Unsheathing the longsword

[Maxime Chouinard]

I don't doubt for a moment that there were plenty of practical reasons for being able to attack on the draw, especially when the form of the weapon makes it relatively easier to do so. I just suspect there's a little more to it than practicality alone simply because so many JSA practitioners make such a show out of drawing and sheathing the blade with dramatic deliberation. I don't know of any other culture that made a whole art with its own name out of drawing the sword and putting it back, even though they all faced murder on the highways and nighttime assaults and all the other types of violence that man can conceive. The reason for that is clearly cultural, and I don't think the samurai looking macho and intimidating drawing his katana is any sillier than the Spaniard posing dramatically before killing the bull or circling you with rapier poised on high like a scorpion's tail, just another form of psychological warfare. I think Mr. Tallebois' point about the effect of cultural norms, taboos and protocols about allowed usage of weapons probably plays a large part in this difference of style. I didn't mean to sound condescending, just a wink and a nod to a warrior's display of pride.

I'll just put things into perspective here. Many styles have a part of their curriculum that they call iaijutsu or battojutsu. It was a specialised skill but not intended to be a stand alone art. There are only a handful of schools that concentrate mostly on drawing. Why? Well as was the case in the west, students came for diverse reasons, they were not expected to stay their whole lifetime in the school and they may have joined a couple of them if they could. They were also expected to have been taught swordsmanship prior to it by their father or clan instructor. So I suppose that one would have a solid base of swordsmanship before joining a iaijutsu school to perfect those types of techniques, or being in need of a fast self defense option because he suddenly didn't felt safe anymore, or being sent by his Daimyo to dispatch a noisy shogunal agent. The fact remains that it would not have been as widespread and popular as it is today, for some reason (personally I find watching a class of modern iaido as interesting as watching paint dry, but to each their own). And many styles practiced today were invented or separated from their kenjutsu counterpart in the modern era.

That said, if Thibault was worried about being caught in the act of drawing the sword and offered advice to avoid it, then surely the Japanese must have had similar concerns and methods to deal with it unless there were cultural taboos against things like tackling a guy before his weapon is drawn.

That is precisely why the resheathing looks so dramatic (although I think a big part of it is due to modern concerns). If you're looking down at your sheat to get your sword back in, thinking all is safe, an attacker might come out and dispatch you while you are not aware. As for being attacked while drawing, there are techniques where you step back while prior to or while cutting or stabbing, but I think the idea is to cut faster than the other guy can touch you. Concerning the cultural aspect, there are no indigenous art I know of that don't include esthetic aspects from their culture, be it a way of stepping, standing or some other decorum, even modern ones are by their adherence to strict practicality in form and function. It's all part of the fun I think and gives them their unique flavor.

The plate in Talhoffer which you can find in the "Fight Earnestly" file in the Historical Manuals section under Talhoffer, seems to be followed with a plate showing a descending false edge blow that seems to be striking across the body's stance from left to right to end the fight, which may indicate that the fight went on for a blow or two between the draw and the end.

That's a common occurrence in iai. You are not necessarily expected to kill with the one handed draw, so a second cut is often needed.

[Stacy Clifford]

That all makes sense, I didn't think that they would learn iaijutsu in isolation, it's just interesting that they would single it out for special attention unlike the Europeans who lump that skill in with everything else. Sometimes knowing why one culture DID do something helps figure out why another culture with seemingly similar needs did not. My opinions may be a little provocative at times, but you usually answer the call with good information Maxime, and it's much appreciated.

[Maxime Chouinard]

Always glad to help. I may sound a bit harsh sometimes in my remarks but it's the Internet filter and my limitations in the English language, not bad intentions.

[Jaron Bernstein]

Always glad to help. I may sound a bit harsh sometimes in my remarks but it's the Internet filter and my limitations in the English language, not bad intentions.

Another thing to consider is that there are responses to a surprise attack other than an Iado "quick draw" of the sword. There are any number of closings for such a situation described in the manuals, such as Fiore's "being attacked while eating dinner" thing. There is a sequence in Meyer (I can cite it here if needed) where he describes how to deal with an opponent drawing a knife on you. It essentially advises to close in and grapple. Petter talks about this as well.

[Jason Taylor]

I seem to remember also hearing somewhere (I think at a study group meeting from a senior member, but I can't be sure) that many knights had something like a caddy to handle and maintain their weapons. It saounded to me at the time like you'd bring all your stuff in some kind of cart and then the caddy (for lack of a better term) would hand you the weapons you need for the day. "My lord,, I recommend the five-iron...."

In all seriopusness, though, does this ring a bell with anyone? That might explain why a lot of the manuals spend less time that we see in the Japanese traditions on just the draw. I remember learning in the little Iaido I took that a lot of their forms were for someone drawing on you during a conversation or in the hall, almost like in a court/home setting and by surprise, rather than on the battlefield. And since the manuals would be written with people who could read (and therefore had money, and possibly enough to have this caddy-squire guy following him around), maybe the draw seemed less important qwith the longsword, which seems like a more battlefield weapon in general. Or judicial duels, of course, in which case you'd aleready be drawn, as well.

This is just me trying to speculate based on past knowledge. Does any of this sound familiar to anyone?

Jason

[Maxime Chouinard]

The Japanese also had squires who would hand them their weapons on the battlefield, or hold their swords while at court, at least if they could afford it.

[I. Hartikainen]

Sal Bertucci wrote:
I don't think he was arguing with you Ilkka, I think he was actually supporting your quote.


Exactly.

Ah, ok then. Look how wary you guys have made me! (just kidding ).

- Ilkka

[Jaron Bernstein]

Ilkka, Max,

This is just pure speculation on my part but I would suggest this possibility. It may be completely wrong and if so please correct me.

The katana is a cutting blade and traditional Japanese clothing (to the best of my current knowledge) wasn't very heavy. That makes a cutting based weapon viable in sudden "quick draw" encounters. Thus the development of iado type things. Historical western clothing was considerably heavier and less prone to cutting. A sudden slashing blow might not cut through a gambeson-thick garment. Thus the possible preference to grappling and stabbing rondel dagger type responses in the same "quick draw" situations that led the Japanese to iado.

I am not referring here to situations where there is sufficient advance notice of the fight to allow preparation. Does that sound plausible?

[Maxime Chouinard]

Well even if it's the case, you still have the option of cutting at the head, face, hands (Talhoffer) or even thrusting. And please don't go thinking that there was no knife/short sword/CQ techniques to respond to such situations, there are plenty .

It is true that japanese clothing is in general lighter, at least in the summer; a winter kimono is basically the japanese equivalent of a gambeson (about the same weight) plus another padded haori (vest, again the same weight) when going outside. But it would be impossible to wear it in the middle of the summer, maybe except in Hokkaido or in mountainous regions, without eventually falling from exhaustion.

[Jay Vail]

Before one can wield a sword, one must obviously first draw it. The many techniques of the masters of old come to waste if one can't even unsheathe the sword.

The Japanese created an entire art based on the draw, so I find it interesting how the draw seems less represented in WMA sources as both cultures certainly would have faced situations where their swords were needed in unexpected situations.

So, a question on the subject, and for those who know my posting style there will likely be follow-up questions:

Are there any treatises/texts on the unsheathing (or setting oneself in a position for unsheathing) of the longsword?

Couple of things. First, iaido: it is a noncombat activity, according to Diane Skoss, a noted kenjutsu authority. By that she means it was a dojo method not intended for real combat. So don't expect to find European analogs in any of the manuals. Iaido is play, not combat

On to the main question. I assume you're asking, how did they normally draw when preparing for combat? Apart from some of the methods described above, which are intended for special situations, I am not aware of any draw method described in any of the available manuals.

However, DiGrassi describes how to draw the arming sword. There is no reason to suppose that drawing the longsword was performed any differently.

DiGrassi does not specifically describe the draw. In fact, he describes the arming sword's equivalent of the ochs on the right. He says that is the end point of the draw:

This high ward, which also might be called the first, being the very same which every man frames at the drawing of the sword out of the sheath ...

You can take it easily from there.

JC described this method to us years ago. He must have got it from DiGrassi.

[Maxime Chouinard]

First, iaido: it is a noncombat activity, according to Diane Skoss, a noted kenjutsu authority. By that she means it was a dojo method not intended for real combat. So don't expect to find European analogs in any of the manuals. Iaido is play, not combat

It's an oversimplification. I doubt she formulated it like that, quote?

[Jay Vail]

First, iaido: it is a noncombat activity, according to Diane Skoss, a noted kenjutsu authority. By that she means it was a dojo method not intended for real combat. So don't expect to find European analogs in any of the manuals. Iaido is play, not combat

It's an oversimplification. I doubt she formulated it like that, quote?

Sorry, it's not Diane, per se, but from an article by Hunter Armstrong entitled "The Koryu Bujutsu Experience," in Koryu Bujutsu: Classical Warrior Traditions of Japan, D. Skoss ed. (Berkeley Heights, NJ: Koryu Books, 1995), pp. 19-38.

Although the discussion about the noncombat nature of iaido is quite long, here is a useful passage to give you the flavor:

Batto (and other solo weapons practice) was primarily used for selfpractice when one didn't have a partner. In most classical dojo, very little time was devoted to solo practice. In some modern dojo, the emphasis may have changed, but in most classical traditions in Japan, such practice is still a relatively minor part of the overall training regimen of the ryu. For example, in Shinkage-ryu (founded by Kamiizumi Ise-no-Kami) and Yagyu Shinkage-ryu (founded by Kamiizumi's student Yagyu Munetoshi), there is either no batto, or it is done as a minor part of the overall kenjutsu training. (In the Yagyukai of Yagyu Nobuharu Sensei, there is no Yagyu-ryu sword-drawing per se; however, Nobuharu's grandfather developed Yagyu Seigo-ryu batto explicitly for modern purposes.) In Shinkage-ryu, the batto is essentially a preparation for two-man, sword-drawing kenjutsu with shinken (closer still to combative reality).

The distinguishing key, again, is realistic preparation for combat.

Iaido, whether derived from a koryu or not,15 has no such aspiration.

Its aim is the development of aesthetic sword movement and spiritual, moral training, and the emphasis varies according to the interpretation of the individual performing the art. These are fine aims, perhaps even better than seeking combative effectiveness. Why confuse the two very different ends? Yet, there are practitioners of iaido who consistently contend that their art is combatively effective and cite apocryphal rationales as proof. One that is commonly heard is that iaido was developed on the battlefield for when a warrior's spear or other weapon was broken or became useless for some reason, and he had to quickly draw his sword to defend himself and continue fighting. First of all, extremely few of the koryu practice any kind of sword-draw while wearing armor, much less quick-draw techniques. On the other hand, several of the extant koryu do practice various weapon-systems in armor, including kenjutsu, sojutsu, kogusoku, etc.

If being able to perform a quick draw while wearing katchu (armor) was so important, one would think that the skill would have been maintained and be more evident. Secondly, and most importantly, drawing a sword while in armor is quite a different matter from drawing while wearing everyday clothes.

The bushi in armor would only draw his tachil7 if he had the time and distance to effectively do so; if a fast draw was necessary, it was probably already too late for the longer blade, and he would resort to shorter weapons and grappling. When an enemy was so close or moving in so rapidly that a warrior's weapon became useless, the bushi was trained to resort to armored grappling (kumiuchi or kogusoku) with a short-bladed weapon such as a wakizashi, yoroidoshi, or hachiwari.18

This was more effective than trying to draw his tachi or katana. Takenouchi-ryu and Yagyu Shingan-ryu are two well-known traditions that put a great deal of emphasis on two-man training in these types of closein combat with shorter blades. Shinkage-ryu also practices kogusoku with kodachi (short sword). In any case, even if the armored quick-draw was feasible on the battlefield, the speed of the draw is not nearly as important as awareness, distancing, timing, and targeting, none of which are aspects of solo, sword-drawing practice.

Another rationale for the iaido quick draw is its development as "samurai self-defense." Supposedly, when the warrior was attacked while walking around minding his own business, iaido training prepared him to quickly draw his sword and defend himself. This is really not much different from the rationale for the quick-draw on the battlefield. Realistically, old world or modern, if an attack occurs so quickly as to require a fast draw from an evidently non-alert defender, the defender loses. The most important principle in heiho for not being defeated by surprise is to avoid being stoprised. The chances of surviving a sudden attack are very small. The best way to avoid being "suckerpunched" is not to be in a position that allows one to be suckerpunched. What is necessary for realistic combative situations— particularly in potential surprise attacks—is mental and physical preparedness.19 The average bushi relied on skills gained in training with opponents, not on training by himself.

In reality, iaido, as a solo implement training discipline, has more in common with kyudo than with kenjutsu; both iaido and kyudo do not include the dynamism supplied by facing an opponent who possesses intent.

[Maxime Chouinard]

I have the book at home, and while it is a good read I do not agree with everything. May be Mr. Amrstrong was not aware at the time he wrote the article, but there are historical records of drawing being successfully used in real situations, I can cite one included in Karl F Friday's Legacies of the sword:

Late one evening, on his way to visit a young woman, Norimitsu was set upon by a band of armed thugs. When one of these jumped in front of him with his sword raised, Norimitsu drew his own blade and cut in the same motion, splitting the attacker's head in two.

It shows that drawing was considered a viable option and was used with success. But Mr. Armstrong is also mainly discussing iaido as what we usually see today, many of those schools have lost their martial intent, but we most not put everyone of them in the same basket.

[CalebChow]

Kind of related to my original question, one that I've been wondering about for some time.
I realize this issue borders on a role-playing question, but I'm trying to think about this from a practical and realistic standpoint.

It seems like keeping a weapon at one's side or in one's hand all the time inhibits movement and stealth, which can easily prove fatal for those on reconnaissance/scouting/guerrilla warfare where stealth is essential.

As a result, I was wondering if anyone knows of any recorded cases where swords were indeed carried and drawn from the back instead of the side.
I seem to recall some simple strap system that allows it in ancient Chinese civilian arsenal but I don't remember where I heard it...

[s_taillebois]

It would have been difficult with longswords, bastards and estocs. Bio mechanically the arm lacks the upward reach to pull something like that off the back efficiently. And no real need as many European conflicts were pitch battles anyway.

As far as stealth per se, well these weapons were dropped they've found a few in England which seemed to have been lost that way. But in general they'd keep their primary weapon at hand, just as much as a modern soldier would do so.

And in general for such as assassinations and the like, well it was easy enough to hire some Welshmen for that...there were well known for their dagger work.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IocQ_DZVAU0

No idea who this man is, excepting a You-Tube Brit whose having some fun with the concept of back drawing swords.