Ted Tenold

Without putting too fine a point on it, the dealer does have point. Like just about everything else, the sword market is based on caveat emptor. Since you had the ability to inspect the sword beforehand, and make a decision in the presence of the dealer, it's a bit hard to come back after the fact. The polisher's discovery is post deal. Had the deal been predicated on the polishers opinion, then it would be a different story. Conversely, we could assume that the dealer did not know it was retempered. Therefore he sold it in good faith. Proving fraud would be very difficult to impossible. What you are referring to here is "disclosure", while the other side of that balance beam is "due diligence" which falls upon you. The thing I see you have a problem with is not whether he knew the blade was saiha or not. It's a matter of his customer service policy that comes into question, and for him this is a business decision. So ethics plays a part, but if the guy genuinely did not know the sword was retempered, then arguably, he may feel justified in his decision and thus feel no compulsion to take back that which he sold in good faith to a client who had the benefit of inspection prior to purchase. Not sure in legal terms how "material defect" would be defined in an antique sword not longer used for intended purpose. Unfortunately, I know of no hardfast code of ethics in the art world that would bind any dealer to disclose anything about a sword. This is not real estate, and thus is not bound by the regulation that one can expect and find when buying a house. You should consult legal counsel regarding your rights and responsibilities. This is kind of where I'm going. All together there were four pairs of eyes on the sword prior to purchase and no one called out "saiha". It was either very poorly lit, a really good retemper job, or too little knowledge as to what symptoms to look for. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to admonish, defend, or accuse. I'm mearly expressing my view of a problem I've seen before in *both* cases; dealer knew and sold it anyway, dealer didn't know and sold it. However in both scenarios, the buyer has to know what they are getting and resolve themself to it regardless of any possibility of recovery after the fact. I know dealers that will take it back for ANY or NO reason at all within a certain amount of time which is generally quite lenient, but that is a customer support choice. It sucks that the blade is retempered, and you found out after the fact. But in the face of your decision to buy it, you share the blame to some degree whether the dealer knew or not. My advice is; definately get a second opinion on the blade by another polisher or appraiser. If you can find a third party that has no equitable interest in it, then even better. As it stands, it is the polisher's opinion vs. the dealer's. If the blade is indeed determined to be saiha, try to settle the matter through sharing the loss somehow with the dealer. A refund, a credit for future purchase, whatever. At that point, the seller's decision will tell you how enthusiastic they are to remedy a problem for a client. Threats rarely make any difference and indeed just tend to make things worse. Expend all reasonable effort to resolve it with calm and civility. If no ammenable solution can be reached, then learn from it and move on. Without conclusive proof that the problem was known to the dealer when he sold it, making accusations or public notices may end up marking yourself for possible legal problems of your own. Just my opinions.

Looking back on it, I think you're right. *Edit*: Okay, after looking at Syd's image, I think it's "kore" again. It's obviously much too late for me here now, and I am going to bed before "kane" becomes "kuro" too. **Re-Edit**: Alright, now I feel like a real jackass... The character is the "No" version of "Sada" that "Nosada" used. This will teach me to post in the wee hours of the morning after a long day.

Now, now, mon petit fromages, let's not get too far off the topic. As you guessed, (and probably to your great relief ), French is not one of my languages. It seems that Muramasa is one of those smiths people either like or not. What I can say is that while at the NBTHK Taikai, there were two zaimei Katanas, and though their existance makes them very special, I found myself coming back to the Heianjyo Nagayoshi. It became easier to see the speculation of connection between the two, but personally, I thought the Heianjyo blade superior work by comparison. That said, there was also an absolutely gorgeous Nidai Muramasa Tanto at the DTI. It was marvelous.

James, This one might be more of a challenge. Kanekore is listed in Hawley's as a Meiji period smith. I have nothing in my library on him, well, except the Hawley's notation. Hope you find something on him.

I suspect this kind of thing was either a purchase by an affluent gardener, or a presentation gift to one from a client that was of lofty position. Given the affinity for masterful gardens among those that could afford them, something like this seems a natural fit.

Hey John, Thanks for the update. I wish I could have gotten over there to see it while I was there. I did get to see a lovely NoSada tanto that was a copy of a Rai. Lovely little piece with nice fine jigane, thick utsuri, and suguha hamon. At first glance, it looks like a Rai, but the steel is a bit courser, and the utsuri is nioi based instead of nie based. It'd be one confusing kantei piece though! Hope you're having lots of fun! Cheers,

No, not necessarily. It depends a great deal on the individual work, the period, the rarity of the work, the size and location, etc.. Some are forgivable, some mearly part of how the smith worked. As an example, Noda Hankei works are often loosely forged which is just a part of how he made swords, and for this fact, ware in the yakiba are not fatal and contrarily accepted as somewhat of a kantei point to look for, as is a duller habuchi which is also somewhat contrarian. Again, the degree of magnitude and location being subjective considerations. Hosho works are another example, and others working in Masame kitae as it is very very difficult to perfectly forge masame works without some degree of kitae ware. Looking at the sword in question, it is impossible from the images to say if the ware are fatal to the sword or not as we cannot see the yakiba clearly. They may not be a detraction after polish, or, they may be evidence that the shingane is surfacing and thus the yakiba may be nemui (sleepy), nioi-giri (broken nioi habuchi) or hajimi (muddy, misty, undefined).

I believe this design is that of a theatre mask as used in Noh theater, in the form of Hanya. Hanya was a woman whos severe jealousy was displayed in these features which are demon like. However, if anyone has ever been subjected to a woman's jealousy, they can attest that it is no less demonic in nature. Oni is a somewhat generic term for "demon". Though slightly similar with features of horns, scowl, and sharp teeth, the Oni most often refered to (often portrayed in conjunction with either the Setsubun ritual of bean throwing, or with Shoki the Demon Queller) was a furry creature with bare upper body, squared facial features, a striped animal loincloth, and long claws on feet and hands. I would agree that from the image, the tsuba appears to be antique, probably early to mid 19th century.

I would encourage everyone to go to the sticky post on usage of this Forum which defines not only "Ebay" but *all* Online Sales and Sellers. We cannot be much clearer than that. However for the sake of bringing it into the thread for clarity.... Feel free to discuss what you see, in a civil tone, within reason, and with purely objective statements. There is no harm is discussing what is clearly and undeniably visable in an item. As an example for the OP's linked item, I would say the things to consider on this piece before purchase are: 1. It is out of polish. 2. Conditional issues are clearly present which may preclude it's candidacy for restoration. 3. It does not *appear* to have a habaki or saya. Perhaps one should ask the seller before considering a bid. 4. The text is not in my native language so there may be information that I cannot grasp, and therefore cannot comment further with any confidence. Pricing is a very subjective matter. Taking an Akom's razor approach (all things being equal) an item might have more demand in one region than another, or a collector might have a somewhat solitary interest in a particular gendre, and thus the price will be accordingly influenced by the demand. So either asking what an item is worth, or establishing a valuation, would be skewed based on personal taste, experience, regional demand, stylistic popularity/demand, etc., etc. Thus the rationalization for not isolating any discussion of pricing. Perhaps it is better to ask; What other items are available for a comparable asking price? That is something that everyone should consider at all times. Stephan also is correct in that the mods are in variable stages of presence. I have returned home, but only now just returning to my own time zone. :lol: Guido and Brian are sporadically present as Brian is still traveling, and Guido was dealing with a dial up connection and a move orchestrated in the bowels of hell. Perhaps it's the stress of the times when all our economies, and thus our daily lives and livelihoods may be in question, but I've noticed more tension and abrasiveness in many posts lately. Even if current events are not affecting some personally, vehemence and aggression are like a virus; easily communicable and hard to erradicate. Please, Gentleman, for the sake of our forum, your fellow members, and the sanity of the moderators, please think about your responses before clicking on that "submit" button.

Matt, Today smiths have the luxury to work in many different styles if they so choose, but they still maintain a loyalty (to a greater extent) to the particular tradition they are emmulating, and won't embellish the hamon within the tradition they are reaching to recreate. Certainly, they have a particular style they most commonly work in as well. The instances that I've seen them "color outside the lines" is when they are experimenting with certain materials or techniques in an effort to rediscover some kind of style, for which the techniques of its creation are not completely known. As an example; the Ichimonji styles (particularly the Fukuoka group) acheived a vibrant and highly active style of yakiba and utsuri that some speculate was done without the application of clay as we know it. So there have been attempts by Japanese smiths to work by this method to recreate an accurate copy of that groups work. The attempts I've seen have been close and quite admirable, but still look somewhat "avant garde" eventhough that wasn't the original goal. So in this respect, they have the ability to work outside the box and in different styles due to the exchange of information that can take place, and the relative freedom of movement in their work. Many smiths today will accept an order for various stylistic traditions. Expanding upon what Grey mentioned also. As you begin your studies, you will also note that in rare instances in the Koto period, there are examples of rather abrupt changes in style by particular smiths. Of notable example would be that of Rai Kunitoshi and Niji Kunitoshi, who are speculated to be the same smith, but because of the drastic change in style so abruptly lends debate to one smith actually being two different ones as it is highly unsual in the Koto period to see such an abrupt change. Changes are most often measured by generations in small increments. Without conclusive written documentation, or a large body of dated works in both styles to establish clear lines, the speculation for two different smiths is logical. There are also examples of stylistic changes in a single smiths working life, such as in that of Bizen Nagamitsu, who began with rather robust flamboyant works that with his maturity evolved into more subtly elegant works. From this, we can look at one of his works in particular and define a fairly close approximation of when it was made even if it is not a dated work. Just some more bits for you to bite. Enjoy your studies!

A "Kao" would be closest to what is known in the western regions as a monogram. Like a monogram, they generally have some or all elements of the characters in the name, but also can have certain designs which are slightly altered from generation to generation.

Notice: Some posts of irrelevant and inflammatory nature have been deleted to maintain thread clarity. Please feel free to continue relevant conversation.

I *think* I can juust make it out. As a guy that was trained and worked in welding/brazing for a few years I gotta say that whoever did that weld was absolutely attrocious. Jeez, I hope they're not putting ships or buildings together.

Shan, I'm almost afraid to ask why the sword "again has chips" after they were removed, especially since the sword exhibits the traces of cutting activity on it. We see far too much activity of folks cutting with antique swords as it is, please tell us that this was an assessment rather than an experience. :| Chip removal is not dependant on one dimension. Removing the chips is merely one aspect, followed by and co-dependant on, an entire sequence of events that balances the swords dimensions, and very importantly, the niku (convex geometry supporting the cutting edge). While the sword may have enough depth of yakiba to remove the chips, there may be other factors in the sword that may not. For that matter, the restoration and *conservation* of a sword blade does not dictate that chips must be absolutely and completely removed. That is a professional judgement, not a mandate. Indeed, some chips or other damage that were results of period combat may be left as a gentle sign of provinance and proof. So the answer is; the only way to know if they can or should be removed is to allow a professional to make the judgement. Having said that, and getting back to the original posters subjects; Robin, what all the advice really comes down to is that the gold lacquer makes an attribution to the sword's maker. However, like any any art, the work must confirm the attribution. The fact that "someone" thought it to be the work of Sukehiro, does not prove it conclusively in the face of no other supporting documentation, or the personal mark of the person making the attribution. The sword will have to be compared to known works by a person knowledgeable enough to establish the conformity and consistancy of your sword to those known works. This process is called a Shinsa, or appraisal, which should not be confused with the context of an appraisal for valuation. The sword must be in a state of condition that will allow it's features to be studied and compared. If is is not, then preliminary procedures can be done to make the features visable to allow this. Additionally, the present state and condition of the sword has to be assessed for it's candidacy for a long and expensive process of restoration. Not every sword is a candidate, and the scale is balanced between artistic merit (importance) and present condition (health). There are certain elements that initially might point to the sword being correctly attributed, but not all the elements that pinpoint the work are visible in the photos. Regardless, a proper appraisal to establish it as a genuine work of Sukehiro and it's restorability, will require the sword be examine in hand by a respected professional. We can merely speculate on it from afar with fondest hopes that your sword is indeed work of this classic swordsmith, but I think everyone will agree that it is certainly worth the steps to have it examined. Welcome and Good Luck!

I have yet to see any umegane done in round shape, and certainly nothing that large. The structure and color are clearly different. This points to shingane imho. If the blade could be examined in hand, one would look for similar structure and color in the shinogiji and also the mune to confirm the construction method and if those areas are exhibiting kawagane loss as well. Even this can be difficult to see though if the burnishing was done to push down signs of that too. Not accusing the seller of any malice. It's clearly odd and he describes it apparently with the same question.

The long extended shapes with long reaching kissaki emerge in the Kamakura period. I'd agree that the crab claws and any really togari based hamon point to later work. Lots of odd and naoshi *looking* shapes were done in late Muromachi and Momoyama, so it's easy to suspect later period on some of these, but still worth checking out.

Pete, From what I understand, the difference between Nagamaki and Naginata, actually lies in the mountings and not the blade shape. Nagamaki meaning "long wrap" elludes to the ebu (shaft/haft/pole) being wrapped much like the tsuka of a sword, while the Naginata is mounted unwrapped. I think Guido found some article about this a long time ago as I remember some discussion of it on another forum. I see them documented or referred to by both terms somewhat interchangably, unless they are obviously of later period Naginata style with the beveled shinogi and naginata style hi. Yeah, might wanna get that one checked out. It sounds very Ichimonji-esque! Hope it's a winner!! :D

I may be an Ebay sceptic, but I'm rarely disappointed. From the article: Wait a minute, so a piano has a "small" amount of ivory? Huh? So do they mean to allow it as a percentage of the entire finished item? Pianos have more ivory by volume than netsuke, and Netsuke are nearly always more than 100 years, right? But one rarely sees anything earlier than a Taisho period piano anyways. Humph.....maybe the Elephants won't notice. Newton's law of fraudsters will apply. So, will Ebay address this next "path of least resistance" to proving the description a fraud? Doubtful.... The Chinese have flooded ebay with all manner of fraudulently represented items for years now. Ivory will become "bone", or "mastadon", or "mammoth", or "petrified" or something even more creatively ambiguous. Don't get me wrong, I like elephants and they should be protected. Some of my best friends are elephants (well "red state" genus :lol: ). This is supposed to be magnanimous? Smells more like Ebay was about to get slapped with some sort of penalty for harboring not just cross border transactions, but *any* transactions they could not ensure were preban origin. Hey, but that's just me, I'm an Ebay sceptic. But this statement illustrates for me the motivation behind it... If they could ensure their own compliance, they would still sell it despite the benevolence our large, grey, tusked friends should be shown. I can see the titles now: Small but Beautiful Old 19th Century Ivory Netsuke I know it's a rant... Save the elephants, well, if it's a *large* piece of ivory less than 100 years old, and not on a big ticket item. Forget the folks getting tooled for the dubious Japanese Antiqueness of it despite it's base material. *sigh* I need more wine...

I believe they do offer Katchu Yogu including different ito for do, sode, kabuto, etc..

Shan, It's not that you shouldn't ask, nor that we mind helping. As a wee tyke, when I did something dumb, my mother would ask "Why did you let him do that?", and my father would say; "Well, some lessons are best learned the hardest way". Thus the comments posted are written with your best interest in mind. That's the purpose of the board and the intent of everyone who generously devotes time to it. Its the approach that you take to it that concerns me (as it probably does others as well). The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome each time. The foundation of knowledge is based on learning from mistakes rather than trying to justify them. Get over them, move on and your knowledge base will expand at a more rapid rate. It's prudent to show things "just to make sure" but what I think everyone will agree is that it's far better to show something to others to *confirm* what you suspected rather than to be told what you knew you couldn't see to begin with. We should all want to guide and be guided, not just be told "this is bad, this is good". So, let me offer you this as a primer; A study of fittings or swords *begins* with the quality of materials from which they are made. In swords, the study begins with the quality of the steel. For iron tsuba, the quality of iron. For soft metal, the quality of the copper, brass, shakudo, etc.. Quality of material, skill of workmanship, age (period), condition, more or less in that order. What you really need is to get in front of some good pieces and *study* them, in hand, up close. Once you do that, you'll see junk for what it is, and more importantly be able to recognize the great pieces when you encounter them.

Shan, this may be a bit harsh, but I can't stand idly by and read these things without a little "intervention". Even in the largest of jest there is often the finest of truth. It's not so much torment as our frustration in watching you torture yourself.....and flush sterling down the lou. The next level above rubbish is junk, niether of which will educate you or leave you liquid to act upon something nice. Yes there are, but no you won't, because your judgement will be clouded by rubbish and your decisions rationalized with advice from Polly Anna. You will not be able to recognize that sleeper piece if you don't know what masterpieces look like and you will not gain that knowledge acquiring by attrition. I'd say enthusiatically foolish, but it's not too late. Save yourself!!

Seems I've been despot-tized. :lol: It's within limits, so it can stay........for now. :lol: Papers say Katchushi and Muromachi Jidai. Saying it doesn't "look" like a Muromachi Katchushi begins to look back to the discussion in another thread about trying to place old round iron guards in neat convenient little catagories of period and school. If you ask me, this is really just challenging the documentation for an already vague and subjective area. If I were better versed I'd offer an opinion, but I'm not on tsuba so I'll defer to the usual suspects wiser in aged things of round iron flatnesses.

I know that smile. That's a fine picture of you Guido. Too bad the divers got in the way.

Looks like: Seki ju Kawamura Masanobu (wo) tsukuru.

Now that's what I call "getting religion"! Careful though, Pete'll put the penguin on ya in a heartbeat. :lol: The aforementioned alcohols work well. I'd also like to add that the Microdear Lens cloths are very very effective at removing oil without alcohol or uchiko and will not harm the blade. Many collectors have taken to these cloths. They're available here which is where I buy them. They're a bit pricey initially, but they are washable and completely reusable. I take a few with me to the shows both to use as fukusa and for cleaning. They are also excellent for handling fittings. Properly and judiciously used, uchiko isn't all bad as long as it's good stuff and not the horid stuff that comes with a Chinese factory sword. On the other hand, uchiko can and will have a long term effect. Looking at many of the old pictures of Kokuho, Jubi, Tokuju, etc., one can see how chalky and hazy the finish gets over time. Given it's a long time, but if one can preserve the polish, then so be it. Now on the other other hand, uchiko does have a lightly abrasive character that will help abate very tiny specks of rust that may begin to form over time. I think that the middle of the road is probably the best approach. Using alcohol and/or the microdear cloths for the majority of maintainance, with infrequent application of good uchiko is a good balance to preserving the blade *and* the polish as much as possible.