Peter Bleed

I am blown away by this DATED Nobufusa. It requires lots of rethinking - on my part! I have generally felt that bi-lobed tsuba - which John Lissenden called "Auriculate" - were a feature of the the Namban style - and further that they were copied/inspired from European small sword guards. That would place them comfortably in the 18th century. But, TAHHDAHHH here is a strongly auriculate tsuba dated in the 1500s. The world is a complex place, I guess. Peter

very interesting bit of script! Please show us the whole guard Peter

I came to this party late and had no problems opening the images. But I have to agree that this arms looks to me(!) like it has been bobbed off - in a "non-arsenel rework". I recall being is a country antique shop somewhere in Tohoku in the old days and the guy had a couple of front stock sections laying in a box. I asked what they were and he explained that he had cut them off of guns. I asked "why" and his total explanation was "To make them shorter." My conclusion is that Japanese arms modification reflects a variety of forces! Peter

Indeed, in 2002 I was THE outside evaluator on Dr. Lissenden's graduate committee. I came to that august post because his graduate advisor at the University of Durham was Gina Barnes, who knew me as an archaeologist- and a sword collector. His thesis was part of a MASTER'S program. And I think that Gina probably had John do some very archaeological things in the thesis. All that stuff he did on size/thickness looked to me like the sort of thing that an archeologist of would do to describe some artifacts. Likewise, his typology looks pretty archeological. I too appreciated conversations with John, He was responsive and insightful. I showed him the piece I published in Man at Arms on Namban copies of European smallsword guards and appreciiated his comments. And I have to agree that the cast cuprous disk that got this thread started has NOTHING to do with Namban tsubas. Peter

I agree with Neil et al. We gotta see the tang. The boshi looks like it must be "thin" at best. Peter

I arrived at Tampa expecting to "share" a table so I brought only a couple of blades. I also had a BUNCH of katchushi tsuba that I thought might attract some attention. I spent little time sitting behind the table I ended up with. I certainly did not flog my stuff, but action was slow. As far as i can tell no one examined my tsuba and i got rather few hits on the blades I set out. Marketing matters and simply putting some items out ain't enough. I did not see one Sendai shinto - not one! To be sure, I enjoyed seeing friends. The NBTHK-AB Hizen show was worthwhile. Overall, tho, the Show was pretty flat, IMHO Peter

American sword shows are NOT good places to see and display fine swords. One may try that, thank you very much, but basically, a weekend event can only be a place to "flash" and scan swords.. Sometimes you can look closely and even discuss particular items with others . But basically, a weekend "event" has to be about discovery - ie. buying and selling. In the old days we could all do some local discovery and use shows as mid level selling/trading opportunities. That doesn't work anymore because 1) discovery is tough, and 2) the market is pretty flat. What should be do? My I suggest that we need MORE and different sword shows. MORE shows, Anybody who can count 6 other collectors within 2 hours of their home ought to organize a sword show. Cheap, easy, and FUN. The trouble may be that our model for a "show" is big. The Minneapolis show seems to have been well received - by the small number of folks who were there. Heck, two guys and a juto makes a good show, screw the motel! The New York crowd seems to be moving is a great direction..., Arkansas maybe not so good. DIFFERENT shows, The need to see new and potentially good swords, ie DISCOVERY, can no longer happen at sword only shows. Thus, I think the sword crowd ought to find a way to meet one another AND OTHERS by going to BIG antiques arms shows. If there was an area with a group of Japanese sword collectors at an good arms show, we could have it both ways. Peter

I think that this question is worth asking - as we so often do -if only becasue it helps us understand why there are SO MANY Japanese swords. Why can we know so much about Japanese armaments of the past 1000 years - as compared to what can be said about comparable aspects of weaponry from China, Europe, or - well - anywhere else. Why did Japan KEEP its swords and maintain such great records about them? Where are all those tens of thousands of Japanese blades that went to China? yahhh dahhh yah dahhh And with the official registration records that have been developed and maintained in the recent past, why can't we say within a gnat's ass how many swords there are? Count'em up! Peter

I have often said that - IF it had come down to swords, Japan would have won WWII. If the people who designed officers' swords had been assigned to aircraft or tank design, just imagine what wonderful weaponry they could have come up with. Instead, what they got was an over designed bit of late medieval armament. P

Getting ready.... what to bring? how to price?... Peter

I see it as a Munemitsu not a yoshi... P

and it has his age too, right? Peter

Gary, Your guns are wonderful, but I am interested in YOU. Where and how did you discover these weapons? What you think about them? What are your special interests and discoveries? Peter

Its a school name. P

It seems to be impolite to give a signature translation too quickly, but Pat, you CAN read this signature - especially if you've owned it for 20years, The smith's name is down there (or over there) at the end. First name character is, tahhh dahh... TADA. And IMHO. it looks both worthy of a bit of head scratching and polish. Peter

Gary, As I indicated earlier, this is a very interestingly signed arm. I think it is dated Koka 4, or 1847. And it certainly was made in Bizen Osafune, but I simply can't see much beyond that. We need better images - and even then I bet we will come up pretty dry since gunsmith signatures are not as accessible as swordsmith names. I am not sure about the big character at the top of the inscription. I think it is the number 2. Peter

And it is a pretty interesting signature. Is that date a Koka 4 which would be in the 1840s? Very interesting, indeed Peter

Gary, This really is an amazing collection and I have enjoyed seeing both the individual guns AND the whole kit. Very impressive. I would love to know more about where you found these pieces and how you found out about them. What are your plans for the collection? Where will you publish your catalogue? Peter P.S. Would you mind if I tagged another o-zutsu to this thread? P

Gary, Thank you for presenting a really interesting series of images and information! P

The barrel of Number 30 ( or 50) strikes my eye as either 1) shakudo do or some other soft metal, OR 2) buffed so that it has a rounded, 'soft' quality. It is a steel barrel? Peter

Gee, This has turned into an interesting thread. Indeed, I, too, had a Meiji era police or civil official's sword with this kind of modified nakago. I assumed that it was a serious negative condition that would essentially destroy the historical value of the blade. I sold it at a Chicago show to a Japanese dealer - who immediately and in front of me (!) sold the koshirae to another Japanese fellow!. I am glad that the NBTHK is maintaining these blades! I wish I wanted a Kanenaka. I'd bid on this blade. peter

Dave got it At least this is certainly signed by Kanekado. I can't read those middle characters, but I am quite sure they do NOT say Mino ju. P

Looks like this says that this "tanto" was made by NOBUKUNI and is a middle Old sword, which might mean something like the 1400s. The specic dating cycle mentioned looks like Eikyo or 1430s P

Golly, I had no idea, but I have done it and encountered no problems at either end. Dumb luck, mebbe? Peter

I missed the arsenal stamp... P