Peter Bleed

the kashira shows a bird on the handle of a hoe that has a wooden head with an "iron" edge. Peter

This thread has twisted and turned into a couple of interesting directions. Thank you all. I was hoping that these tsuka would get the Board thinking about other odds and ends that have turned up as sword fittings. None of that has happened. Maybe there aren't very many of such things so that these points are what they seem to be - pretty unusual. And YES, the wakizashi did come to me from Ron. I was not sure if I should mention names, Ron. Let me add a few archeological details. Indeed, obsidian - 'natual glass' was a fairy common stone tool raw material in Japan. But during the loooong Jomon era, I think that 'hard shale' which is a grey chert was ther most common raw material. I am sure that these points are Jomon. I assume that these fittings origininated in northern Hoshu. Shigekatsu who made the wakizashi was from Yamagata - as I recall. And the blade is dated 1860. I suppose the tsuka could have been remounted, but it IS a Bakumatsu koshirae. I agree with Brian that these two handles are not a perfect match. But lots of sword that were worn as a pair were not what we would think of a "Daisho." If they were not a pair, they must have fit a model. Brother Trotter's suggestion that this was a sword made for an Ainu is interesting, but I am doubtful. By the late Edo period, Ainu had not had anything to do with stone tools for 1500 year. And the swords they WERE carrying did not look like these. But others have suggested that stone tools had Ainu connections. A Japanese scholar named Matsuoka Gentstsu suggested that arrowheads found in norther Honshu were weapons Ainu hunters had shot into large birds that had not been killed and managed to carry them into "Japan." It also turns out that the famous scholar Arai Hakuseki (author of the old book many of us have, 'Sword and Same') was a fairly serious collector of old weaponry. He was given some stone points as collectibles. He researched these and concluded that they were - tahhh dahhhh - archeological evidence that ancient people had lived in northern Japan. I'd still like to know if people have seen other odd "menuki". And short of that, do people thinks these are collectible as kodogu? Peter

Henry, Thanks for giving us the link to the earlier discussion with Barry's terrific links. I KNEW that something had got me thinking about these tsuka, but it was long enough ago that I had forgotten the specifics. Mark it up to early onset wha'cha call it. I am sure that the menuki I showed are Jomon era artifact. Their shapes are all pretty typical of Jomon points. and as I said, Jomon points did not change very much. Peter

Friends, Please allow me to present a couple of tsuka from my collection. As tosogu, I am quite sure that they would NOT be considered anything more than trinkets, and odd country trinkets at that. But they illustrate how swords were actually treated. These two tsuka came to me separately, and they are less that identical. Still they are similar enough in "look and feel" that it is hard not to wonder if that had been a "daisho." Both handles were in the US when I got them. I came by the larger tsuka first, but it came to me as an isolated fitting. I got the wakizashi tsuka with a sword (signed by Shigekatsu, dated Manen Gennen or 1860) in a plane black saya. It looks to me like a country samurai's sword. The fuchi-kashira are plain rough iron. The wrap in not identical but on both tsuka it is lacquered tape. And both are covered with black shark skin rather than traditional, stingray "same." Here' the interesting thing, both tsuka have stone projectile points ("arrowheads") mounted as menuki. The points are certainly Jomon era tools. Point typology is not very useful in Jomon archaeology since a few basic types lasted fr thousands of years. Still, my guess is that these points are from the Middle Jomon period, or about 4500 to 3000BC. I have no information on where these fittings originated, but I think they may have come from northern Honshu. Points like these are common in that part of Japan. I happen to have done some research on the history if archaeology in Japan, and in that regard I found that collecting arrowheads was a rather popular pastime in northern Japan during the later Edo Period. They were understood as weapon tips and ideas were put forth on when and how they got to Japan. As stone tools, the points are not identical, but they appear to have been carefully paired with small points on the shoto tsuka. The points on the bigger tsuka are - well - bigger. They seem to point in inconsistent directions, tho. It also looks like the bigger points were ground slightly smooth before they were mounted. I find these tsuka lots of fun, but I am not sure that there is a clear "take away message" from them. I can easily believe that an Edo period rural samurai could be in places where stone tools could be found. Can we assume on the basis of these handles that samurai also had the wherewithal to trick out their swords with objects they found interesting? Peter

Thank you all for an interesting discussion. Once again Arnold has given us a rational discussion of the realities of collecting. I remember reading his contribution to the 1972 Dallas session and just not "getting it" 'til years later. As investments, swords are less than perfect. And if a bright sword collector worked hard on learning what Warren Buffet does, he would recognize that developing skill at kantei doesn't make economic sense. I also agree with Chris' observation that "serious sword collecting" is so costly that ordinary people have a hard time joining in. In principle those points of view are correct. BUT, for at least the next generation, I think that Japanese sword collecting will be approachable to a broad range of people - including those with modest means. Across the US and other areas sword are still mildly chaotic so that under appreciated items are still to be found. AND, it is not simply the under-appreciated treasures. As they are being collected today, Japanese swords are "scalable". The great stuff may be out of reach. But Studying the good stuff (may occasionally pay off AND) can help low end collectors appreciated the mass of swords that will remain available to people who want to collect "Japanese swords." Look at how collecting of gunto has grown in the past generations. A lot of fellows who have no idea what a toku-ju might be, have gotten great satisfaction out of collecting swords that can't go back to Japan. My point is that stepping on to the collecting escalator is likely to remains easy for some time to come. And once a guy has stepped on the escalator, met other collectors, bought some books, gone to some shows, collecting will move on upward. Peter

Thanks Brian and Jean, You are right, I should have grabbed an images. I am pretty sure that this is on the very margins of nippon-to, but I will try to click a pick because it is "on the margins" of this thing we do. Peter

Grey said: The hitsu have been enlarged or possibly opened in a plate that didn't originally have any. I think these hitsu may have had sharkudo rims - that have been lost. No great loss, but I would NOT recommend building this guard into a koshirae that has a fine kozuka! Peter

Dear Friends, Last night, a friend brought over a Japanese knife for assessment. It looks like classic belt hunting knife, cheap pig skin scabbard, solidly built aluminum grip with antler/bone slabs with cross-hatched grinding and a bit of red dye. The small cross guard has something like the flowing stream below a Kikusui and there is a sort of "Fuji-gata habaki". The blade is kammuri-otoshi with hi on one side only but that hi is clearly machined. I saw no hit of hada. Here's the kicker. The blade clearly had a hamon. It is certainly Post-War. I read it as a 1950s looking rig, but I have never seen one. It does NOT look like those sexy knifes that the current generation is making to beat sword production regulations. I have two questions. 1) Were swordsmiths making these things in the early post-War era? 2) Are they collectible objects of sword history. Peter

I am glad that John responded to Henk-Jan. Henk-Jan is wrong on a couple of points and we should not errors stand. I think that John and I may not agree completely, but let me add to his comments The "Namban trade" refers to the international trade that Japan allowed in during the Edo period. It IS a Chinese term. At this time, a number of foreign objects were introduced to Japan - bread, trouser, leather, condoms, cake, for example. Some of the stuff that came it was steel ingots from India - "Namban tetsu". That steel was cheap and good, but it was NOT imported to make Namban tsuba. It was cheap good steel. During the 18th century a fad swept Japan for exotic objects. Then - as now - Japanese like fads. The 18th Century fad was called "Rampiki" and it got lots of Japanese to affect "foreign" looking objects. The obvious place that lots of men could show that they were part of this fad was to put an exotic tsuba on their sword. The koshirae we call "Namban" are basically Japanese produced fittings that have designs that Edo period Japanese thought looked "foreign." In addition to koshirae made in Japan with "foreign motifs", there were also some sword fittings that were made in Japan or elsewhere of objects that wcame from outside of Japan. The terrific tsuba made of Dutch coins that Fred showed us is one of those items. This was high end stuff. There were also some Chinese sword guards that got to Japan where they were adjusted for use on Nippon-to. We call those "Canton guard." Those are good, too. The menuki that I think Henk-Jan judged rather harshly show a couple of guys that Edo era Japanese would have found "exotic." Henk-jan feels that they look Chinese rather than European, but it does not matter. They were "foreign" when Foreigners were bringing in Namban stuff. They were exotic. They were "Namban-jin." John thinks the menuki were made in Hizen. I would agree that they were made in Japan, but, Hizen? Well, mebbe. But there were workshops in several parts of Japan that made Namban fittings. Hizen would be the safest bet, but I think that supposition needs further investigation. The guys on my menuki do look Chinese, but that does not keep them from being "Namban-jin." The beards, the trousers, and the brimmed hats are all icons of "foreigners." Chinese merchants were trading in "Namban" stuff and they were interestingly "exotic" to Edo period Japanese. Furthermore, by the time Dutchmen made it around the Horn, past India, thru the Straits of Malacca, spent some time in China, and got on to Japan, they would have worn out their Holland threads and be wearing outfits that included a mish-mash of Asian garments. Let's not be too rigid, Henk-Jan. Peter P.S. Oh, pm sent to Fred!

Thank you Morita-san! You are the best! Peter

Last week I mentioned a set of iron Namban menuki in one or another of the namban threads that were active. I have forgotten which one I mentioned these in, so please let me start a new thread. Are these "Namban fittings" or do they merely present a Nambanjin? And in any case, are they good enough for Fred? Peter

Friends, Please let me beg the insights of the Board. My friend Tim Ott asked my help with a gendai –to he recently acquired. Scan attached are the only images I have altho I have seen the sword. It is gendaito with a mei to say that the sword was made “for” Mr. Masaharu Kaneoka, and “awarded” by the “Central Osaka Something or Other” and that it was made by SADAYUKI who lived in southern Kii-shu, in September of ’44. Interestingly, for a sword of this date, it is mounted in – basically – early shin-gunto koshirae. . . . Well gee. Tim and I have lots of questions. Is there any way of figuring out the history of this sword? Are there records that might show why this sword was commissioned? Are there newspaper or other records that might tell who got this sword and carried it? Can we know the relationship between Mr. “Kaneoka” and what looks to me like the “Central Osaka Neighborhood Association”? Peter

An interesting mei, but I want to see that habaki. Is it curved? What kind of fitting is the blade in? An interesting problem, thanks and show us more! Peter

Nanban fittings are a lot of fun and I was totally sincere in saying that Fred Geyer has discovered some extremely interesting and high quality pieces. I was interested in Namban tsuba that appeared to have been based on European sword guards. During the Edo period Japan was supposedly "closed" but lots of 'foreign' ideas flowed into the country - sugary cake, bread, trousers, condoms, cannons, leather, felt hats, global geographic understanding, Dutch medical texts, oh, and steel ingots. This trade was regulated and routininzed in very Japanese ways. Study of foreign information was called "Rangaku". Use of foreign objects and styles also became a popular fad that was called "Rampiki". In the 1780s all across Japan, stylish guys affected foreign style objects, clothing, and manners. A way of looking 'with it' was to use some things that the community viewed as exotic and foreign. Most samurai could only afford to embrace this fad with low end stuff - witness all of those crappy Namban guards out there. At the high end, trend setters in foreign style were ranked and discussed in the popular press. And the economy was doing really well so there were lots of rich guys who could afford really nice foreign geegaws. That is what I think the coin tsuba is. It is the equivalent of a platinum Hello Kitty. Peter

David and all Others, Thank you very much for this interesting and highly informative discussion. It has been detailed and expert and dealt with issues that we all can use. This is the kind of discussion that shows why and how the NMB can work. Peter

One hates to 'explain' a quip, but I hope you realize that I did intend my comment as a pun. As in, to announce that famous Hizen smith, we could say, "Tahh, dahhh, Hiro!" Peter

Mark is right, Tahhh dahhh Its real showa Masayuki Peter

Let me add to the voices who have found this thread useful and interesting. We have discussed situations where papers etc are 1) fake, 2) dated, or 3) questionable. And covered how papers should be regarded and the ethics of their presentation. What about situations where a sword receive an evalaution that isn't "bad", simply modest. I'm thinking a blade I submitted to shinsa. It is big, ubu, healthy, signed and dated (but not very legibly), and clearly "old". The papers it got were positive altho they wouldn't even speculate about the mei, ignored the nengo, and stopped way short of the evaluation I was hoping for. This sword is collectible with the papers it earned. But if I were to bring this sword to a show, I think some collectors would be attracted to it as a "sleeper" with "up side potential". There are collectors who would rather hope that there is a "pig in the poke" than be told that it is merely a perfectly good cat. Solved riddles are less interesting than challenges. Am we obligated to dash the hopes of potential buyers? Peter

talks cheap, guess are cheaper! Mino Senjuin Why? Well, why not, but there is that masame Peter

Indeed, I agree that this is a gunto. It seems to have a poorly struck Cherry-blossom "Sho(wa) Stamp. The signature is poorly cut too, but I read it as "Seki-ju Kanesada." Peter

Hoanh, Terrific work and a very positive result. Better than anyone could have expected. Like everyone else I am sure the brass will take care of itself. Given the overall condition and integrity of the guard, I think you ought to very carefully inspect it to see if you can reconstruction how the twisted brass wire strands were inset. I just bet that if you carefully inspect the joints you will be able to figure out which wires were placed first. and from that, I bet you will be able to determine where the inlay started and how it progressed across the iron plate. I'd love to read that article! Peter

Congratulations, INDEED! Please show us the entire article. Peter

Unlike most translation requests that I discover only after there have been a couple of responses, this thread was great fun. There was a tease, an easy discovery, then a couple of trustworthy assessments. I am dying to find out if the blade fits that saya. And I will push things ahead a bit. The saya-gaki with a date looks a whole lot better than the mei - which could have been cut with a screw driver. Or maybe, the saya-gaki writer ignored the signature and told us who he thought made the blade. Peter

To briefly add to my earlier contribution, I recall at least one early player active in the sword boom who not only signed but also "tempered" blades. That sort of activity could create the obvious fire scale that this sword displays. I think there is no question that this is a Japanese blade. It is also clearly junk. As io look at it, tho, I think it may reflect aspects of sword history. If an American is not responsible for its current appearance, I wonder if it spent some time in the hands of soldier operating on western or northern China. Isn't that brass fitting on the scabbard of this sword one of those fittings on the side of Russian scabbards that held the spike bayonet of a Mosin-Nagant rifles? Peter

Chris is right, "chinoiserie" could be a good fair guess for this sword. But there is another potential since aspects of this sword look pretty Japanese. In the 70's and early 80's, when sword buyers were actively running ads and spending money, many of the players were very naive and the level of skill and understanding was generally low. So were prices, of course. In that context there were Americans who 'signed' swords and made other improvements that were intended to make unsigned blades more salable to gun slicks and others who thought that they could make money on "signed" blades. I recall one fellow who said his "mei" was "Masahira" or sometimes "Hiramasa". Peter