Ted Tenold

Tsuba = Guard = Hand Guard Though I've read through the commentaries and find them interesting, deeper examination of guards "true purpose" (dare I say existence) and how to validate it seems to wax trancendental. Perhaps the question should be "How are guards invalidated?" Does a guard not protect? Can not the guard of highest artistic expression protect as the pedestrian can? Iron and non-ferrous can not protect to a modest degree of equality? A guard is, as it is so named, intended as such. It's validation emerges in function despite form or material. It starts this simple and everything else beyond this is expression created and creativity appreciated, but always a guard first.

My vote would be the Tempo 10 example (C2). I find it the most questionable in rendering and character.

Thanks for bringing it to our attention. We are investigating the email problem on the site right now. I think it is a forwarding issue due to an address change that was overlooked. Either way it will be resolved. In the meantime, folks are welcome to contact me either by PM here, or my email listed in my profile.

Jean, All of our opinions are obviously just observational wanderings. What I'd recommend is that if this is a potential purchase, kindly ask the seller if they will guarantee the old NBTHK papers will upgrade to current equal level papers to the same attribution. That's really where the rubber meets the road.

Jean, I too have a couple of fundamental observations against Osafune Kagemitsu. 1. The gunome is too uniform, too widely spaced, and not slanted or square cut. 2. The jigane is not what I would expect from the Sansaku. Too course, and not "wet" enough look to it. 3. The nakago does not have sufficient and consistant taper, and the jiri looks a bit too rounded. *edit* Also, the sayagaki does not define "Osafune" Kagemitsu, which with works of that significance are usually defined as such. The features of the Osafune Sansaku lend to tighter, more concise, and abundant gunome with Kagemitsu works sometimes even looking compressed or packed in. I would expect this kind of gunome with Yoshii being a place to start. If there is very clear and regular utsuri that patterns the hamon very accurately, then this might be a Yoshii piece that was mumei. I would think Kaga might also be a possibility, however Kaga is part of Hokurikudo and having masame in the ha lending to sunagashi, kinsuji, etc., would be expected. From your images, I cannot see any evidence of this.

Hiroki, The fact that you are having these troubles, and your interpretation of the terms displays that you don't have the slightest understanding of the process or the materials involved, so I can only surmise that you also have little if any understanding of the sword you're working on, and what materials to choose in the first place. Learning these things is not that simple and not something anyone here (myself included), nor anyone, anywhere else will be able to teach you on line. Suffice to say that this forum is not a place that entertains "Do-It-Yourself" questions in many of the crafts associated with Nihonto, polishing included. The advice that can be universally given is that if you don't know what you're doing, then don't do it at all. For the advice on that has been given so far on polishing, there are a great many fundamental things wrong with it that also show a reletive lack of understanding and application. Before this goes too far and delicate toes become trodden, I'm locking the thread as there's little more that can be said other than leave polishing to polishers.

The hada in Soshu works by the Enomoto are very strong. I polished a tanto by Sadayoshi's son, Sadahito. It also had very strong hada. This is a product of blending steels of very different content in the billet. This was a work style of the Soshu tradition and can be seen in swords from many schools that followed the practice in greater and lesser degrees. I read also that in recent years, smiths are even including "flavoring" steels into their tamahagane which provides drastic contrasts within the hada.

George, Jean, et al., Just a short address since I can't commit to a new post at the moment, but will draft something in more detail in the future. There really are too issues here; tired or diminished. Using measurements on an altered blade are of little consideration when determining the difference between the two. O-suriage swords can show significant depleation in the habaki area where the polishing starts from the nakago which was itself part of the blade body before it was shortened. Tired is defined by a sword having lost consistency or uniformity of essential features, the severity of which is somewhat subjective depending on the work, it's age, and the tradition in which it was made. Diminished condition better defines a work which still carries consistency of it's features, yet the overall mass of the blade has been depleted. Tanto are a good example of how much deminishment a sword can suffer while still exhibiting intact structure, material, and heat treating features. The shape might be a shadow of it's former glory, but the integrity of the work still remains. Arguably, there is a gray area between them that could be sort of an "approaching" tired stage, where certain features are starting to suffer. An example of this might be an area of "hajimi" which is slight muddiness of the yakiba, because the yakiba weakens in form and feature the deeper into the heart of the blade the surface reveals. As with all things in Nihonto, exceptions exist when applying these terms to a sword with the age, tradition, school, smith, etc., all playing a part. A sword that has suffered what could be called a fatal loss due to becoming tired, is not necessarily a lost sword from a historic or academic perspective. Now, keeping the subject appropriate to the OP; I have not said anything until now about this particular work, but there is one image (and we know how tainted judgements from images can be :| ) I have circled what *appears* to show the yakiba running off the edge approaching the kissaki. Jock mentions that he "twisted and turned the blade in different angles in the light until my eyes popped out" to see the boshi and return. This is a bit concerning to me. If the rest of the yakiba is quite visable, then the boshi and kaeri should not be so hard to identify. The sword looks like it may have had finger stones applied because the ji is a chalky white and the yakiba will look darker as this sword shows. That strength should have some consistancy throughout. If not, it could be poor application, or the yakiba in the tip could be soft or absent altogether. Again is the caveat that images aren't always good story-tellers, but it does seem to look like a problem may exist.

Hi Clive, Maybe the obvious question, but have you looked in the Shosankenshu? If you don't have a copy I can look in mine. Other members here may also have copies. Can you post a picture of the tsuba as well? This might help narrow down the maker by work style instead of paging through hundreds of kakihan. Other more fittings oriented (no pun intended ) members might recognize the work and kakihan more readily than I.

Yeah, you're right Pete. I can't read the date on the letter (I don't have my 3D glasses :lol: ) but all those letters to Santa asking "All I want for Christmas is a job" are probably jamming up the system. Yes, it is sad to see the Florida show go the way of the passenger pigeon. It's yet another one to add to the list of RIP's like Houston, San Antonio, and Santa Barbara. I've had some fundamental differences with the way the Florida show has been run over the years, but certainly it is important to maintain these venues as a point of introduction and perpetuation of appreciation. I hope someone will step up, take up the show, and enable it some needed momentum.

Thanks for posting this James. Hmmm, as a member of the FTK, I'm disappointed that I did not get a copy of this letter.

Dr. B., As occidentals we'd like to think that variations in signatures on swords should naturally carry variation, but signing a sword isn't like signing the monthly rent check. Inscribing a sword is the final touch on a very personal work. The sword is not *complete* without a properly finished nakago. Students are taught not only how to make swords, but in many schools they are taught specifically how to sign them and what with. Look at an Enomoto signature and you can see the striking influence of their Gassan education. Gassan Sadakatsu signed for his father for *decades* with only one known example of his own signature prior to 1918 that I know of, which I saw earlier this year and was a shoshin Meiji dated piece. Takahashi Sadatsugu was a student under Gassan Sadakazu *and* Gassan Sadakatsu. So how much variation should be reasonable? Very very little. When it comes to the Kao or monogram, even less so.

As a point of consideration for folks when looking at any Gassan school sword; Gassan smiths are absolutely fastidious about their yasurimei and signature. It is not a matter of personal embellishment for them. As Jacques is elluding, one should really REALLY scrutinize everything to a fine degree with regard to these elements. Just a comment to help digest the images.

Guido compiled a list of testers here: http://www.una.edu/faculty/takeuchi/DrT ... ameshi.htm There is an Ogawa Shigeharu, but not Shigeyoshi. So perhaps this particular tester is not on his list, but there was at least one "Ogawa" performing tests. Perhaps another generation or related tester since the "Shige" is consistant. Like other mei, Saidan-mei need to be authenticated too, so shinsa would be necessary. I will say that this one looks rather crude, but I remember seeing a very crude looking one that was genuine too. At the moment, I can't remember where I saw it, but it was surprising to me that it was shoshin by comparison to others rendered in more pleasing form. Remain the sceptical optomist.

A word from the Moderator.... I'm going to keep this thread open for the time being though I still emphatically believe this is a matter between the buyer and seller. Any hint of deviation from a civilized and courteous discussion and I'll lock the thread again and will disallow any further commentary on the subject. However, I will not allow it to continue to monotony. The issues here still remain between buyer(s) and seller(s) and must be resolve between them outside this venue. The opinions expressed here remain just that; opinons, favorable or unfavorable, and at the end of the day, are discussion between individuals that took place after the transaction. @ Elite Militaria; As a member of the forum it is mandatory to sign a real name to your posts. You can keep the company name as your handle and alter your post signature to Dan K. in your profile section. @Yuzo-san; Welcome to the forum. Thank you for providing us with more information regarding this sword. @ Everyone; As Yuzo-san pointed out, gimei in lower ranked smiths is pretty rare. Many of the makers from this period have little if any recorded mei and work examples. Many recordings are not yet available in literature other than Japanese. However, we must always be on guard. Ask questions, do your research, and gain knowledge before buying anything. If you do business with reputable and honest dealers, they will help you. They have a responsibility to stand behind their own return policies and should if they wish to maintain their reputation. However, *buyers* also have a responsiblity to act in accordance with good business practices. An honorable refund policy doesn't mean it should be used at random as a protective measure against buyer's remorse, poor foresight, or a change of heart. The dealer's livelihood, reputation, and their employees and families also have dependance on transactions. Sell, and Buy, responsibly. As a suggestion; Perhaps instead of a return for refund, the buyer and seller would entertain a credit toward some other item, now or in the future, less shipping and associated return fees, with the understanding that an alternative item would be final, as is, and conclude the matter.

Forgot the images?? :lol:

I had two solutions; Brian's suggestion of clicking the compatibility button worked immediately signalling to me that this is indeed a problem with IE8 compatibility with phbBB. Second, I downloaded Google Chrome which it turns out, is a much faster browser that also eliminatest the jumping cursor issue. It's a great browser too. Gotta love Google.

Advice based on experience can be shared. Experience is always personally gained. :lol:

I have to say (and all I can really conclude) that I really am at a loss here folks. This is not how a community of people with common interests is supposed to co-exist. As much as we all appreciate and admire Nihonto, the element of dignity and respect, both public and personal, should not be compromised in the face of disagreements. Certainly, if harsh words are to be had, then that "public dignity side" should be protected through the provisions of private messaging or direct emails. As a moderator, I can only try to keep things on a straight track and provide guidance. It's not my place to ban people, and I don't want that magic button anyways. That action should be reserved for the spammers and trolls. What I can say, which is also a policy I apply to myself, is that participation is not manditory on NMB. If visiting it and/or participating it does not bring benefit of enjoyment, education, or socialization among those with common interests, then by all means seek out an alternative place that will provide enjoyment. I don't want to see members leave unless they feel they're not benefiting from their experiences here, but I also don't want to see people stay if it makes them miserable. Life is too short for that. Find a beach, a chair, and a beer instead. In the spirit of everything they're supposed to represent; Happy Holidays.

My father used to tell me; "Some lessons are best learned the hardest way". You can try to teach folks, but in the end the learning comes through personal choices. Whether it is a good sword or bad one, a good buy or a waste, is in the end only determined when the sword is properly identified for maker and condition. However, the overwhelming odds are against it being a good piece, and that's where the advice from those that have experienced this fact and really grasp it, comes into play. My advice to you Jock; Buy what you like and can afford. But make sure your purchases are not blind speculation fueled by hopes of grandeur to be affirmed by folks that know the odds. On another note; please don't refer to Japanese swords as "Jap" blades. The shortening may be acceptable in some languages but has disctinctly disrepectful connotations in others. Just a point of dignity for all readers here.

To Elite Militaria; I can find no individual claim of "expert" to persons replying to the sword in question. Opinions, good or bad, can be obtained anywhere from anyone. As someone who collected militaria for many years before the internet was around, I can personally vouch for this one. Mark actually says in one post: Mark sought outside opinions and obtained them. Had opinions been different (right or wrong) this really wouldn't be an issue for you or Mark. Gimei, in the clearest definition means simpley "false signature" in the context that the physical inscription was not made by the person that made the blade. These can be anything from outright misleading or misrepresentations for obvious financial gain, attributions made later by someone convinced the sword was made by that smith, or other reasons, but certainly does not imply the blade is a fake as in made in a country other than Japan and represented to be Japanese made. This may be known to you, but I'm stating it for clarity. I will be the first to say that if you ask 10 different people about a sword, you'll get 10 different answers. Forums.....*any* forum..... magnifies this number. I will also be the first (and have stated in the past) the forums have a very limited ability to judge things accurately from electronic images. Thus, the opinions are of limited value as well. I will also say that I applaud your refund policy as a business and hope that you understand and accept this comment with the sincerety it is meant. Ebay is frequently the whipping post of many threads here due to the dubious nature of sellers that predate on buyers there without regard to anything except profit. You gaurantee it's authenticity and are willing to stand behind that. The essence of this matter is that this is a textbook example of "ask questions, do your research, and know what you're buying *before* you buy it". It will makes things far less complicated and cause a lot less hard feelings. This transaction is a matter between buyer and seller and should remain such. Where Mark received information is less important than how he felt by seeking out outside opinions in the first place. It seems clear to me that Mark had his own questions which prompted his questions to begin with. How he and Elite Militaria deal with their transaction is their own matter. I'm going to lock this thread from further comment, and leave this to the parties directly involved in the transaction.

DIY (do-it-yourself) advice can be dangerous and not really what we condone here for complicated processes. There is not enough known about the piece in question to determine the approach that should be taken. Leave lacquer answers to lacquer pros such as John has suggested. Please sign your posts per forum rules.

Hi All, The new kantei is now up on the NBTHK/AB site. Our webmaster had a rough patch of life and it was delayed, but I think we've gotten it all worked out. http://www.nbthk-ab.org/Kantei/kantei3.htm Have a go! Cheers all, Ted

Hi Alex, I wasn’t ignoring your questions. I wanted to address them in greater detail and I needed to set aside some time. Alterations can include moving up the notches (machiokuri), shortening the blade from the nakago end either modestly or greatly, removal of mei, installation of horimono, or even corrections from the tip end such as on Naginata and Nagamaki where the tip curvature is removed to promote remounting for use as a bukezukuri mounting. In its history, a sword may have undergone one or more of these processes, some of which will eliminate evidence of another such as a machiokuri on a sword which is later shortened. My point on your sword was that it may be possible the hi were installed prior to the shortening of the sword. Determining the maker with any confident accuracy from images is, again, quite difficult to impossible. Swords are a three dimensional study while monitors provide a compromised two dimensional representation. It’s possible that a maker that worked in that style of hi made the subject sword, but don’t take those examples as suggestions of this swords origins. The practice of ending the hi with a margin between them and the koshinogi is to provide a buffer zone (if you will) of area that the tip can be pulled back if necessary without intruding upon carvings closer to the koshinogi, in which case would compromise the shape, structural integrity, and niku of the kissaki. It also puts a bit more weight and strength into a critical, yet delicate region of the sword. Some smiths practiced this as a part of their working maxim, but when looking at older Koto pieces, I generally suspect atobori on hi that end further back unless the maker (or the condition of the hi) precludes that. In swords with shoshin mei (genuine signatures) it’s a bit easier to conclude whether they are ubu or ato. In mumei pieces, identifying the maker can be a process of either including the features and health of the hi as part of the analysis, or separating them from the other features (hada, hamon, shape) of the sword, to determine the maker. If the hi demonstrate certain elements of installation, then one might be able to accurately conclude that they are ubu to the maker. A particular maker may have hi that are very wide and deeply cut for the blade, and/or ends of a particular style, with ends cut in a particular way. These are all clues to analysis. But if they seem to not fit in some way, or stand in opposition to the other characteristics of the sword, then one might have to suspect they were added later. All that said, after looking at your latest images I would add more points for consideration. I see that the hisaki (ends of the hi) look more like nagashi than sagaru (terminating a distance back away from the koshinogi) with the end cut to mimic the shape of the koshinogi. Nagashi is "tapering or washing away" to an equal point rather than the conventional end with the rising cut reflecting the koshinogi shape. The hi are centrally set in the shinogiji so that a thin road boarders either side of the hi. This is ryochiri style. Over time, as swords are polished, there can be geometric changes manifested through the removal of material. Horimono can be one of the most evident visual victims of depletion. Hi become thinner and shallower as the adjacent surface material diminishes thus changing their shape. Their ends begin to soften and loose their original shape as well to the degree that original ends can eventually become nagashi. They can even begin to loose their uniformity of width and the edges begin to meander along their length so they look crooked or squirrely. Smaller hi such as soe-bi can disappear in places and re-emerge along the length of a sword. Hi cut later in the blades history can obviously demonstrate a newer, healthier appearance against the overall sugata of the sword. Polishers must make serious considerations to how much and how far to polish hi and horimono of any kind if they are suspected to be original, because if they are, they should reflect the maker’s intended shape, the period and age of the blade, *and* balanced symmetrical condition to the sword itself. Taking the above into consideration, I notated your image of the munesaki. Looking at this image, one can see that there is a disparity in the termination points of the koshinogi at the mune between omote to ura and an imbalance in the width of the mune surfaces. This disporportion of shape from side to side can affect the depth and shape of the hi from side to side presently, and in the future. In radical examples, this also elevates the potential of shingane surfacing on the thinner side of the blade in the ji and/or shinogiji as one side of the kawagane (and the niku) may have been reduced more than the other. Restoration is many times about decisions of compromise to promote the greater good. Maximizing preservation while minimizing depletion is the primary consideration. The appearance of this imbalance could be a matter of your camera angle, but this can be seen on swords and thus am using what you’ve posted as the example. Seeing something like this compels us to look at all the features of shape and consider if they are original or alterations, and in either case if they are “as intended”, conditionally compromised, or just plain poorly executed. I would say that the new images sway me to think the hi may indeed be original and showing signs of depletion, but without having the sword in hand, we're all just speculating here. *edited for minor spelling errors and clarity*

Neil, Numbers on the nakago, whether stamped or painted are a product of tracking individual blades among tens or hundreds of others in a production environment. Even as mass produced swords, each has somewhat individual measurements and must be more or less "married" to it's mountings, that in turn must be kept together through the process of completion and production numbers accounted for by the factory or company. The mountings also often have numbers inscribed on them to help identify their group and to which blade they belong. Handmade blades (those with star stamps) can also have stamped or painted numbers. Whether they are a product of tracking completion by the arsenal after the smith supplied it, the company that mounted it for the purchasing officer, or the arsenal that completed it, is a matter of speculation. Because they rarely exceed three digits, my hunch is that they restarted the numbering process every month or so.