Franco D

Do we own our swords or do the swords own us? Are we samurai? What is the purpose of practice? What would these swords look like today if their owners had gone around chopping things up for the past many centuries or more?

The problem here is that sooner or later an "art" sword will be ruined by someone who lacks the knowledge and better judgment necessary not to proceed. This is not unlike the issue with amateur polishers. Desire is the cause of suffering.

I see no evidence that this is anything more than a shobu zukuri wakizashi.

Fyi, (to help you get started) https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/search/?q=boy's day sword&quick=1 https://www.google.com/search?q=Japanese+boy's+day+sword&sca_esv=811d106c3f469370&source=hp&ei=teojZ4SVHcOJptQPjr63oQM&iflsig=AL9hbdgAAAAAZyP4xWmsCmhHAvG7sOfjSfkZuoc0xvot&ved=0ahUKEwjEw_7gvLmJAxXDhIkEHQ7fLTQQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=Japanese+boy's+day+sword&gs_lp=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_gE&sclient=gws-wiz

Jussi, if you were talking about an Edo period sword, then perhaps. Otherwise, it would be well to be reminded that form follows function. What was the "environment" at the time in history of the sword being discussed? During feudal times it was unlikely aesthetics took precedents. Form follows function.

That determination is up to an organization like the NBTHK.

The Japanese write that kantei is the foundation for nihonto appreciation. Sato sensei writes in the NBTHK English Journals that judging quality is the second step in kantei (although, it is all too often a step that is overlooked). If you really wish to learn and get better at kantei make it an objective. And as far as that goes, kantei is and should be the collector's guide to collecting nihonto.

Thoughts, Muromachi period shape. Could be early. Narrow hamachi > narrow hamon. May have had chips removed in previous polish. Hamon looks a bit tired to these eyes in these images, just one opinion. Appears to have a Tensho age nakago jiri. It's difficult to tell from these images just how much longer this sword may have been but considering that it's 25 1/2" now, even if you add 7" it would still fall within the expected range for a Muromachi period blade. Full measurements might help give further clues and answer a few questions concerning this swords history? What is the overall length? Width of kassane including nakago? Widest and narrowest points? Thanks.

What little exposed steel there is that can be seen in these images looks like what Yamanaka describes as "lifeless." If that's indeed the case, it makes the question of polish moot.

It is not clear and difficult to tell exactly what is going on with this sword. Needs to be evaluated in hand. Still leaning towards O-suriage.

Leaning towards O - suriage. When? Not clear. What is the widest measurement/point of the kasane of the nakago? Kasane @ mune machi? Thanks.

Additional images of the nakago would be helpful? Length? Nakago kasane? Full length images of the sword? Measurements? Overall length, nagasa, moto/saki kasane, moto/saki haba?

FYI, https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/25760-interesting-mino-juyo/#comment-260547

If it had no real importance why would Mr. Tanobe have talked about it at a Florida sword show? If it had no real importance why would there be mention of it in a Marcus Sesko article? In the overall evaluation of a sword, sometimes it's the additional small details that confirm or deny one's conclusions.

Much appreciated, Jussi. Historical importance is not always readily obvious. Plus, a "competition" where judgment takes place will be open to subjectivity. They do remember. A new polish might even be the only reason for a resubmission, and that might be enough for a sword to pass the second time around. Pay to play. Prepare the best you can (which means do your homework, check all of the boxes, presentation matters), go in without expectations. Again, it could be the sword itself that's not good enough. It could be the polish, too. It could be the new competition that presented an obstacle, as well as the competition from previously passed swords that was too stiff. We don't know what the judges are looking for. Perhaps rarity took precedence over quality in one instance. And then, there is subjectivity. It's never easy. Participation is voluntary. Desire is the cause of suffering.

A few things to consider when submitting a sword for Juyo shinsa. Yes, it is a competition (as Darcy said). The sword will be in competition not only with other swords being submitted, it may also be in competition with previous similar swords/examples that have passed. And if the sword being submitted is not better than previous examples that have passed, you may be out of luck even when and if the sword being submitted is an excellent sword. Another thing to be aware of is that a sword's polish matters, and it too is being judged. Old polish or new polish, it must meet their expectations. Also, more than a decade ago I was about to submit a sword for Juyo shinsa when I was tipped off that a stash of Toku Ju swords that had been discovered were being submitted because it was a Toku Ju shinsa year, and it was unlikely that anything else would pass. I wonder how many other swords were submitted that year with absolutely zero chance of passing? Their game, their rules. Entry is voluntary. Which means that when you enter you're agreeing to play by their rules. Best of luck!

Quick thoughts, Tsuba: 1. Has to be bushi, has to have had or have a bushi connection. Evidence that it was once mounted. 2. Maker, good makers make good tsuba. Signed or unsigned is fine. Good tsuba are easier to kantei (same for swords, right?). 3. Material, any but has to have obvious quality. Has to have mass. 4. Art, composition, shape/design, obviously forged. 5. Size matters, 3" + . This is not to disparage smaller work, not at all, just personal preference. a) it isn't necessary to own something to appreciate it (sorry tsuba dealers). more: 6. Upper level work is much easier to research. Desire is the cause of suffering.

I'd prefer your verbal description, otherwise I wouldn't have asked. While the images do show that there's a lot going on, the clarity is basically is poor.

Does this tanto have nie utsuri? Yubashiri? Please describe if so? Nagasa? Thank you.

Customizing to the user's needs/desires/koshirae. https://nihontocraft...hinsa_Standards.html Shinto swords should be ubu, have no flaws, and be signed. Anything other would explain why it only received Hozon level origami, aside from quality.

A few quick thoughts. We need to keep in mind that form follows function. As time passed, fighting styles changed and with it the shape of swords either through manufacture or modification. Following this point, we need to be aware that throughout time the shape of earlier swords were being copied, but that sometimes what was being copied were modified swords. This holds especially true when entering into the Edo period. It is one reason we see familiarities in Shinto swords like that of shortened nambokucho or other earlier period swords. For example, look how often we see what is thought to be a naginata naoshi only to find upon closer examination, "nope, it's simply a Shinto period shobu zukuri wakizashi." The study of the origin of shape is essential for a complete understanding of nihonto.

I'm skeptical that this an "old" sword and second the thought that this may be a Shinshinto sword.

From old computer files, not referenced.

I've seen 3 and 5 punch with my own eyes. Watching Ford in the video you can see the displaced metal forming a ripple all the way around the nanako. When a multiple punch is used the ripple forms an uninterrupted continuous wave down the line of nanako. That may be a clumsy description on my part for now. I'll try to see if I can come with a better way to describe it.

When evaluating nanako it needs to be determined whether the nanako was made using a single punch tool or whether they were made using a multiple punch tool. That can be determined by looking at the displaced metal surrounding the nanako. There are a number of factors involved in the making of nanako including the precision of the tool and the precision of the strike.