. Swordsmanship really didn't come into its own until the Edo jidai.

Now, off the battlefield, given mobility, the spear and long weapons are superior to swords. Just as swords are superior to daggers. (same reasons listed above). But, weapons like the bo, or hanbo, or chain, suddenly become more useful, since in a duel, you weren't *necessarily* attempting to kill. And your survival didn't depend on dispatching one enemy and moving on. Sticks make excellent *self defense* weapons for priests and the like in ancient japan since they were likely forbidden to take life and forbidden from wearing swords. But there's no doubt... blades are more deadly as a general rule.

Aric Keith

Gil Gillespie
10th July 2000, 16:26
Li'l Dave-----You've been doing reading. If you've included Donn Draeger's "Classical Bujutsu" you'd find eloquent answers to this question by one of the most qualified round-eye budoka ever to lift the pen. He exemplified the warrior ideal of "bu" and "bun" (which we should all check out).

Aric, you said swordsmanship didn't come into its own until the Edo time of peace. How do you mean that? When you say swordsmanship do you mean the structural compositions of various ryu? Do you mean the iai wazas done out of restful (i.e. peaceful) postures of seiza and tatehiza? I think all those heads rolling around Okehazama and Sekigahara may take issue with your perspective.

This is a good thread. Interesting posts. Whoever included Musashi--------that's always a good idea!

Lil Dave
10th July 2000, 22:54
This is Lil Dave again. I have a new addition to this question: which type of weapon is appropriate for which types of people? I am 5'8" (no shoes, and no cheating either) and about 135 lbs. I'm a distance runner, so a minimal amount of that weight is fat. Would it be ridiculous for a person like myself to be using a yari? Should I look more towards the lighter weapons such as the katana, jo, tessen etc?
Someone mentioned that in a duel the katana was the only way to go. What about the sohei, who, in the Edo period, seemed to do pretty well in tournaments and so forth using spears? (note: my knowledge of this is based on the fictional book by Yoshikawa, "Musashi". I wish to know if that sort of thing in this book is ridiculous or not.)

Kolschey
11th July 2000, 03:52
Lil' Dave,

Your physical profile is actually very similar to my own. I stand 5'6" and roughly 135. Like you, I used to run distance, until a knee injury curtailed that activity. I now make use of a bike. Despite my stature, or perhaps because of it, one of my favorite weapons is the naginata.
I am also reasonably comfortable with the rokushaku bo.
Generally, most of the polearm length weapons I have worked or played with have become familiar with sufficient practice, and the weight does not tend to provide me much difficulty, due to the distribution of balance. If you have the opportunity, try working with one of the Cold Steel line of spears! To make matters even more interesting, I have had the opportunity of watching a demonstration of naginata technique given by the wife of a fellow kendo student. She cannot stand more than five feet in height, yet she adroitly fended off sword wielding attackers. As Yoda might say "size matters not, the difference is in your mind" :)

MarkF
11th July 2000, 10:05
Lil dave and others,
Please take a look at the forum rules concerning the use of names. It is at the top of the page. All members who post here must sign full, real names to their posts. It is most easily done by using the signature feature in your profile to do this. Otherewise, welcome!

Jason Backlund
12th July 2000, 05:19
Originally posted by Lil Dave
This is Lil Dave again. I have a new addition to this question: which type of weapon is appropriate for which types of people? I am 5'8" (no shoes, and no cheating either) and about 135 lbs. I'm a distance runner, so a minimal amount of that weight is fat. Would it be ridiculous for a person like myself to be using a yari? Should I look more towards the lighter weapons such as the katana, jo, tessen etc?
Someone mentioned that in a duel the katana was the only way to go. What about the sohei, who, in the Edo period, seemed to do pretty well in tournaments and so forth using spears? (note: my knowledge of this is based on the fictional book by Yoshikawa, "Musashi". I wish to know if that sort of thing in this book is ridiculous or not.)

____________________________________________________________

Lil Dave,
One thing that you must remember is that at 5'8" you are still rather tall compared to a typical bushi of ancient Japan. Also, in terms of dueling, koyari (short spears) range in length from 5' to 6' and are much more useful at close range than a 9' battlefield yari. These are the same spears that bushi could carry with one hand while on horseback (of course, they would use two hands if they needed them, and would use their legs to guide the horse).
Anyway, the use of koyari in dueling wasn't uncommon. I said that the katana was the only way to go because it is my favorite weapon, and during Edo it was never very far away from its owner.

In terms of the sword not coming into its own until Edo, this wasn't really the case. It's true that many of the kenjutsu, battojutsu and iaijutsu ryu were developed during this age, however, prior to the Kamakura period the bow and tachi were the predominant weapons. Most of the bushi who charged the battlefield and fought at a close distance during this period were on horseback, and used the tachi when up close. The true value of foot soldiers using yari and naginata wasn't apparent to the bushi until after the Mongol invasions (1274 & 1281?).

Jason Backlund
Kobushin Kai
Yamagata Ryu Bujutsu, Matsubara Ryu Bujutsu

ben johanson
19th August 2000, 10:09
Everyone seems to be forgetting that it is not the weapon itself that determines its superiority, but the skill with which that weapon is used. A master swordsman (or spearman) will be able to defeat almost anyone regardless of which weapon his opponents use. In the hands of a master, any weapon is superior to all others. In the hands of an amatuer, no weapon is superior. Both sword and spear have their advantages and disadvantages. For instance, the spear has a greater reach than the sword, but it is also much slower and heavier. The swordsman , when fighting a spearman, has a greater distance to cover to deliver a cut to his opponent, but his weapon is more precise and less encumbering, therefore allowing him greater mobility. But my point is , none of this matters in regards to the outcome of a duel. The only thing that determines the winner in a duel is skill (and possibly a little luck). So no weapon is superior, only the skill with which it is used can be called superior or inferior.
And as for their uses on the battlefield, the spear was predominate-but not because it is the better weapon. There are several factors that contibuted to the adoption of the spear as the samurai's primary battlefield weapon. I won't go in to them all here. But the spear was widely used by mounted and foot soldiers alike, mostly because of its versatility-it was as useful from the ground as it was from a horse's back. In a battle, spears were used at first, but as the armies got closer to each other and melees broke out, swords were used by some. As for the naginata, it was popular amongst peasant footsoldiers and warrior monks duing the gempei wars and the kamakura period, but with the adoption of the yari by the samurai in the mid 1400's, it began to fall out of favor. But what weapon a samurai charged into battle with was largely determined by his own choice. All (good) samurai were adept at using every weapon, but they each had their preferences. Most prefered the yari probably because it was easier to learn than the sword. But after the introduction of the gun to Japan in 1543, the sword, oddly enough, became more popular.

core
26th August 2000, 22:06
I have heard that the naginata, in addition to other uses, was used by infantry against horses. That it was used to cut the legs out from under horses charging past, hence its hefty blade and powerful swing.

I don't know enough about the physics involved to comment. Anyone else?

Shinobi
27th August 2000, 00:51
Originally posted by core
I have heard that the naginata, in addition to other uses, was used by infantry against horses. That it was used to cut the legs out from under horses charging past, hence its hefty blade and powerful swing.

I don't know enough about the physics involved to comment. Anyone else?

Corey,

I've heard this as well. I think Hatsumi sensei of the Bujinkan mentions it in one of his books or on his Naginata/Nagamaki/Bisentô video that it was used against horses and armored opponents.

I think mostly the Bisentô would be used as its just like the Kwando (sp?) from China, very hefty, smashes and hacks right threw armor.

The physics involved require complete taijutsu body movement. Its amazing to watch Hatsumi sensei wield this weapon at his age, he mostly uses a wooden mock up that probably weighs 30 lbs. This weapon comes from Kukishinden Happô Bikenjutsu in the Bujinkan, I'm not sure if its used in mainline Kukishin-ryû or its other branches. Togakure-ryû Ninjutsu uses it also, but is adopted from Kukishinden. Its definitely a battlefield weapon, one you would not want to use against a swordsman of even average caliber IMO as its very slow and cumbersome!

Lil Dave
27th August 2000, 07:24
About the wielder of the weapon: I agree that skill did play a very important part for masters. But few are masters. Give me a 10 foot spear and my friend a sword, I'll waste him (assuming this is with live blades, he wouldn't be brave enough to charge past my tip, with me thrusting it). Same thing the other way around. The weapon very much makes a difference at our no-experience level. Also, average kusarigama users could defeat very good swordsmen beccause of the weapon's range and the whole chain thing ('master', like Miyamoto Musashi, is a bit different than 'very good'). Now no experience versus average, and the odds are in favor of the average despite weapons. At any rate, with varying skill levels encountered, the weapon made more of a difference than you say.

Dave Buck

Brent Easton
27th August 2000, 15:37
Lil Dave

[Give me a 10 foot spear and my friend a sword, I'll waste him (assuming this is with live blades, he wouldn't be brave enough to charge past my tip, with me thrusting it).]

It depends on a lot of different circumstances. First, is the terrain, i.e., if we were in a heavily wooded area, the 10' yari would be a disadvantage. However, on an open plain the length will not be a disadvantage, then it would move to my second circumstance.

Second, are you in a defensive mode or offensive mode? Offensively, the yari is an excellent choice for it gives you reach and ease of use ( note: mastering the yari is not easy but teaching a simple thrusting attack is.). Due to it's size, an attacker(s) can manuever an opponent into a "corner" or very disadvantagious position. In a defensive posture, the possible attack may come from at any time and from any angle or location. You could be in a confined area or an open area, beset by a single or multiple attackers, armed with nothing (open handed) or with everything.

Overall, I'd choose the daisho, moving from iai techniques to batto techniques depending on the specific situation.

My Humble Opinion

ben johanson
28th August 2000, 04:25
Whether or not either opponent in a duel is a master makes no difference whatsoever. Skill levels are relative. Even if both opponents are about average with their respective weapons, one will undoutedly be at least a little better than the other and that one will most likely win (I stress the phrase 'most likely' for nothing is a sure thing,especially in a duel). The point of my reply was not about mastery of a weapon. It was that each weapon has its own advantages and disadvantages but its up to the weilder of the weapon to exploit the advantages and compensate for the disadvantages. Arguments over which weapon is better are fruitless and piontless because of the simple fact that no weapon is inherently better than any other. Some weapons are better suited to certain situations than others (i.e. the spear is far better against cavalry than the sword) but essentially, a weapon is only as effective as the weilder is able to make it via his skill. No one should concern themselve with which weapon is superior. Which ever weapon you prefer is the one you should strive to master.

And as for your comment about average kusari gama practitioners being able to defeat skilled swordsman, I have neither heard nor read anything to substantiate that.
I would be interested to know your source for that piece of information. True the kusari gama is an unusual weapon that poses an unusual situation for a swordsman (or spearman) but, once again, victory depends on the skill levels of the parties invovled

Lil Dave
28th August 2000, 10:17
DANG! I just cleared the fields instead of submitting. I'll sum up: I oculdn't locate where I read that about average kusarigama. I believe it was in a thread that has been removed. I understand your point better with the new post. I must have read the previous one with the wrong tone or something.

I was picturing the spear fight in my very large yard, so it would have been clear. I chose that particular friend because he and I are so very close in every way (size, weight, strength, etc.). My point wasn't that the spear is a superior weapon, but that weapons change the circumstances the less experience you have.

David Buck

ben johanson
29th August 2000, 04:51
Dave,

And I now understand your point better. That may very well be true that the less experience someone has, the more it matters which weapon he uses. After all, the sword is a more difficult weapon to use properly than the spear so logic dictates that someone with no experience, or very little, would do better to use the simpler weapon. I guess I was looking at this from the angle of two experienced samurai dueling. Not neccessarily masters, but highly adept at using their weapons none the less. In that case, skill would be the determining factor in who wins. But if neither of the opponents has very much skill or experience, your probably right that the spearman would beat the swordsman owing to the fact that he has the simpler weapon.

But I think the interesting thing that happens when one trains exstensively with all of the weapons is that the differences between each weapon begin to blur. You start to realize that the body machanics invovled with using the sword, spear, naginata, jo, or even no weapon at all are not all that dissimilar. And at that stage of developement, it truly does not matter what weapon you or your opponent has, because you will win regardless. Because at that point, you realize that it is not the weapon that wins a duel or a fight, it is you. If you're interested in this idea, get the book Legacies of the Sword by Karl Friday . The philosophy of the koryu featured in the book, the Kashima Shin-ryu, is based on what I am describing here.

Lil Dave
3rd September 2000, 02:13
I do definitely agree that the more experience the less weapon matters. I believe that (just as with other things) those who excel don't obey fixed rules, but rather principles.

Lil Dave Buck

Richard A Tolson
3rd September 2000, 06:28
LilDave,
Concerning your comments about the kusarigama, I am an expert with the kusarigama. Not bragging, just a fact. Several decades can do that to you :). The kusarigama certainly has a few advantages over a man armed only with a katana. Weight + chain + blade = nasty!
However, victory is not a given. There are some very simple strategies to use against the warrior armed with a kusarigama. Again, it comes down to two things. One, who is more skilled. Two, who is luckier. Never forget the role of Mr. Murphy and and the ancient Chinese master, "Dumb Luck", in combat.

[Edited by Richard A Tolson on 09-03-2000 at 11:19 AM]