Regarding Tomoe Gozen's Portrayal
YeMi
Dear all,
I am currently working on my Bachelor's paper, focusing on Tomoe Gozen's depiction in literature and art, with a particular emphasis on this modern version: book)
During my translation process, I came across some intriguing and puzzling points that I hope to clarify. I would greatly appreciate any insights or additional information regarding Tomoe Gozen (be it in written or visualized form).
木曾殿は信濃での出陣以来、巴、山吹という二人の下女を連れておられた。
Since Lord Kiso went to war in Shinano, he had been accompanied by two maidservants, Tomoe and Yamabuki.
In the text, the maidservants are described as "Tomoe and Yamabuki," emphasizing their functional roles, whereas in the German and English versions by Björn Adelmeier and Royall Tyler, respectively, they are depicted as "beautiful women." I am curious about the reasons behind this difference in portrayal.
I have also noticed that they barely use her name, she is mostly just a woman.
だから戦さとなれば、頑丈な鎧を与えられて、 大太刀と弓とを持たされて、まず一方の軍勢の大将として敵にさしむけられた。
When it came to battle, she was granted sturdy armour, a large sword and a bow and first sent as the commander of one of the forces against the enemy.
Although the text mentions Tomoe carrying a "great sword," I noticed that visual depictions of her, especially in ukiyo-e prints (which I will use a comparison for her visual portrayal in my paper), consistently show her wielding a naginata. Is there any reason why there are no depiction without a sword?
だからよう、そういう覚悟であるのに、『木曾殿は最後の戦さにまで女人を連れておられたよ』な どと言われるのだとしたら、なあ、憾みが残るぜ。わかるか」巴は、しかし、離れなかった。
Therefore, although I’m prepared to do so, if someone were to say something like, “Lord Kiso took a woman with him even to the final battle”, well, that would be very regrettable. “Do you understand?” Tomoe, however, did not move away.
This passage struck me profoundly. Initially, Kiso takes her to the battlefield, equips her with armor and weapons, even entrusting her with leading the army. However, the implication that having her by his side during his final moments would be regrettable raises questions. Was his concern primarily for her well-being, or was it driven by his pride as a warrior? Even then women seemed to be able to fight and defend their own home as well.
御田八郎に馬を押し並べる。馬上でむんずと組む。御田八郎を鞍から引きずり落とす。それから巴は、自分が跨がった馬のその鞍の前輪に押しつける。少しも身 動きをさせない。そして御田八郎の首を。捩じ切る。棄てる。
She lines up the horses alongside Onda no Hachirou Moroshige (name taken from the English version). After that, Tomoe presses it against the front wheel of the saddle of the horse she was riding. She doesn’t allow even the slightest movement. And then, Onda Hachirou’s neck – she twisted it off and discarded it.
In the description of this fight scene, I am struggling to visualize the exact sequence of Tomoe's attack. Especially the part of the “front wheel of the saddle”. Does anyone have any ideas?
Thank you very much. I’m looking forward to any responses!
Best regards,
Cyra M. Ledergerber
Sachi Schmidt-Hori
Dear Cyra,
Hello. As you may know, there are numerous variants of 平家物語 so any non-Japanese or modern Japanese translations have to make a decision as to which classical text(s) they use as the 底本 and how to translate certain words. In this particular modern Japanese translation you are looking at, the translator decided to interpret binjo as 下女. Below is from 小学館 全文全訳古語辞典. (I personally think 召使い or 下女 sounds a bit too lowly), while others decided to go with 美女.
I think 大太刀 and
薙刀（長刀）are similar. Please see below:
“国史大辞典
大太刀
おおだち
鞘に足金物をつけ、帯取（おびとり）の緒をかけて佩用する長大な太刀。長門本『平家物語』一九に、武蔵坊弁慶や源行家の所用を三尺五寸の大太刀といい、『源平盛衰記』三五には根井行親の所用を三尺六寸の大太刀と伝えているが、時代の下降とともに、打物合戦の激化につれて長大さを増している。『太平記』八、山徒寄
京都
事に佐治孫五郎が「其比曾て無かりし五尺三寸の太刀を以て」とみえ、同書に散見する四尺・五尺の太刀を大太刀と呼んでいないことも注目される。『嘉吉物語』には村の助景安の六尺あまりの大太刀、『応仁記』にも一宮入道勝梅が「七尺三寸ノ棟ニ銭ヲ伏程ノ大太刀」の所用を伝え、文飾でないことは、新潟の弥彦神社や愛媛の大山祇神社、栃木の二荒山神社などに伝来する大太刀からも窺われる。なおこの種の長大さによる佩用困難から郎従に持参させるのが普通となり、『家中竹馬記』にも「大太刀をも持するなり、特に若人は似合てよし、無為の時諸家の供衆持せぬは稀也」とみえ、近世の武士が鑓持を随えたように持参させたことが知られる。”
For Kiso’s motivation for rejecting Tomoe’s help, I have written an essay:
Schmidt-Hori, Sachi. “The Erotic Family: Structures and Narratives of Milk Kinship in Premodern Japanese Tales.”
The Journal of Asian studies 80.3 (2021): 663–681.
As for your question about 前輪 (maewa), please see the image below (copied from
大辞泉):
Sincerely,
Sachi Schmidt-Hori
https://faculty-directory.dartmouth.edu/sachi-schmidt-hori
From: pm...@googlegroups.com <pm...@googlegroups.com>
On Behalf Of YeMi
Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 1:24 PM
To: pm...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [PMJS] Regarding Tomoe Gozen's Portrayal
|
You don't often get email from fruit...@gmail.com. Learn why this is important |
--
PMJS is a forum dedicated to the study of premodern Japan.
To post to the list, email pm...@googlegroups.com
For the PMJS Terms of Use and more resources, please visit
www.pmjs.org.
Contact the moderation team at mod...@pmjs.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PMJS: Listserv" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
pmjs+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pmjs/CAE4f%3DDGqM%3DN-GgMc_-t_JRoU%2BPdToiZ4-_74w-6piYO-nBHFgg%40mail.gmail.com.
kfrida...@gmail.com
One of the things you need to be careful about not losing sight of, when considering depictions of battles and weapons in texts like Heike monogatari, is that the overwhelming majority of the details were invented during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Because of that, I wouldn’t recommend making much of discrepancies among descriptions.
In the case of Tome’s long weapon, the text refers to an ōdachi (also called a nodachi), which is an unusually long sword. These became popular during the fourteenth century (i.e. around the time many of the battle details in Heike monogatari were being worked out), but there’s no evidence that they were already around in Tomoe’s time.
It’s not impossible that the characters 大太刀 refer to a naginata, but it’s very unlikely. Exactly when naginata first appeared is difficult to ascertain. There are almost no extant examples of naginata blades that predate the mid-Kamakura period, and none that can be reliably dated to Heian times. The earliest clear reference to a naginata in the written record is a chronicle entry from 1146, which describes a warrior being startled by thunder and reaching for a weapon “commonly called a naginata.” A document dated three months later reports the investigation of a raid on an estate in Kawachi province, in which the perpetrators carried off “20 head of good oxen, 3000 sheaves of cut rice, 20 haramaki armors, 100 swords ([tachi)]], ], and 10,000 [sic] naginata.” Both sources write the word “naginata” phonetically, leaving little doubt that the weapon must have been around by this time. On the other hand, as Kondō Yoshikazu points out, the phrase, “commonly called” (zoku ni gō su) in the first entry suggests that the term “naginata” was not yet widely known, supporting the conclusion that the weapon was relatively new in the late twelfth century. Nevertheless, there are earlier, albeit somewhat more ambiguous, references to naginata in the sources. A diary entry from 1040, for example, mentions what may be a naginata carried by a warrior in the capital. In this case, “naginata” is written with characters that mean “long sword” (長刀), which was the standard orthography until the fifteenth century. Similarly, a diary entry from 1097 speaks of what may be a naginata, using a similar orthography (長剱); while a document from 1124 depicts a police official “drawing a naginata”; and a diary entry from 1110 describes foot soldiers parading through the capital bearing “uchimono,” a alternative term for naginata in later sources. But it is difficult to be sure whether any of these are indeed early references to naginata, or simply literal allusions to very long swords. The phrase, “drawing a naginata,” in the 1124 document raises additional questions in this regard, inasmuch as the verb used in later medieval sources to describe unsheathing a naginata is “remove” (hazusu), rather than “draw” (nuku), which is normally associated with swords.
The later pictures of Tomoe armed with a naginata are almost certainly anachronistic. During the Tokugawa period, a form of naginata became a standard weapon for women (for home defense and such), but these were dramatically smaller and lighter than the naginata of Tomoe’s era. The ukioe artists were probably just projecting contemporary practices onto Tomoe.
As for what’s going on in the passage describing Tomoe’s fight with Onda Hachirou, that too should be taken with several handfuls of salt. Heike and other texts frequently portray warriors wrestling on horseback, but more recent analyses discount these depictions. Certainly it’s not physically possible to actually twist an opponent’s head off (as the translation has it), and it would be very difficult even to cut it off (as the original actually suggests) while on horseback.
The bottom line, I think, is that the warrior version of Tomoe is mostly—probably wholly—a literary fabrication, so it doesn’t pay to get too hung up on the details of how she fought her battles.
--
Best,
--Karl
======================================
カール・フライデー 歴史学博士
Karl Friday, PhD
Professor Emeritus 名誉教授
==================================
From: pm...@googlegroups.com <pm...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of YeMi
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 2:24 AM
To: pm...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [PMJS] Regarding Tomoe Gozen's Portrayal
Dear all,
--
YeMi
Regards,
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pmjs/0ea801da0712%24fd585000%24f808f000%24%40gmail.com.
Sybil Thornton
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pmjs/CAE4f%3DDHjENRWwUMNigwTdYteBPhhdGHjPUf3CmdKKf0j8%2BCodw%40mail.gmail.com.