anatomy of axe<\/a> to refresh your axe terminology.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFour Reasons Why a Nata is Not a Hatchet<\/h2>\n\n\n\n1) Axes have a Handle Longer than the Blade<\/h3>\n\n\n\n In my opinion, in order for a tool to be an axe (or hatchet) it will have a handle longer than the blade. If the blade is longer than the handle it isn’t an axe. While some nata do have a handle longer than the blade, many nata have a blade over twice as long as a handle. This puts it into machete or knife territory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2) Axes have a Poll opposite the blade<\/h3>\n\n\n\n Additionally, axes have a poll (or butt), even if it is short, where the blade is at least partially offset by weight opposite the blade and further past the handle. There are a few exceptions to this, such as a fireman’s axe that has a spike instead of a poll or a double-bit axes where the poll is replaced by another bit and some tomahawks or battle axes which have no poll at all. However, axes that have no poll still have the other three characteristics mentioned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I have not seen a nata that has a poll.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
3) Axes have a Cutting Edge located multiple handle-widths beyond the handle<\/h3>\n\n\n\n Axes have a cutting edge that is spaced out multiple widths away from the handle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The cutting edge of a nata is often within one handle width of the handle itself. The blade of a nata is not far enough out from the handle. This causes it to look and function more like a knife, cleaver or machete. I have seen some nata that have a cutting edge that extends multiple handle width beyond the handle which makes them more axe-like.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
4) Axes have a cutting edge that is longer than the cheeks<\/h3>\n\n\n\n On an axe the part of the head that is perpendicular to the handle (the cheeks) are shorter than the cutting edge. There are some splitting axes which have a cutting edge about the same length as the cheeks. In these exceptions they have the previous 3 characteristics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I have not seen a nata that has a cutting edge that is longer than the cheeks.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThis is an axe: 1) The handle is longer than the cutting edge 2) There is a poll that extends beyond the handle 3) The cutting edge is more than 1 handle length away from the handle (orange lines) 4) The cutting edge (red line) is longer than the cheek (blue line)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\nThis is not an axe. 1) The handle is shorter than the cutting edge 2) There is no poll 3) The cutting edge is less than 1 handle length away from the handle (orange lines) 4) The cutting edge (red line) is shorter than the “cheek” (blue line)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\nThe Most Axe-Like Nata<\/h2>\n\n\n\n Below is a picture of the most axe-like Nata I’ve seen. I might even be willing to concede it is a pseudo-hatchet. But it is not a true hatchet. It’s not a hatchet because it only has 2 of the characteristics listed above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/figure>\n\n\n\nThe nata above ticks a couple axe boxes. First, the handle is longer than the blade. Second, the cutting edge extents multiple handle-widths beyond the handle. However, it has no poll and the cutting edge is not longer than the cheek. So it only ticks 2 out of 4 attributes axes have. It would need to have the cutting edge be longer than the cheeks or a poll or some kind offset for me to consider it a hatchet or axe. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Axes often have all four of the above characteristics and at a minimum have three of them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Nata is axe-like but not an Axe<\/h2>\n\n\n\n There are some similarities with some<\/em> types of natas and some hatchets. However some natas are much more in the machete or knife category and have few similarities with axes other than having a handle and sharpened edge. I think it is much more useful and consistent to separate a nata from axes and hatchets. Birds and bats have similarities but that doesn’t mean that bats are birds or bats are birds.<\/p>\n\n\n\nI realize that one could cite various sources (like the erroneous definition at the beginning of this article) that refer to a nata as a hatchet (and also a froe, really?). But clearly a nata is in a different category from a hatchet or one handed axe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I’m not anti-nata. I’ve never used one but I think natas look cool. I have a great affinity and appreciations for Japanese tools and weapons. However, I think that describing a nata as a hatchet is confusing, inconsistent, wrong and shouldn’t be done. A nata is not a hatchet.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Japanese Nata is often referred to as a hatchet. It’s time that this Japenese machete stops pretending and admits it is not a hatchet. I explain why. First let’s define what an ax and a hatchet are, starting with the dictionary definition. Source: https:\/\/www.merriam-webster.com\/ Here is a definition of a Japanese nata. The source […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":979,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"off","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,10],"tags":[35,34],"yoast_head":"\n
A Nata is not a Hatchet - Ancient Path Workshop<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n