Musashibo Benkei

by

Short History on the Japanese Axe

Many countries have a history with the axe. There are records of these chopping weapons, of different shapes and sizes, used by common folks, fighters and warriors alike. Japan also shares in this history of axes, including during their eras of war and strife. Were they depended on the same levels as spears, swords, and rifles?

The Japanese axe does not have the same level of documentation like the sword and spear, especially those used on the battlefield. Outside of 3rd party accounts of predating battles, and folklore that are often thought to be a gateway to real life, getting a factual picture of axes used by warriors is a bit of a challenge. For this article, I will do my best to cover what I can about the short history of the Japanese axe.

THE INTRODUCTION OF AXES

In recent times, Japanese archeologists found traces of earliest iterations of axes made out of stone. In its primitive form, these are called “sekifu” (石斧) in Japanese. These date back as far as the Kofun period (around 3rd century to the 7th century), way before the Yamato Kingdom was established. After the first groups of clans who would establish Japan as we know it, and develop Japanese culture with the cultural influences from China and Korea, axes made out of iron and steel would replace the stone axes, becoming the prevalent versions all the way to modern times.

Snapshot of prehistoric stone axes dating back to Yayoi period, on display in Tokamachi Museum.

There are 3 fundamental naming conventions used for axes, which are the following:

  • ono (斧)
  • masakari (鉞)
  • yoki (斧)¹

What determines which name is used and when? The region tends to dictate this, along with what locals there choose to use. Here’s some descriptions on axe designs.

  1. Relatively tapered slab of metal with a flat side, and the other side featuring a slightly curved edge
  2. A much thinner slab of metal shaped like a sideways “L”, with the side running parallel with the handle sharpened
  3. A wooden handle that curves at the top, and is capped with a small metal piece with a sharpened end
An illustration of various designs of the Japanese axe, from left to right, top to bottom: chona (手斧), yoki (斧), masakari (鉞), habiro-yoki (刃広斧).

Along with the differences in axe heads, they also have different handle lengths. In this case, there are those that are crafted for one-handed use, while others are long enough to be held with 2 hands. Despite the name used or the design, these iron/steel axes were simple tools used by villagers and artisans for gathering lumber and woodworking, which were essential for development throughout Japan’s evolving society.

COMBAT AND WAR

Sometime during the late 1100s of the Kamakura period, an interest in axes being incorporated as weapons of war took place. These particular versions were crafted larger than conventional ones, with some boosting larger axe heads and longer handles. They were rightfully labeled as “senpu” / “ikusa-ono” (戦斧), “ō-ono” (大斧), and even “ō-masakari” (大鉞) in Japanese, which parallel with English equivalents “war axe” and “battle axe”.

Like the common equivalents, these battle axes bear a large axe head, with a wide, curving edge. Troops carried these onto the battlefield, with the main intentions of using them for the following tasks:

  • chop through armor
  • break through gates of enemy camps
  • knock down wooden barricades or obstacles

Thus, battle axes were seen as essential tools for laying siege on opposing strongholds and structures. They had more weight to them, and warriors with great arm strength could wield them. While the standard bushi (武士) armed themselves with these, other fighters with more unorthodox lifestyles such as sōhei (僧兵, warrior monks), yamabushi (山伏, mountain ascetics), and akutō (悪党, rogue warriors)² did so as well.

These hefty weapons would be used by such figures and be viewed as viable tools for war all the way until the Muromachi period. However, around the earlier years of the Sengoku period, battle axes lost their place, and slowly fell out as key components for strategic purposes.

LIMITATIONS

Why did battle axes fall out of favor? Researching records which document the gear, tools, and weapons used by warriors, martial artists, and military families during Japan’s warring times in documents including Buki Sode Kagami (武器袖鏡), Honcho Gunki Koushu Kozusetsu (本朝軍器考集古圖説), and Buki Zu (武器圖), one will be surprised that there is no mention of these heavy chopping weapons. Are they forgettable as valid tools once used for war?

Let’s review the negative points of battle axes. For starters, they were not truly effective melee weapons when challenging an opposing army head-on. The factors against them include their short reach dictated through the method of wielding them, slow swing speed due to the disproportional weight distribution, and lack of immediate cutting power. This realization most likely came from actual experience from decades of wars, along with the improvement to armor worn, and inclusion of weapons with longer reach, which would bring an unspoken consensus to move away from battle axes. Outside of their traits, another unavoidable factor is the requirements needed to handle their size and weight. As one would guess, these large weapons were unyielding for most save for the large, physically strong warriors.

Artwork of a fictional character named Kezori Kuemon (毛剃九右衛門), a great pirate who wields a large axe. By Utagawa Kuniyoshi.

In the long run, axes could not keep up with the newer methods and tactics incorporated in battles. This isn’t an unusual decision. Actually, this is common practice in warfare, one that happens in all generations, including now. However, this doesn’t mean that axes were no longer used. It’s possible that smaller groups commissioned to participate in battles may contain individuals who still carried an axe. Stereotypically, many artworks and stories written during Edo period depict large men who were formally warriors fallen into a life of crime, bandits, and other types of fictional characters possessing tremendous strength using a large axe. Maybe there are some truths to these depictions?

SURVIVING EXAMPLES

Nowadays, anything related to a Japanese war axe can be seen in comics, games, artworks and the like. However, are there any real figures out of Japanese history known to have wielded such a weapons? There are some sources, but cannot necessarily be considered official, reliable documentations.

An ukiyoe entitled “Nagayama Tōmi-no-kami”, which portrays said warrior on horseback raising his battle axe over his head to strike a target. Part of the “Musha-e” (武者絵) series. By Utagawa Hiroshige.

The first source we can look at is Taiheiki (太平記), the famous recordings of the conflict between the Taira and the Genji clans in the 14th century. In this is a warrior by the name of Nagayama Tōmi-no-kami (長山遠江守), who was active during Nanbokucho Period. Hailing from Sagami Province (相模国, Sagami no kuni)³, he started his career in the Northern Court army controlled by Ashikaga Takauji. Tōmi-no-kami is described as a large, fierce individual who wielded a large axe to boot. One of his highlights recorded is his participation in the battle of Musashino (武蔵野の合戦, Musashino no gassen).

According to the Taiheiki, as Tōmi-no-kami was surveying the battlefield, he was spotted by Akamatsu Jinori (赤松持則), a warrior from the rivaling Southern Court army. Approaching on horseback, Jinori challenged the large warrior to a one-on-one fight. After a bit of taunting from Jinori, along with a few other verbal exchanges, Tōmi-no-kami agreed to the duel, very pleased to fight another warrior with a reputable rank. In this battle, it is said he whirled his large battle axe with no effort.

The other historical individual associated with an axe is none other than Musashibō Benkei (武蔵坊弁慶), the famed loyal retainer of Miyamoto no Yoshitsune. Is this historically true? Outside of 2nd handed accounts like the Gikeiki and theatrical performances, there are no reliable sources regarding this.

Already surrounded with a questionable existence, Benkei is often portrayed as a strong man who, at the side of his master Yoshitsune, fought to their death against their foes during the battle of Koromogawa (衣川の戦い) in 1189. During this, he fiercely wielded 7 different weapons⁴, one of which was a battle axe.

MODERN TIMES

Are there any surviving techniques, strategies, or systems related to the war axe? From my own research, I’ve come across none. While some older martial systems that are active today may mention the use of a war axe, there’s been no presentation of specific skills dedicated to them. Possible this is due to the simplicity of the war axe’s actual use.

There is, interestingly, one group that specializes in the methods of the axe in present day. This group is known as “Nihon Onojutsu Kyōkai” (日本斧術協会), and their system is called “Shintō Hassō ryu Onojutsu” (神道発想流斧術). This group is about preserving the concept and spirit of the axe, and have different branches throughout Japan. Although “jutsu” is used in this system’s name, they use the label “onodō” (斧道), which aligns with the whole “self-development” direction Japan has gone with regarding their modern martial arts. The Nihon Onojutsu Kyōkai also appear in public events and workshops.

There is very little information about this group, even in present day. The only source I’ve come across is their official (?) site:

Nihon Onojutsu Kyōkai (日本斧術協会)

CONCLUSION

An axe is a versatile tool that can be used for recreation, field work, and survival purposes. They were also modified for battlefield uses at one point, but unlike other popular weapons like the sword and spear, this was short lived. We come to a close on this article about the Japanese axe. Even though it is not so well documented historically, there are still some stories and 3rd party accounts that can give us some idea on how they may have been present especially during their high point. Intending to bring some of these stories to light in future posts.

1) Yoki shares the same kanji as ono. The difference is that yoki is an older word.

2) The term “akutō” is a loose label with a wide range based on context, covering the likes such as criminals, thieves, heretics, and trouble makers. Its fundamental roots stem from earlier times of the establishment of Japanese culture, where anyone who was considered a threat to the establishment of the Imperial rule and territorial expansion were considered the “bad guy”. So, even if the opposition was actually “good”, living a peaceful life, or even had no ill intentions to the Imperial court, they could easily be labeled as a bad guy, and be recorded as so with no concrete proof.

3) a large stretch of land consisting of present day Kanagawa Prefecture, Tokyo City, and Saitama Prefecture.

4) This established the phrase “Benkei no nanatsu dōgu” (弁慶の七つ道具) based on the image of Benkei entering the battlefield carrying 7 different types of weapons.

by

Yoshitsune & Benkei’s 1st Encounter: Tracking down Facts out of Lore

Today’s article is sort of a pick up from the last one, where I spoke about Musashibō Benkei’s ōnaginata being a cultural asset. To reiterate, cultural assets are things that have value in a country’s culture, but may not necessarily match up in the form one would expect. Let’s look at this from another angle, taking a popular story of how the heroic Minamoto no Yoshitsune met the barbaric Musashibō Benkei. Though their first encounter was violent, they became loyal partners with Benkei becoming a retainer to Yoshitsune. Through this, a bridge claimed as where the encounter took place has become famous, and quite an important landmark that many individuals (both local and international visitors) travel to see.

Artwork depicting Yoshitsune (right) dueling with Benkei (left) on a bridge, entitled “Yoshitsune Ichidaiki no uchi Kyukai Gojō no hashi ni” (義経一代記之内 九回 五条の橋に). By Utagawa Hiroshige (歌川広重).

For stories of the past that seem bigger than life, do they always add up as being accurate? For today’s article, we will look at the specifics of this legendary story & how they play out in the geographical setting of Kyoto, then delve into this particular bridge in question and see how much it actually ties in to the fame it gets.

THE LORE

The backdrop of this popular lore is set in 12th century Japan during the late Heian period, and begins in the rich Capital city known today as Kyoto. For about a year, the warrior monk Benkei would approach anyone bearing a sword as they attempted to cross a particular bridge, and take it by force by challenging them to a fight. He was always successful, since he stood at a monstrous height and was equally as strong bearing a large naginata, for many individuals were powerless against him. However, this would come to an end when he met a small boy named Ushiwakamaru, who would later be renown under the name “Minamoto no Yoshitsune”¹.

Here’s a popular children’s folklore song based on the encounter, called ”Ushiwaka”, which sums up how the popular lore of the encounter plays out. To the left is the original Japanese text, while to the right is my English transliteration.

This folklore sets the acclaimed image of two warriors battling out on a bridge, which in turn contributed to a setting like this being a popular one for duels in many stories even today. While this lore is simple & easy to understand, it’s also surprising to know that this is not how their encounter took place! For the full story, we have to review the original text, which is called “Gikeiki” (義経記), or “The Records of Yoshitsune” in English. The Gikeiki is stated to be a very old war chronicle by an unknown author(s), which was compiled into 8 volumes during the Muromachi period in the 14th century, shortly after the real-life feud between the Taira clan and the Minamoto clan in the 12th century. Through this, not only do we learn that the fight took place in not one, but two locations, it’s also revealed that either one was not mentioned to be a bridge directly².

GOJŌ TENJIN SHRINE

In the Gikeiki, the encounter between Yoshitsune and Benkei can be found in the 3rd volume, recited in a chapter entitled, “Benkei rakuchū nite hito no tachi wo ubaitoru koto” (弁慶洛中にて人の太刀を奪ひ取る事, While on a bridge, Benkei takes other people’s swords). Here, they first meet each other not too far away from the Gojō Tenjin Shrine. The specifics of this is Benkei departed from this shrine and headed southward towards a pathway with earthen walls on either side within a residential area, and waited at the end of a waterway for his 1000th victim to walk along this route. He then caught a glimpse of Yoshitsune walking along this route as he crossed a waterway³, playing a flute. This route is significant as it was used by those who traveled to pay their respects at the Gojō Tenjin shrine, which is a real place located in the lower city area of Kyoto.

Pic of Gojō Tenjin shrine. From Wikipedia.

Is the Gojō Tenjin shrine where the famed battle takes place? Not really, as it is only half of it. According to the Gikeiki, after a brief scuffle, Yoshitsune demonstrated unexpected skills which would put his opponent on the back foot. Not prepared for the smaller Yoshitsune to be so overbearing, Benkei runs away.

KIYOMIZU-DERA

The final confrontation between Yoshitsune and Benkei concludes the following day. However, it did not take place on the Gojō bridge. Instead, the two warriors would meet⁴ and settle their dispute in front of a large gate of the temple called “Kiyomizu-dera”. This temple, too, has a claimed long history and still exists today in the Higashiyama District of the city area in Kyoto. Take note that as both Gojō Tenjin shirne and Kiyomizu-dera are in the city area, they aren’t too far away from each other. Distance-wise, they are about 30 mins apart by foot, separated by the Kamo river (more on this later).

Pic of the westward gate of Kiyomizu-dera. This is possibly the same area where Benkei and Yoshitsune met a 2nd time before resuming their fight. From Wikipedia.

The two would battle around the vicinity of the Kiyomizu-dera, where Yoshitsune, realizing his opponent’s potential, would lightly wound Benkei on the hand to prevent him from continuing the fight. Defeated, Yoshitsune offered him to pledge his allegiance and serve him. Weighing in on the pros and cons, Benkei agrees.

POTENTIAL HISTORICAL INACCURACIES

Going based on the Gikeiki, there’s no mention of Yoshitsune encountering Benkei on the Gojō bridge, or any bridge for that matter. So where did this idea come from? Does it even exist today? Just to be clear, there is mention of a bridge in the said chapter of the Gikeiki, for the chapter title indicates that Benkei does his dirty deed on a bridge. By default, he is synonymous with a bridge due to the trouble he stirs in Kyoto as he performs his task of acquiring 1000 swords. Yet, why does he not occupy this bridge for the 1000th victim, who would turn out to be Yoshitsune? Instead, after departing for Gojō Tenjin shrine, Benkei chooses to wait near a waterway…possibly leading to the Gojō bridge? Or, is it possible that their fight spilled all the way onto the Gojō bridge? What about during their 2nd encounter at Kiyomizu-dera? Distance is way too far, so logically they wouldn’t have concluded their battle on the bridge, right? This could just be a case of poor narration on the part of this unknown author, and failing to describe properly the fight being on the aforementioned bridge. Of course, there are other sources of this famed event that mention the Gojō bridge as the location where the two warriors met, but take note that they date much later than the Gikeiki.

Regarding this bridge in question, how do we track it down? In popular lore and other (later) adaptions of the lore (including in the form of song and theatrical performance), it is referred to as “Gojō no hashi”, but is officially called “Gojō Ōbashi” today. If we go by the latter, then yes there is a Gojō Ōbashi, which is a large bridge that sits over the Kamo river. It is geographically in the middle of Gojō Tenjin shrine and Kiyomizu-dera, albeit at an angle, and is an option of a path for those who would need to travel between both locations. However, this particular “bridge” cannot be the same one hinted in any of the sources, simply for the fact that it was not originally there at the time of the two warriors’ battle!…at least, not in the form we see it now.

Here is the Gojō bridge (bottom-left), portrayed with the temple Hōkōji (方広寺) in the artwork “Gojō hashi Daibutsuden Chōbō Zu” (五条橋大仏殿眺望図). By Maruyama Ōgyo (円山 応挙) sometime in the 18th century. To the right, a pic of the same bridge as it is in modern times. From Wikipedia.

Here’s a quick explanation to clear this up. Originally, this Gojō bridge was a short distance north from where it is now. In 1590, the shogun Toyotomi Hideyoshi had that bridge moved more southward in order to make processions to the temple Hōkōji (southwest of Kiyomizu-dera), which houses the largest statue of Buddha in Kyoto, more accessible. This is where the new Gojō bridge sits today. So, where was the old location? Researchers have estimated it to be where the current Matsubara bridge (松原橋, Matsubara hashi) is located, which is on the Matsubara tōri (松原通り), or “Matsubara street”. Guess it’s safe to say that while the location of the bridge is correct, apparently the specifics of the general area are a little off. Since it would’ve been the preferred route at the time, it aligns with the idea that Benkei was using this previous Gojō bridge (Matsubara bridge), and that he would’ve confronted Yoshitsune there (see illustration below as a reference).

In regards to potential inaccuracies concerning the 14th century text Gikeiki, this is to be expected for a couple of reasons. For starters, it is not unusual for locations that were mentioned in ancient text to not match up due to the development of cities and towns. In Japan’s case, this is even more of an issue, as certain key areas faced many changed due to whoever was in power at the time, usually a warlord, or by order of the shogun. It is not unusual for a bridge to be moved and renamed, but there are cases of villages, towns, and prefectures gaining new names or resized geographically. This poses as a challenge when trying to pinpoint places found in old documents that no longer exist. Another issue is in regards to the author of the text. While there is no author’s name specified, it is believed that the writing was heavily influenced by Buddhist monks. This isn’t unusual, for they were but few of specific groups that were literate, plus much of the contents for certain characters involved Buddhist practices that would take someone in the field to understand⁵. That being said, the original text, while slated to be a war chronicle based on true events, has its fair share of oddities that hint at agenda-driven ideas. In essence, these peculiar points could lead to such inaccuracies like not indicating properly whether a battle between two warriors indeed takes place on a bridge for the sake of highlighting places of worship.

This is an outline of the general area is Kyoto where the event takes place, as well as key locations mentioned in the story. The most important point to take from this is the location of the modern Gojō Ōbashi (Gojō Grand bridge) versus the previous Gojō bridge, now known as Matsubara hashi (Matsubara bridge).

On a related note, it is worth mentioning the naming convention “Gojō” is connected to the Gojō tōri, or “5th street” for simpler reading. As one would expect, the Gojō tōri is part of a numerical sequence of large streets that run through Kyoto, so there is an Ichijō tōri, (1st Street), Nijō tōri, (2nd Street), and so on. In turn, these same streets have their own matching bridges over the Kamo river. The Matsubara bridge, the former location of Gojō bridge, is geographically where Gojō tōri is said to have have been (present-day Matsubara tōri), which is one of the reasons for the name of the shrine Gojō Tenjin to have “Gojō” in it, as it sits near the edge of that former street (now called Matsubara tōri). Today, Gojō tōri runs along the same line as Gojō bridge…which seems to also be where Rokujō tōri (6th Street) is supposed to be.

CONCLUSION

In ending, certain aspects of history can make tangible things much more special, becoming intangible cultural icons. In the case of Yoshitsune and Benkei’s fated encounter, it’s been passed down as a lore that embraces the Gojō bridge as the stage for this. Being an old story, sometimes details don’t match up quite as well as they should, which can bring up questions, such as the accuracy the actual location. At the end of the day, it is best to see the modern day Gojō bridge as a tribute to the original location in my personal opinion. While there are perks to understanding the specifics, it shouldn’t deter a person from visiting this massive bridge and enjoy its visuals.

1) Historically famous under the title “Minamoto no Yoshitsune” as an adult. When he was younger, including the time of meeting Benkei, he went by the nickname “Ushiwakamaru”. To avoid confusion, we will primarily stick with his adult name for this article, where it applies.

2) There are a few other adaptations that cover this fated encounter as well, this including those interestingly entitled “Benkei Monogatari” (弁慶物語), “Hashi Benkei” (橋弁慶), and “Jisori Benkei” (じぞり弁慶). While all have their similarities, a few of them contain more info about Benkei, as well as some slight variations to how Yoshitsune and Benkei’s encounter unfolded, such as directly centering the Gojō bridge as the sole location where they would meet & conclude their battle.

3) This waterway points to the Kamo river, and may be the hint to Yoshitsune crossing over it by the Gojō bridge. Problem is, this is not actually stated in the Gikeiki, leading readers to assume this is the case. Note that this is an issue with the Gikeiki, and not necessarily a problem found in other sources covering Yoshitsune & Benkei’s fight.

4) In the Gikeiki, this is narrated as if this happened by chance. Benkei guesses that he would meet Yoshitsune at Kiyomizu-dera at night, and sure enough he appears. There is no indication that this is an arranged meeting, which is strange…or possibly the readers are to assumed that there was a clue hinting to the two agreeing to meet there…?

5) This is similar to the “Heike Monogatari” (平家物語), another historical text that covers the same events found in the Gikeiki, except more from the perspective of the Taira clan. While the author of the Heike Monogatari is unknown, it was told by monks in the form of verses for many generations.

by

Ōnaginata that Survived into Modern Times

For this November, the ōnaginata (大薙刀, large glaive) will be the focus of my martial arts group’s Theme month training. Handouts with information regarding the monthly theme is given out, which will be the same Other than just learning fighting techniques, it’s important to also study the history of Japanese weapons, and understand how certain ones have been preserved up to even modern times.

From a historical standpoint, the naginata is a respectable weapon used during the long warfare that plagued Japan during its medievel period. While in today’s generation we commonly see the shorter version generally called a konaginata (小薙刀, short glaive), in the past very large ones both with a long shaft and large blade called ōnaginata once were carried by some of the mightiest warriors. Once wielded in the hands of capable warriors during Japan’s chaotic warring times, it lost usage once the Tokugawa Shogunate was established during the early 1600s. Thus, due to the government rule of naginata naoshi (薙刀直し), where the giant blades of ōnaginata were to be cut down into smaller blades to be used for such weapons such as katana, kodachi, and tantō, along with other restrictions that prevented large-scale battles from erupting. It’s unfortunate that no single ōnaginata survived into modern times…or did they?

Here are 3 examples of surviving ōnaginata, from their dimensions, the makers, and the stories tied to them.

ŌNAGINATA BY MORIMITSU

The first one is labeled “Oonaginata-mei Morimitsu” (大薙刀銘盛光), located in Setouchi City, Okayama Prefecture. Simply an ōnaginata that bears no unique name, it is a good representative of like weapon types used in the past which only is marked on its tang with the name of the maker, who is “Morimitsu”. This is the surname of a particular blacksmith that lasted for 3 generations, whom were active in the 1300s from the Nanbokucho period to the earlier part of Muromachi period, was respected for the craftsmanship used in the weapons produced.

Public images of this ōnaginata blade by Morimitsu. The left pic is from a pdf download link on Okayama Prefecture’s site, while the pic on the right is from “Nihon Bijutsu Tōken hozonkyō kai“.

There are a lot of details regarding this ōnaginata made available, with below an example of some of those that are provided:

  • Blade length is 107.8 cm
  • Curvature: 3.2 cm
  • Straight grain tempered pattern
  • Has a straight temper line with a misty-like appearance
  • Has 2 mekugi ana (peg holes)

This is a fairly long blade at 107.8 cm (42.5 in.), stated to be much longer than the standard size of ōnaginata used during warring times. Just as a frame of perspective, modern iaitō (居合刀, aluminum-bladed swords) and shinsakutō (新作刀, newly-made steel swords) have a standard length around 70 cm (roughly 27 in.), which is much longer than the blade for a konaginata, which can reach up to about 60 cm (23 in.) in length. In comparison, this ōnaginata has a big advantage, boosting a difference in length over 30 cm. One can imagine that, attached on an long shaft, a person would have superior reach when performing cuts. Speaking of shaft, this blade comes paired with one, which is black-lacquered.

THE SHRINE ŌNAGINATA

The next ōnaginata is part of a 3-piece collection that includes a larger sword and a shorter sword. Written on one side of the tang, we learn that it bears the name “Hōkago Hachimangu Reiken” (奉篭八幡宮霊剣). On the other side of the tang is the signature of the maker, which is “Heianjōjū Fujiwara Kunimichi” (平安城住藤原国路). This is currently the property of the shrine called “Hirosaki Hachiman-gu”, which is located in Hirosaki City, Aomori Prefecture.

Picture of the ōnaginata “Hōkago Hachimangu Reiken”, (top) along with an uchidachi (middle) and ōdachi (bottom) crafted by the same blacksmith. From the Hirosaki City website.

From surviving records, this is a 17th century weapon that was in the possession of the aforementioned shrine in 1611. There is a great chance that this ōnaginata (along with its 2 swords counterparts) was made specifically for the shrine and is more of a ceremonial piece, meaning it’s never been used for warfare. It is also known that Fujiwara Kunimichi, an uprising blacksmith who resided in Kyoto, made a name for himself with his style of craftsmanship that contributed to the new types of swords many moved towards to from the early Edo period onward.

Here’s the known specs of this ōnaginata:

  • Blade length: 91.2 cm
  • Nakago (tang) length: 1 meter

There’s not much info regarding other specs of the blade. However, the entire built is very long, for from the tip of the blade all the way down to the tang, it measure 205 cm.

How long is this ōnaginata blade? Let’s compare it to an ōdachi (battlefield long sword) at the bottom of the pic above, which was made by the same blacksmith.

  • Blade length: 107.8 cm
  • Nakago (tang) length: 35.3

While the ōnaginata’s total length is greater, the actual blade length is over 10 cm shorter than the ōdachi. Nevertheless, we can see that an ōnaginata blade is roughly the size of an ōdachi. Including the length of the shaft, the overall reach of the ōnaginata is staggering.

LEGENDARY BENKEI’S ŌNAGINATA

The last ōnaginata to showcase is an interesting one. Named “Iwatooshi” (岩融), it is claimed to be the prized weapon of the famed Musashibou Benkei (武蔵坊弁慶). As a little bit of history, Benkei was active during the later end of the Heian period (794 – 1185) as supposedly a large warrior monk, and was a loyal retainer of Minamoto Yoshitsune. The ōnaginata he used was just as grand, with a name that stands for “a blade that has fine cutting edge good enough to split stone”¹. The Iwatooshi is currently housed in Ōyamazumi Shrine in Imabari City, Ehime Prefecture, and is categorized as a valuable cultural asset, and is provided safe keeping².

Pic of the actual blade (?) of Iwatooshi, from the Touken World website.

There isn’t much info regarding its specs, other than the following.

  • Blade length: 106 cm
  • Maker: Munechika

On top of being on the longer side of standard ōnaginata length, the name of the maker is important to note, as this is possibly the legendary blacksmith known by the name “Sanjō Munechika” (三条宗近). Renown for making extraordinary swords, Munechika is noted in records related to exquisite swords and exemplary blacksmiths. This includes his finest work, “Mikazuki Munechika” (三日月宗近), which not only exists today, but is considered a national treasure, as well as one of 5 swords categorized as “Tenga Goken” (天下五剣, Five Greatest Swords). With a high profile blacksmith on its label, is there not doubt the level of acclaim the Iwatooshi will receive?

As expected, the Iwatooshi isn’t without some perplexing mysteries. For starters, Benkei is a figure who’s story has many holes due to a lack of proper documentation, so his existence is rather on the exaggerated side, especially in pop culture. Second, Benkei is said to have been alive around the 1100s, which is about 1,100 years ago. The same can be said about the Iwatooshi, which is amazing that such a thing could survive throughout so many generations (and in good shape too!)…if such a weapon truly did exist. Lastly, if we go based on the information regarding the blacksmith and can accept that Iwatooshi is a relic of past medieval Japan, can it be proven that this is the authentic ōnaginata and not a replica? From what I could find, it doesn’t look like this ōnaginata is set up for public display.

ENDING

This wraps up our look at ōnaginata. Once a potent battlefield weapon in ancient Japan, seeing a fully functional one today is but a think of the pass. Those who have the opportunity to see any form of an ōnaginata that has survived into modern times is usually in exhibitions, generally those held in museums.

1) 岩をも断ち切るほどの切れ味の良さ

2) An interesting note regarding items that are valuable cultural asset is that they are different from national treasures. The reason being is that while the former has a significant cultural value within Japan itself (whether it actually exists or is just a replica), the latter has prestige value on a global level in terms of tangible piece of history.