Stever

Nicely stated, Jean. Everything must be kept in perspective. cheers, /steve

Fine. Reinhard, I respectfully disagree with your statement that the hamon can not be seen as I have no trouble seeing it. Also, I respectfully disagree with your call on the other thread where you state unequivocally that the mei is fake when it isn't. Brian, I have issues with arguments that don't follow the rules of logic, such as argument from authority as is regularly exercised here by certain members. You want me to leave them alone, fine, but please apply the same rules to them when they go off on someone else. I don't see why I have to fall in line with others' prejudices. >>I often wonder if people spent as much time and effort on studying Nihonto as they do on their own particular personality clashes here..how advanced would they be in their studies? Don't assume that this prevents progress in the field. The two things are not related in any way. Human nature I suppose to make such assumptions, but they are false. thanks and goodnight, /steve

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I haven't delved that deeply into Muramasa school yet, but it looks pretty nice with interesting activity (I especially like that boshi, and the ji nie that seems to coalesce almost into muneyaki at one spot) and there don't seem to be a lot of pieces changing hands so I guess I wasn't surprised the price was high. I think Ted's nailed it as well with the 'mystique' aspect of Muramasa blades. I wouldn't doubt many sellers (and buyers) put a premium on them for this reason. Interesting info about the papered Nidai sale. I guess I'll have to keep my eyes more open. The Bungo Tomoyuki in that link is interesting, though the shape doesn't 'do it' for me. It wouldn't be a bad thing to have an item with a (documented) history to it, but definitely not the primary concern. John, do you know if Sano did a catalogue of that exhibit? Do they do this exhibit often? cheers, /steve

Hi Peter, could you explain why you feel it's massively overpriced? Honest question; I'm genuinely interested in hearing your explanation. I wonder if some items disappear from the site to get polished? Just a thought. thanks, /steve

Scallop shells, cool! Haven't seen one like that before, very nice. cheers, /steve

Very interesting to see the differences in interpretation between high-level exponents of the same ryuha. From austere to flashy, and straightforward to intricate. The control, concentration and intent are obvious. cheers, /steve

Thanks a lot, guys. Ted, that is very much the direction I was thinking in. It takes skill to make a copy, but it also takes artistry to imitate form and style as well. This is an entirely different level of fake, almost going so far as to require the faker to "be" the artist he is faking. The almost ephemeral aspects of the creation of top class nihonto would seem to make it so, in my thoughts. In regards to utsushi-mono, I agree that they are done with reverence in mind; my question was more in a devils advocate mode regarding the view that copying requires no creativity. I'd like to see you say that to Ono Yoshimitsu's face! cheers, /steve

I don't disagree with that statement, but where do utsushi-mono fall if that's purely the case. Also, it seems to me that Kajibei was copying styles and workmanship, not the exact details of a single piece, which could be argued to require creativity and artistry as well. Particularly if he was able to do this with many different smiths. Did Kajibei ever make blades that weren't passed off as someone else's work? cheers, /steve

Ok, here's a really stupid question for you: If Kajibei was "capable of copying workmanship of top-class ShinTo masters", and could perfectly copy their signatures as well, doesn't this immediately make him a master himself? Why the concern about gimei, if the workmanship is the same and so is the signature? cheers, /steve

Hi John, I believe those last two are Hokkien and Teochew dielects, FWIW. cheers, /steve

Hi Brian, Sorry for starting this crap again, but the issue I have here is that it's all well and good to put persons with whom you have conflicts on ignore, but when said persons are also among the most knowledgeable on the subject it seems a lot like cutting off your nose to spite your face. While I can understand the frustration, needing to put site mods on ignore seems a little extreme. Seems to me like there are 2 points of view here with respect to moderators: either that they shouldn't be questioned due to their position on the site and experience (implied here is: no matter what they say), or they should use their position of authority on the site with respect to all other users. The remarks regarding questions from newbies are besides the point - it's not so much the newbies asking questions I am concerned with as those that don't post and other lurkers that haven't even signed up. I suspect that these groups are much larger than the posting community and deserve consideration. As to remarks regarding knowledge, backgrounds, and desires of those that visit this site, I don't think anyone here has enough information to make such a call. Also remember that not everyone here has English as a first language, and sarcasm (no matter how well-intended) may be lost on a large portion of visitors. Finally, to add to your counter point: I would think if yubashiri is such a ridiculous suggestion it would be worthwhile to explain why. This has been explained now, but still not thoroughly and not until after my post stirred things up. I'd love to contribute more to this site, but knowing the disdain with which my level of experience and knowledge is viewed around here (especially by moderators) prevents me from ever doing so. cheers, /steve

Gee, Guido...for a moderator, you sure are an ass!

Hi Brian, Precisely the source of my confusion, thanks! cheers, /steve

Uhhh, just out of curiosity, did anyone else notice the striking similarity between Ludolf's tsuba and the one Brian posted from the MFA? They appear identical, does this suggest one is a copy of the other? Would Teruhide have produced multiples of the identical design? cheers, /steve [edited to add file]

Thanks, Mark. I was looking in the Toko Taikan, now that I look in Fujishiro's, it actually looks closer to Kanesada I than III! Mayhaps it's a gimei of Kanesada I? I should clarify, though: I don't actually think it is by either I or III as the characteristics don't really seem to line up. Though I do have to say it would be really cool if it did turn out that way. I was thinking more along the lines of a possible early Aizu Kanesada smith, though I haven't been able to really find any decent mei examples to really narrow anything down. cheers, /steve

Hi All, I'm hoping your collective knowledge (and libraries! :D) can help me with a tanto that has come into my possession. It's hirazukuri with a 10 5/8" / 26.9875cm / 8 sun 9 bu nagasa with ~1/8" / 0.3cm / 1bu sori. Nakago jiri is iriyamagata bordering on kengyo, signed Kanesada. The blade is unfortunately in piteous state, looks to have been used for polishing practice. Even through the scratches I can still make out the hamon, which seems notare-midare with tons of activity. On one side, there appears to be a double habuchi. There also seems to be some muneyaki, but I'm not sure about this. I also can't really make out the boshi. Anyhoo, I was wondering if anyone might be able to help me track down which kanesada this might be and whether it may or may not be gimei (looks a little like Kanesada III). I'm trying to decide if it is worth my while to have it polished and sent for shinsa or not. Here's some pics of the mei and sugata: cheers and thanks in advance, /steve

Ouch. Oh well, it's been fun while it lasted. Guess I should start looking into selling things off. I'd hate to think of what might happen if they're put into storage. Maybe I can get some trips to Japan in to make up for it! cheers, /steve

Hi folks, It seems I may be moving to Malaysia in the near future, which is good as it puts me that much closer to Japan, but I heard some disturbing information that it may not be possible for me to bring my collection with me due to Malaysian import restrictions. Does anyone here have any familiarity with Malaysian import laws, specifically as they relate to importing blades (antique or modern)? Any such information would be very much appreciated. I don't want to have to sell everything off if I don't have to! thanks, /steve

This is the Sadakazu from Mike Y, correct? Starting bid US $15,000.00 Buy It Now price: US $30,000.00 link: http://cgi.ebay.ca/Japanese-Samurai-Swo ... 0241247491 cheers, /steve

Yes, looks like kitae ware (forging flaw/delamination). I wonder, is that line at the machi a form of hagire? Maybe not as serious as a vertical one, but it looks like a crack to me. Nice sword, though. I always like sunnobi tanto and/or hira wakizashi. /steve

Interesting. This makes me wonder about mei on other small items. If we follow Reinhard's logic, would this also make mei on yajiri suspect? If not, why not? cheers, /steve

I believe you are absolutely correct on this point, Moriyama san. It is the same in english, most people (who don't work with it) don't know the difference between hardening, tempering, annealing, and normalizing. Removing the hamon to start again would be either annealing or normalizing. Tempering isn't enough to erase the hamon. Out of curiosity, I wonder if a smith would consider a blade on which he wasn't happy with the hardening and redid it, if he would consider this blade saiha? cheers, /steve

For those that are interested, here are a couple of snaps taken with one of these things, with different lighting (the LEDs have 3 settings: off, low and high). I picked one up for work (;D) from eBay (just search "usb microscope") for ~$60. 1.3 megapixels, 10 - 200x. Resolution isn't the best and focusing is a bit of a pain (the image isn't very stable while using focus). One thing I did notice while using this thing that I hadn't previously noted, is the poor polishing job in certain areas of the kogatana I used as a guinea pig (see the scratches on the ha in the first snapshot). Thanks, Stephen for pointing these out. cheers, /steve

Maybe this is more hair-splitting, but... Much is spoken of "grades" of swords, indeed the NBTHK and the like have systems of grading that group blades into different levels. However, even the published criteria don't specify aesthetic requirements other than in vague terms. Say we have two swords, virtually identical in sugata, hada, hamon, hataraki, but one has more kinsuji than the other. Or one is nie deki and the other is nioi deki. Which is better? Which is more desirable, from an aesthetic standpoint? Which would get a higher ranking from the NBTHK? The real problem is that when is comes down to details, things are very subjective. I've often seen statements that are condescending to those who prefer big flashy hamon, yet this would seem to contradict the indications that a lot of activity is desirable (no, I'm not confusing activity with complex patterns, just that there is often much going on in large midare, gunome and choji hamon). This stems from the aesthetic, and I would respectfully submit that this is why I disagree with Guido's quoted article. Yes, there are well-defined criteria, but they are only half the story. On the other hand, much of what is deemed desirable in nihonto stems from functional parameters (i.e. whether or not it was a good, functional blade that would stand up in battle). There is an example in Nagayama's where he is talking about ara-nie and ko-nie, and mentions that other types of nie are not particularly desirable. Why is this - is it because of artistic sensibility or is it considered a flaw in workmanship? The different (individual and cultural) aesthetic sensibilities involved don't make it any easier. Is one better than the other? If so, why? I'd love to see a discussion like Ford mentioned that follows stylistic developments from an aesthetic point of view. Several different authorities over the years have also tried to come up with various ranking systems as well, yet all are deemed to fall short in some way, why is this? Perhaps a discussion along the lines of Ford's suggestion could bring us closer to a viable system? cheers, /steve

What about what the blade actually is, regardless of mei? Even if it's not what it purports to be, wouldn't it at least be a good exercise to try and figure out what it really is? Wouldn't the ultimate determination of gimei be, "it can't be a Kotetsu, because it's obviously by X"? Just thinking about the adage of the mei just being confirmation of what the blade is telling us. cheers, /steve