Leaderboard

Yesterday, I was at a militaria show. I had an appointment with a dealer to look at a Gunto sword he had for sale. The seller also had this beautiful kogai. I found it very attractive so I made the deal and bought both. Although the kogai is not signed the craftsmanship is above average. To share my excitement just a few pictures. Feel free to comment. Regards, Ed

Hey Glen Okay, while I generally am in very close agreement with your sentiments in these threads, as you know, I do need to draw attention to the quoted selection above, for two reasons. First, there are period documents from the late-Momoyama that record the move of the Shodai and Nidai Yamakichibei, specifically, from Kiyosu to Nagoya in the course of the Kiyosu-goshi -- the transfer of the political seat of Owari province from Kiyosu to Nagoya between 1610 and 1613 (See page 70 of Markus Sesko's translation of Okamoto Yasukazu's Owari To Mikawa no Tanko). These are labeled as "transmissions handed down over time" (not sure by whom and to whom), and which now reside in the Tokugawa Museum in Nagoya (where it is rather unlikely they would be if they were much later documents, say, late-19th-century or later). Moreover, it is known that the O-Shodai Yamakichibei's full name was Yamasaka Kichibei Shigenori, and, importantly, the kanji of "Shigenori" are known ("Shigenori" can be written using various kanji). For the specific kanji of his name to be known -- when he never signed with "Shigenori" on any of his known tsuba, it would seem necessary that there were documents with his name recorded, and it would seem likely that these would be documents contemporary to his life. Further, Yamasaka Kichibei Shigenori was also known as Shizuyama Yoshii, again, with the kanji known. How would this additional name -- which likewise has never appeared as a mei on his sword guards -- and the kanji used to write it, be known if there were not period documents to record it, especially since this was never a name he used to sign his work? Additionally, he is known to have been active in Genki (1570-1573) -- a relatively brief and obscure period to note his active years (in part) if someone were just conjuring a fiction about him well after the fact -- and to have lived in Kiyosu near Oda Nobunaga's Kiyosu castle. He was known there early on as an armor maker, working for the Oda. I think it is good to remember that we may not (or certainly do not) have access to all of the records that may exist or have existed about these early smiths (who knows how many have been lost to fires, floods, etc...?). Sometimes, the mention of these smiths may have occurred in an otherwise pedestrian document, as in the case of the recording of the Shodai and Nidai Yamakichibei moving from Kiyosu to Nagoya (it's possible that they were only two of a number of artisans whose move was recorded for census, or some such prosaic reason). I have looked for, but cannot find in my library at the moment, a publication that mentions it having been recorded that Yamasaka Kichibei Shigenori was sent out into the field by Oda Nobunaga to repair armor. I cannot speak to the veracity of this account, of course, but I have seen several such documents that record quite ordinary orders of various Daimyo, high-ranking bushi, etc regarding very unremarkable tasks. Perhaps this document exists somewhere, but it has never been translated into English or published in many or any books because it does not directly involve "tsuba knowledge." In any event, I have little doubt (actually, no doubt, really) that the early Yamakichibei smiths were certainly Kiyosu men, and then, in the case of the Meijin-Shodai and Nidai, later moved on to Nagoya. In other words, definitely Owari. The second reason I wanted to call attention to the quote above concerns certain logical likelihoods which, in the absence of certainties and objective proof, stand in as "the best available thinking" on a question or issue. Here, I am speaking of the place and time origins of Kanayama guards. You quote Sasano in his thoughts regarding the similarity in construction between Yamakichibei tsuba and those now called Kanayama, and his drawing the conclusion that it would then seem likely that Kanayama tsuba would also have been made in Owari. Two things need to be emphasized here: 1. The similarity in construction between Yamakichibei sword guards and Kanayama sword guards is not merely high, it is so close that no other tsuba-making tradition comes anywhere near these two in terms of the highly specific shared aesthetic sensibilities they express and the peculiar and shared combination of construction methods they employ. 2. While Kanayama tsuba closely resemble Yamakichibei tsuba and vice-versa, nothing else comes remotely close to either one, even so-called Owari sukashi tsuba, Nobuiye tsuba, or Hoan tsuba. No other tsuba made anywhere else in Japan before, during, or after the Momoyama Period looks remotely like a Yamakichibei work, except a Kanayama work, and vice-versa, in terms of specific Tea Culture aesthetics and then also of construction. It is those two groups...and that's it. So, when Sasano posits that Kanayama guards -- in resembling the construction methods (and aesthetics) of Yamakichibei guards -- were therefore likely also made in Owari, it is a damn good guess, especially in the absence of any other viable. evidence-based theory. I mean, where else would they have been made? Kyoto? Well, mayyybe. But if so, they would have really stood out for their "crudeness" in a capital city known for its pride in the elegance and grace of its ways and wares. Do Kanayama guards look like Kyoto's Umetada guards? Or Kaneie guards? Or Shoami guards? Do they look "Kyoto" at all? And if not Owari or Kyoto, where? So, while I absolutely take your point that there is a huge Emperor's New Clothes situation in the world of tsuba scholarship and nomenclature, I think there is some room for a bit of middle ground between knowing 100% that something is the case, on the one hand, and then saying that we know nothing at all, on the other (*We can save epistemological discussions on the nature of knowledge for another time... ). Circumstantial evidence is admissible in Court (in many cases) for a reason. There are, of course, varying degrees of circumstantial evidence, but if one employs sound inductive analytical methods and then qualifies one's conclusions and statements appropriately after the analysis, there is, as I say, some room for this I think, especially given how likely it is that we really can never know for sure many things about pre-Edo tosogu. I recognize that the primary driving force behind your opening this thread is that the above methods are not used and have not been used historically in tsuba scholarship, as your posts have so well pointed out, and that this has led to all kinds of fictions in what passes for knowledge on the subject. The motives behind this are due variously to laziness, to deference (iemoto-ism), and then at timesperhaps to more unsettling (unscrupulous) reasons. In any event, I think it is quite clear that the significant majority of what we read about "schools" and labeling, particularly of anything pre-Edo, is untenable. And while we may not actively be able to really do much about the "traditions" in place, simply knowing how thin are the foundations on which they're built can aid many of us in our efforts to attempt to pierce through the flimsiness.

Welcome to the NMB aka the AWJMB "Arguing With Jacques Message Board", as you'll see, his attitude often attract controversies. But please, no need to offend innocents ones, Jacques behaviour only commits himself. And is not a norm here in France. Many Frenches here will be pleased to help you if they can. Best regards. Benjamin

Yes Enpō 7 (己未) year of the sheep

These are "Hazama" tsuba using the exotic sahari inlay (silver, lead, tin, etc mix- possibly using mercury in the process) that is incredibly hard and possibly toxic in the manufacturing process. Ford said he could do it, but I would say it is one of the times where his bravado got ahead of him. His sahari inlay did not convince me at all. It looked very modern to my eyes. Sahari was also used to inlay gun barrels, as it won't suffer from the heat. Sometimes Hazama (and closely related Kunitomo) tsuba are referred to or known as "gun-maker" tsuba and enjoy a little panache in Japan for that reason. The orange lighting from above doesn't help. Having seen at least 100 of these and owned 4 or 5, I can look past the odd lighting and properly imagine what they look like. For Hazama, the designs are on the dramatic side. I'm not saying I'd want to own either, but the inlay and use of sahari on the Taiko drum Hazama is relatively impressive. I doubt the ropes are sahari. They are probably another much softer metal, like silver. Very unique tsuba, but I'd 100x more prefer to have the skull Nobuiye.

Must be strange for someone coming to a forum just looking for help and end up there being a debate about whats ok or not to collect.

1, 鉄地丸形真鍮象嵌土手耳小柄櫃穴 2. 丸に三引両紋草花図鐔 3. 無銘　応仁 4. 室町時代ノ応仁年間（一四六七～一四六八）頃ニ製 5. 作サレタト伝ワル薄手土手耳ノザングリシタ 6. 地鉄ニ点象嵌縄目切込ノ真鍮象嵌ニ 7. ヨル簡素ナ文様就中櫃穴ヤ切羽台ヲ真 8. 鍮象嵌デ囲ム技法ハ応仁鐔ノ特色也 9. 平成十九年十二月誌[kao?] 10. 付　コノ鐔ノ小柄櫃穴ハ最初ハ無ク後世ニ開ケラレタモ 11. ノデアル表裏ノ穴マワリノ真鍮象嵌文様ガ切断サレ 12. テイルコトニ依リ明白也 13. 保存刀装具鑑定書付（平成九年六月二十日）

Heres one befitting an Ichimonji blade... Tachi Koshirae: Shichiyo-mon (NBTHK Tokubetsu Hozon Tosogu) - Japanese Sword Shop Aoi-Art

What you say to others concerns not only you, but also the people you say those words to. Otherwise, why say anything at all? A little empathy can go a long way. -Sam

I would also caution against drawing hard conclusions based on machine translations of the texts above. Japanese language contains a lot of subtleties and ambiguities which can go missing, or can get translated into non-negotiable English terms, when translated by google or AI. Plus, the translations often stumble over kanji, which themselves contain information that may get lost in translation.

And being Jacques, if it was useless for him he will make sure its useless for everyone, as he does.

What is the subject? A suspended bottle of some sort? Shinto related? Never seen it before.

I am not sure, but it could be 三原住政宗 (or 家?) – Mihara ju Masamune (or Masaie?).

This got me motivated to go through my archive and set aside items where the dating is not secured, though has been theorized and leave only the items for which it has been established. Good thing about continental finds they often come with a sword, which in turn is dataable... so far to my surprise I see solid plates as early continental tsubas, though on the other hand wheel is not such a big symbol on the continent. But still, the flood of sukashi appears to coincide with late Muromachi...

Tom, "adding" a DOTE MIMI is probably less work than cutting it out from a thick plate! It is standard work for a good TSUBAKO, and in your case, it looks quite well made.

So it WAS AKIYAMA who ASSUMED that "Owari" tsuba were made there because of the location inscribed in the signature of the third "Sakura" Yamakichibei, who WAS KNOWN TO BE WORKING DURING THE EARLY EDO PERIOD!!!! So he just assumed that the pre-Edo sukashi tsuba were also made there. So again, everything we THINK WE "KNOW" about these pre-Edo period sukashi tsuba schools are just BUILT ON ASSUMPTIONS, and then ASSUMPTIONS BUILT OFF OF THE PREVIOUS ASSUMPTIONS.... it's all just early 20th Century theorizing that has never been verified by any period documents of any kind... or verifiable EVIDENCE OF ANY KIND for that matter...

Points of note: "THERE ARE NO MENTIONS OF KYOTO (what we would call Kyo-sukashi or Heianjo sukashi, I assume), SHOAMI, OR OWARI IN ANY EDO PERIOD DOCUMENTS" and there are varying contradictory accounts of what a "KANAYAMA" might be... "The Toban Zufu... ~(1716-1736) states "there is a place called Kana Yamate, where the watermark is immediately and greatly expanded, and it is a place of divination" I presume this could/should be read as: "sukashi tsuba suddenly appeared and proliferated in a sacred area called Kana Yamate". "in Kinjo Sokuyose" by Tanaka Kazushige (1839), "the NAMES AND PLACES "Kanayama" and "Yamada" are UNKNOWN". from Sasano himself: "However, since the construction of the steel frames and the first and second generations of Yamasaka Kichibei is quite similar, IT IS BELIEVED that the two are related and that KANAYAMA WAS BUILT IN THE OWARI REGION". well dayum... that's pretty damn close to the original statement that I posted as second hand information from a discussion (great memory BK!!! ). So we actually have NO IDEA WHERE these were produced, we're just working off of assumptions... and solely because Kanayama and Yamakichibei seem to have similar "iron bones" along their edges... AND that's only going off the assumption that the first and second gen of Yamakichibei were made in Owari to begin with (no offical record of this exists... just some other assumptions and quotes like "it is said that...blah blah blah") I mean WTF? Really? THIS IS WHAT OUR SUKAHSI TSUBA "SCHOOLS" SYSTEM IS BASED OFF OF???? We simply HAVE TO DO BETTER THAN THIS, or at the very least acknowledge how flawed it is and start constructing a better framework. Clearly the names themselves are pretty much meaningless and arbitrary. Unfortunately institutions like the NBTHK are still following these narrow sets of school names (all tracing back one way or another to the influence of Akiyama in the early 1900s through his regular meetings of his sword study group) and have been continually ramming in other unknown, unsigned, undocumented tsuba styles into these already existing constructs because they simply don't know what else to call them. They even go along with all the "Ko" b.s. like "ko-shoami" and "ko-umetada" (meaning older than / predecessors)... the tsuba certainly exist, but attaching them to other existing school names is just ridiculousness piled on top of ridiculousness. By the way, the first time we actual signed SHOAMI tsuba is in the mid to late 1600s (early Edo period) and they look NOTHING like any of the so called "ko-shoami" group of tsuba. TEHRE IS ABOSLUTELY NO RECORD OF ANY SHOAMI PERSON MAKING TSUBA BEFORE THAT!!! The only record of a pre-Edo "Sho-Ami" (spelled using different kanji) was only documented as being a "silversmith" for the Ashikaga. Just the one record, that's it, and that's all... and NO MENTION OF ANY TSUBA PRODUCTION WHATSOEVER. Pure fantasy... So there are plenty of really nice "ko-shoami" tsuba out there, but the name is complete garbage and has nothing to do with any kind of lineage. In my opinion, these should be grouped and categorized and given new names based on their "type"... or something along those lines.

I think it is a case of "Give them what they want" - 99% of people would not know the difference. Production line on old plain tsuba

Older blades, who lost their signature and were shortened later to be carried as katana, should be displayed as katana, i.e. with the cutting edge up. No mattter what their original shape and purpose were. reinhard

I'd truly like to see one of your swords jacques - they must be amazing! What do you collect personally?

The date is unclear, but may be Enpo 7 (a lucky day in the eight month of 1679).

Hi Bradley, As stated by others, doesn't make a lot of difference which style/pieces you choose because when you're done the koshirae will be modern and put together by a westerner. Nothing wrong with your plans but keep in mind that, when you're finished with the build, if you spent $5,000 on it you will have no trouble getting $2,000 back when the time comes to sell. Collectors want original, antique koshirae. I think it makes better sense to look for an existing antique koshirae mounted with tsunagi that you can display next to the tachi in its shirasaya, which is where it belongs. If you choose well you'll have no trouble getting your money back. Grey

It's all down to personal taste. For me, a Tensho koshirae in the style seen in the Uesugi collection (including the Sanchomo koshirae).

Congrats Michael. Love the provenance.

Gentlemen, Christmas is coming, we should all be more kind :). I have read many posts of Jacques and first of all I thank him as many others on the forum for his contribution, it is always taken for granted to have an answer for me it is not so ... my work generally leads me to always grasp the positive aspects of the various characters, I agree that sometimes his answers go beyond the limit (Often without reason) and can be considered offensive especially for newcomers but for me his vision that may seem narrow and elitist and his obstinacy in always looking for a counter-proof is still praiseworthy and useful also to deepen the issues, everyone here expresses his point of view and knowing the way of thinking of a person also helps to contextualize his opinion and to relate it to your own according to different criteria, also I personally don't judge anyone in relation to the blades they keep... if you only buy Juyo it means you have money to buy them, not that you are an expert. Even in this post his answer is rude but ultimately not wrong, this is not a piece that should be bought... but personally I think that we should always think of people who want to keep an antique / original piece for display useful for conversation without other intentions. From this point of view the price paid (Seen on another site) is lower than the cost of the tamahagane needed to make the blade... not the deal of the century but it's not a tragedy either... personally I prefer that these pieces are lived rather than rusting in some cellar. @Benjamin Just for fun my last interaction with a potential French customer: Me: Hello Sir can I help you? Customer: Oui Me: Excuse me Sir do you speak English? Customer: yes but I don’t want to speak English Me: Giordy

it is singed on the Katana Mei side, if i am not mistaken .

Stylised Inro or incense burner? That what struck me. Whatever it is the piece shows superb workmanship. Are these pieces usually solid gold or gilded?

That's really interesting, Peter! Especially the part that says "However, from about 30 years ago, people began to classify Shinto shapes as 1) Keicho Shinto, work from around the Kanei to Shoho periods, 2) Kanbun Shinto, and 3) work from around the Jokyo to the Genroku period." Thankyou! Dee

Nice nanako background, and I like the rope work. Very nice find.

hi, have a look on the books from Markus Sesko. Shinto-shi is good: https://www.lulu.com...ko&page=1&pageSize=4 Oli

That's gorgeous!!!! ❤️

The great Kanehira may be a stretch, but it does appear to be an old Bizen blade.

There are mentions of the name Sho A from the years 1489, 1540 and 1571. From the mention in 1540 and 1571, the job title Gin-Saiku emerges. The 1540 mention also states that the Sho A have been in the service of the Ashikaga for generations. This is consistent with the fact that artistic advisors and curators (doboshu) with their origins in the Jishu sect of Jodo Buddhism traditionally use the syllable Ami or just a. Gin Saiku, i.e. silversmith, leaves the range of activities of the early Shoami completely open. It can concern everything from decorations on building elements, religious-cult objects, jewelry, but also sword mounts. I personally believe that there were very few workshops specializing exclusively in sword ornamentation at that time. I can imagine that it was economically better to have a wide range of production. But this flexibility automatically extended to manufacturing techniques and technologies. Which is also an advantage. It is also completely open whether people such as the gin-saiku Sho a Uemonsaburo mentioned in 1540, in his function as doboshu, instructed craftsmen in design or commissioned “collections” of different objects accordingly. This is why there is no typical shoami style for tsuba, as they are not limited to ji-sukashi. As a doboshu, it makes sense to have its location at least near the Ashikaga and the Hana no Gosho. Yes, the first shoami master to sign was Masanori. In a dated work from 1645, he describes himself as a pupil of Umetada Shigeyoshi and a resident of Nishijin. It is also said of Horikawa Kunihiro that the workshop of his master Umetada Myoju was located about 2 kilometers north of the sword forging district of Kaji-Cho on Horikawa. And so we end up back in the middle of Nishijin near Toyotomi Hideyoshi's Jurakudai castle. If we take the late 1580s as a benchmark, Nishijin was the creative quarter for a clientele of rich and powerful people who resided nearby. Everything from the “fashion industry”, Kano artists, Raku masters, tea masters, to the Goto, the Umetada and obviously also the Shoami could be found here. This concentration and proximity of many artists from different visual arts also explains the stylistic proximity of their works and their influence on each other. However, the Momoyama period under Toyotomi Hideyoshi was also a time when class barriers were cemented. The shoami were not aristocrats like the goto. Accordingly, there are few records. They must also have inevitably lost their patrons (the Ashikaga) and thus their doboshu function with the dissolution of the shogunate, and one can only assume that the shoami thus underwent a major social change. Since the Umetada were in Hideyoshi's favor, hierarchies will also have adapted to the changed political situation. And despite all this, the Shoami managed to form regional workshops in almost all of Japan from the early Edo period onwards and had a great influence on other schools, more than any other “tradition”. Yes, I know what's coming: it's all just guesswork and fantasy! But in my opinion, the Shoami certainly have a long history. How the whole thing actually happened back then, just because there are hardly any or no records today, is really not the fault of the poor Shoami.

Trouble with some information on page 5 of the PDF - Modern studies on “Tsuba” started only from the beginning of the 20th Century In Japan 『刀剣会誌』(刀剣会): 1900 onward  秋山久作 (日本鐔研究界の始祖)  和田維四郎『本邦装剣金工略誌』(1913) In Europe  Hara, Shinkichi, Die Meister der Japanischen Schwertzieraten (1902)  G. Jacoby, Japanische Schwertzieraten (1904)  A. G. Moslé, Japanische Kunstwerke (1909) "Modern studies on “Tsuba” started only from the beginning of the 20th Century" Clearly this is untrue. THE 'ORNAMENTAL ARTS OF Japan' VOLUME II by: GEORGE ASHDOWN AUDSLEY (1884) THE ART AMATEUR : TALKS WITH EXPERTS. no. 2 Heromich Shugio : On Japanese Sword-Guards. Dated 1888 "The Scottish Arts Review" Vol.I Japanese SWORD-GUARDS. By J. P. MacGillivray. 1888-1889 The Portfolio; "SOME Japanese SWORD-GUARDS". by Philip Gilbert Hamerton. published 1889 Japan and its ART by Marcus B. Huish, L.L.B. 1889 Japanese ART by Louis Gonse translated from French by M. P. Nickerson. (1891) CATALOGUE of the COLLECTION Japanese SWORD-GUARDS Louvre Museum, gift of Mr. Tadamasa Hayashi of TOKIO 1894 HISTORY OF ART IN Japan Commission impériale à l'Exposition universelle de Paris, Dated 1900

My friend is a very experienced collector and was also a dealer for almost 45 years. I will ask for pictures of the blade. Hopefully he will share it with us. Regards, Ed

Here's the Owari section from Sasano's silver book:

This is clearly not the case given that there are maybe 1000 listings per day on YahooJ... granted a fair number of those are re-posts, but still...

Gendaito Project YOSHIHIRO (慶広・慶廣), Saitō MOTOHIKO (元彦), Saitō KIYOMARU (清丸), Saitō KAZUFUSA (和房), Saitō MASANAKA (正中), Saitō

Thanks for your time, here a picture off the blade

A Rai Kunimitsu without Rai hada. Unfortunately not for sale because of KOKUHO. Rai blades with Rai hada are bijutsuhin.

I'm not sure if I understand your question with regards to treating a katana as a tachi. If you're talking about for example a 70cm o-suriage mumei Kamakura blade, it is a katana (in the eyes of the NBTHK). It was once a tachi and is now a katana, unless it has been placed into tachi koshirae and is being used as a tachi again. Sometimes blades are papered at juyo and above alongside their koshirae, and I believe there are edge cases where the NBTHK wouid call such a blade a tachi when paired at shinsa with its koshirae. However separate from the organization, dealers like to call osuriage mumei koto daito tachi because it helps with marketing their swords (improves sellability, by making the piece sound more desirable). In my opinion you should look at what is written on the papers and use that for the description.

The NBTHK does not generally categorize daito as tachi if they are osuriage mumei, even if they were made at a time before katana were produced. Ie. An o-suriage mumei katana from the Kamakura period would generally be papered as a katana. However, being signed tachi-mei or being ubu from that time period will steer towards categorization as a tachi.

I think the biggest problem we are going to encounter is the lack of reliably dateable complete Koshirae in between Nanbokucho and the Late Muromachi period, it is a bit of black hole, a sign of the turbulent times I guess. For the investigation to continue, I think it will be important to source Koshirae examples from this period, even if they do not include Sukashi Tsuba, so that we can form a base line of what was in use.

The shapes of my gendai collection. All different.

I think the emergence of ko-tosho and ko-katchushi tsuba out of a plain-plate foundation can certainly be seen to have occurred as early as the 15th century. It isn't much of a stretch to imagine a smith deciding to perforate a simple motif into a plain plate, or even for the owner of a sword himself to do so (perhaps quite crudely). Once others saw the motif of a crescent moon, or snowflakes, or a butterfly, it is fairly easy to see how it could catch on and become "trendy." And once the concept took hold, it could kind of explode into more ambitious ko-sukashi expressions, such as that seen in Florian's example above (which I think is clearly Muromachi). But I think Glen's (OP's) thread here was begun with the focus on ji-sukashi tsuba in mind, especially. And perhaps even more so, those that are not the "usual" kuruma-sukashi or kiku-sukashi designs, i.e., those produced out of the traditions now called Kyo-sukashi, Owari sukashi, and Kanayama. Such ji-sukashi designs, I believe, did not come into existence until -- at the earliest -- the very end of the Muromachi Period, and perhaps more likely, the early Momoyama Period. One consideration as regards how early the kuruma-sukashi designs may have emerged: the earliest tsubako who regularly signed their works were Nobuiye, Yamasaka Kichibei, and Kawaguchi Hoan, all of whom lived and worked in the castle town of Kiyosu, Owari, at least for a time, in the 1570s - 1580s (and maybe as early as the 1560s). Each of them made kuruma-sukashi tsuba, and two of them -- Yamasaka Kichibei and Kawaguchi Hoan -- made them as a relatively large proportion of their output. The question here is whether these smiths more or less "invented" or reinvigorated the design themselves, or if they instead were simply following trends in that direction that had already been established by others. There is no evidence that I am aware of that the kuruma-sukashi design was already present and popular at the time of the emergence of these three smiths (instead, I believe plain-plate tsuba, as well as some ko-tosho and ko-katchushi guards were prevalent). Moreover, according traditional Japanese practices, artisans of a kind, such as potters and lacquerware craftsmen, often/usually lived in the same parts of town, even on the same street, and so it is quite possible that Nobuiye, Yamasaka Kichibei, and Kawaguchi Hoan were neighbors who saw one another's works and perhaps even had some conversations about it. Even if this were the case, though, there is something of a conceptual jump from the regular patterns we seen in kuruma-sukashi (and kiku-sukashi) sword guards to the more sophisticated expression seen in ji-sukashi designs representing a variety of motifs, as in Kyo-sukashi, Owari-sukashi, and Kanayama works. Perhaps these can be seen as something of a marriage between the motif expression found in ko-tosho/ko-katchushi -- which presented definite subjects, such as dragonflies -- and the more openwork kuruma-sukashi designs of the Kiyosu masters. The presence of European swords in Japan by the mid-16th century, too, may have exerted considerable influence toward the development of the much more open ji-sukashi designs. All of this suggests a dynamic time in the expressive potential of sword guards in the latest Muromachi and early Momoyama years. Add in the factor of the advent of some tsuba being regularly signed meant that tsubako had gained enough cultural gravitas to put significantly more consideration and effort into the refining of their works than may have usually been the case in the relatively simplistic ko-tosho and ko-katshushi forms.

Florian, but aren't we ourselves to blame? It used to be time-consuming and expensive to submit a tsuba for a hozon, for example. There was also no internet in the past, and in the early years there were only very few dealers with the corresponding goods and papers. But we want papers! We expect every dealer, whether in Japan or elsewhere, to offer his tsuba with papers if possible. And the dealers react and are happy to provide everything with Hozon because it sells much better. The market only reacts to us, the collectors! And now we are complaining about hozon inflation. We are responsible for this, not the NBTHK! The NBTHK has reacted! The mass of submissions was far too great. Now it is limited. It has become more difficult, or at least more time-consuming, to submit ornamental rates or blades.

Omi (no) kami ___ (suriage) I believe the next kanji after Kami is Fuji: https://nihontoclub.com/view/smiths/meisearch?type=All&mei_op=contains&mei=近江守藤

Bob, try 廣正

Practitioners who cut regularly in Japan will simply have their swords sharpened on a stone, without proceeding to true polishing stages (see photo). This takes only a few minutes. As mentioned above, there are also some togishi who offer a “batto polish,” which is maybe around $1000 and not as extensive as an art polish. To the untrained eye a batto polish looks nice though! Not all traditionally made swords are meant to be art. But knowing and appreciating the difference is important. I train with both non-Japanese shinken and shinsakuto.