Gakusee

Alex, at least it is a step in the right direction.

Brendan, it is not easy. In fact it has become more difficult in the last 20 or so years but people need to read and prepare throughly. “Talking to collectors” does not cut it anymore. Attention to detail and familiarity with the law are important. Please also refer to the separate thread about Royal Mail / Parcelforce. There is some misunderstanding in that point too.

Brendan - thank you but did you even open the link I posted above? We have explained all of that and much more.

Let us hope for a positive outcome. One needs to be patient and well informed and have the right documentary back-up evidence.

Alex Not quite true. We emailed all of our ToKen members with this here: https://to-ken.uk/re...egal-and-import.html People need to refer to what we have discussed on this board several times and also to references on this and other websites. That is why the Token committee and John in particular (big shoutout to him) drafted this guidance note.

I have worked with Shiho Tsukada san and her team. They are good and helpful and my purchases have always arrived promptly.

John, however this blade is signed and dated…. Therefore the mumei exclusion condition does not apply here.

Brano - you have some amazing swords. And you like sashikomi, as we have discussed with you several times. Applying uchiko (with the usual caveats: carefully, gently, using the best polisher uchigumori powder you can find etc) on sashikomi polish blades has a lower visual impact (as the website of the Kashima sisters that Brian linked explains) since the approach to the polish is different in the finishing stage. In fact having seen blades that have been uchiko-ed many times, I have noticed that a hadori polish after years of uchiko starts to look more like sashikomi (despite the nugui stage being different). It is the abrasiveness of that powder that 'brings out' artefacts that might not have shown before or could have been hidden in the kesho method. But as we know, the polisher could also achieve that with uchigumori, if he were to keep at the sword - again, it is a matter of time, cost, desire etc. So, I am still of the belief that if the polisher wanted to and had the time (not rushed or pressed by other means), could achieve the 'multiple year of uchiko-ing' effect as part of his initial treatment. This is a contrarian view to the in-house polisher of the sisters (http://www.ksky.ne.jp/~sumie99/uchiko.html). I will be curious to see your tanto 'in progress' next time we catch up. In effect, you have continued the sashikomi work of the polisher by using hazuya powder....

So, Franco it is perfectly natural for a student to charge a different fee to a mukansa smith. That entails different economics but also different skill levels. Saito san commands the highest prices in Japan because he can rectify polishing disasters or bring swords back to life. A mere deshi might not be able to do that. Polishing time, techniques, expertise and skill deservedly are rewarded with higher fees, which might not be in accordance with everyone's budget. Even Tsurura san, once upon a time, not so long ago, would differentiate between the different 'levels of polish' - see below (not on his website any more). I hope my 'sticking' of the image below is to your satisfaction? In reference to the question below: My conclusion from the sentence below was that by making the ashi 'more vivid' you had made the polish what you and Arnold perceived to be somehow 'better'. In other words, you have implied that the initial polish did not show the activities and detail sufficiently (ie, had obfuscated or concealed them to some extent) and your subsequent application of uchiko rectified that situation, so that the latter became more vivid and visible.

This is a lengthy topic..... Uchiko 'dulling' of the blade due to the micro abrasions of the powder over time might have been recommended in the 1980s and 1990s on overly brightly polished blades in heavy hadori. The feeling back then among some was that the kesho was so bright, and frankly obfuscating the true hamon, that it had better be toned down by repeated uchiko application. Indeed, people pursued a hybrid appearance between kesho and sashikomi. Again, in the Western world, firstly people did not have much access to a lot of highly qualified and skilled polishers and we were working off what we had, the understanding was inferior to today (ie shiny hadori polish was the way forward, no matter what) and went as far as believing that there was a 'Juyo polish' and 'non-Juyo polish', etc. All of that resulted in sub-standard or budget-friendly approaches (we have experienced these on this board - if people look back some 6-7 years ago they will find the threads of some promoted polishes which ended in rather pitiable outcomes) with polishes which were just not good enough. There are different budgets, different skills and different polishes suitable for different blades (dependent on their age, condition, workmanship and style). A certain mukansa might be appropriate for a certain blade due to his skill or experience, and another might be preferable for another. A sashikomi might work better for a blade but be less suitable to another. A polisher is supposed to give his best to the blade, rather than leave a user to 'improve' his polish. Such statements normally accompany kesho style polishes and serve almost as an excuse. I have not been told by a mukansa smith or Tanobe sensei to 'go and apply uchiko for 20 years and then you will see the best result'. So, this topic requires much finer understanding of polishing, different styles and methods and the effect of certain stones / uchiko on a blade.

This is a misconception and an old belief. I hear it from time to time from the older generation collector but current thinking is not consistent with that approach.

We are getting somewhere …. You are learning…. That is the whole point of this exercise

Well, please compare those mei and let us know what you think. That is part of the learning curve and pleasure of investigation and improving one’s knowledge. Bear in mind that in the period you reference, the hamon looked different, wakizashi were already in place and signatures on short swords were on the other side, general geometry had shifted/changed from the kodachi (Kamakura) times etc

Then, please provide examples of the nijimei Muromachi Norimune and we can explore. However, the hamon and other features of the kodachi do not point in that direction.

….however, did he not sign with an Osafune mei..rather than the nijimei evident here….. ->Norimine (則宗), Ōei (応永, 1394-1428), Bizen – “Bizen no Kuni Osafune-jū Norimune” (備前国長船住則宗) signature Listen, nothing wrong with having a nice gimei blade that you can live with. Especially if a gift from your father. Mine, as much as I loved him and vice versa, would never have made me such a present and in fact was against “weapons” and such “fads” and collectible “varieties” - perhaps due to his very modest character and humble upbringing.

People might or might not have realised that Royal Mail / Parcelforce recently amended their rules specifying that antiques are excluded from the shipping ban. See below. Of course, you will need to provide plenty of documentation and evidence about why an item is an antique and what its purpose is (presumably a collectible). Since antiques are being treated as “restricted blades” by RoyalMail/Parcelforce, they will need to meet certain shipment / packaging conditions. See bottom of text below. So, let us stop complaining please and let us adapt and evolve. As humans, we have kept adapting to difficult conditions - we might not like them but we have found ways. ———————————————— Prohibited Bladed Items Hunting/combat/survival type knives, daggers, movie knives that promote violence (such as Rambo or Crocodile Dundee style knives), replica fighting knives, throwing knives, machetes, swords, fantasy knives, knives with images or words that suggest use for violence, stiletto knives, battle axes, open razors/folding razors and any similar items are prohibited and cannot be sent . Also see Weapons The following are not prohibited and will instead be treated as Restricted Bladed Items, provided the only intended use is one of the permitted uses listed below: Bladed items that are: commonly used for sporting activities; commonly used for religious or ceremonial purposes (must be blunted); sgian dubhs (must be blunted and for ornamental purposes); being sent to a recognised museum; commonly used in historical re-enactment (must be blunted); commonly used in theatrical productions (must be blunted); and antiques. Note: in order to avoid your item being treated as prohibited, in the event of any checks it would be helpful to include supporting documentation to enable us to verify the relevant permitted use listed above. Restricted Bladed Items Prohibited Bladed Items cannot be sent. However, other Knives or Blades as defined by s141A Criminal Justice Act 1988 or ‘Bladed Products’ as defined by s41 of the Offensive Weapons Act 2019 can be sent, provided certain conditions are met. These include but are not limited to any knife or knife blade, including cutlery knives, bread knives, knives that can be used for hobbies and trades (for instance, utility knives and snap-off cutters, gardening, camping, lock knives, bushcraft and farming tools with a blade or any other trade tool that could commonly be described as a knife), butcher knives (including meat cleavers), felling axes and razor blades. These items may only be sent using the Royal Mail Tracked Age Verification service; this service is only available through Royal Mail Click & Drop Items must be packaged appropriately so items present no risk to employees, other postal items or recipients. Wrap heavy cardboard around sharp edges and points, strong enough to ensure that the contents do not pierce the outer packaging. Wrap each item with cushioning material and place in a suitable outer container such as a padded envelope. The sender's name and return address must be clearly visible on the outer packaging. The outer packaging must be clearly marked to indicate a bladed item is enclosed and that it must not be handed to someone aged under 18. Note: this excludes folding pocket knives where the cutting edge of its blade does not exceed 3 inches (7.62cm) or razor blades permanently enclosed in a cartridge or housing where less than 2mm is exposed which can be sent without using Age verification service. Please Note: It is the senders’ responsibility to ensure compliance with the law. The following links to the legislation and guidance may assist but Royal Mail prohibitions and restrictions regarding the sending of bladed items must also be followed: Criminal Justice Act 1988 Offensive Weapons Act 2019 Statutory guidance: Offensive Weapons Act 2019

We are getting into hypotheses here. We do not know when the sword could be dated to as we have not inspected it and analysed it. No, I am not sharing my swords here….

Per se not an issue. I have owned two kodachi from the 1240-1260 period, both Bizen den. The one I have sold was papered, had the mei remaining at the tip of the tang and was 57cm long. I think originally it would have been a 65cm or so kodachi. The other one (still with me) is smaller, ubu, zaimei, papered and nagasa is 49cm. So we cannot discount it on the basis of length alone. Should be investigated further.

With a name like Norimune, you do stand up and pay attention to the mei. It does not make any sense not to. You look in order to immediately identify if it could theoretically be THE Norimune. Because then you have hit the lottery. Of course it goes without saying that the workmanship needs to support the mei…..I am not even going into that. Since here we are only really provided proper images of the nakago, that is why we are talking about it. The bottom end of the nakago is shaped and proportioned like a Muromachi Bizen nakago, which is somewhat inconsistent with other “kijimomo” proportions. I am not convinced about the mei etc. indeed it could be some other, unidentified Norimune Bizen smith….

Wrong His sayagaki were faked.

I think this is an understatement. Ichimonji Norimune is not just big but it is extremely big. He is the founder of the Ichimonji school ie Fukuoka so this would be as big as it gets in terms of “discovery”. So, yes, if it came from the West or even Japan - it would likely have been tried for papers…… Indeed here we cannot see if behind the suguha kesho polish one can find the kochoji that are expected. What however does not look promising is the mei. The space between the kodachi kanji is too wide and the sizing given the proportions of the nakago do not seem right. Attached are images of genuine Norimune. More compact, tighter together etc. The nakago would have probably been a bit slimmer too….

Well done Coden! Excellent achievement. I remember jointly checking out your other tsuba during the 2023 DTI and looking at its original-inspiration progenitor tsuba. This one is even better.

Looks like he built a rather valuable and diverse collection spanning the historic development of the Japanese sword.

Utsuri: light coloured. Antai (space between habuchi and utsuri): dark

Apart from the V&A and BM, the Tower used to have some tachi and katchu (even though the majority are now in the Armoury in Leeds) and also the Wallace Collection should have some Japanese items. The Japanese Gallery in Kensington is a well known swords and prints dealership, Peter Finer sometimes has Japanese swords, etc… You need to plan these things in advance and not post a last-minute request on NMB. Remember - this is the physical world, where appointments and planning are necessary versus the virtual world of insta-posting