mdiddy

Yes – as part of arsenals primarily, second as political tools for authoritative representation and rewarding, third as pretty decorative wall-hanging ornaments. I don’t think everything is artifact…yet. Many objects, even future objet d’art, are still being used for their primary function regardless of form. I think Nihonto fall into this same interesting subset of art that have (had) a primary function yet whose form is also quite pleasant to look at too. The same could be said for architecture, furniture, etc – but what’s important is form and function, not just form alone. I don’t think there is function to a Monet, even though they are quite pleasant to look at. I think it was pointed earlier in the thread that Nihonto are a meeting point of art and artifact. Along that line of thought, I’m suggesting there is a relationship and sequencing of artifact/art from which my question is still not directly answered: wouldn’t a sword necessarily be an artifact before it could be called purely art?

Right. Back to my question - wouldn't a sword necessarily be an artifact - i.e. characteristic of an earlier time or cultural stage and past its primary use - to be seen as purely 'Art'?

Would this be an admission that a sword must mature past its primary use, and hence be historical artifiact, in order to qualify as 'Art' much later?

I've read that some form of polishing existed in Heian and that by Kamakura sword appreciation was in effect (else how would Go-Toba have been able to be such a connosieur? ) I've also read that polishing methods with water stones to effect the hamon did not evolve until sometime in Muromachi and were perfected by the Honami in Momoyama giving us modern-day sword appraisal/appreciation. Which is more likely and did Ichimonji and Masamune swords have such high regard at the time they were made, ostensibly from battlefield performance, or only later when polishing technique had evolved to reveal more detail of the sword? I'm interested in understanding if high-end koto we call 'Art' today was considered 'Art' when it was handed off by the swordsmith, and how historical relevance impacts the definition of 'Art' (i.e. not 'Art' but 'Tool' when it was made, mediocre 'Art' 100 years later, highest 'Art' 500-1000 years later).

Chris - I agree, and I know how it will end. So, back on topic: gunto tomorrow = ko-tosho today?

As well: The use of swords as weapons plays a minor role from at least Nagashino onwards, but probably more given the emphasis on Samurai as mostly mounted archers.

What about ko-tosho tsuba? Today, they are held in fairly high regard as art yet were initially intended for low ranking soldiers 500 years ago. Their simple design and crude manufacture suggest to me some degree of mass production. I can’t see these items being as distinguished 50 years after their initial manufacture as they are 500 years later today. I agree with Richard and Ian’s point of view and find Ian’s thought of gunto koshirae as information particularly salient. I can easily imagine 500 years from now when everything is made of plastic or corn derivative that people will stop by the Met to ogle at the last 10 gunto tsuba made by the ancients with their crude metal working machines, instead of nano-organisms or quantum technology, as high art given the amount of manual interface required. Going back to earlier statements, I don’t see how this particular one is grounded in fact: Approaching this topic with utmost respect, but how is 1930s Japanese ideology of expansion any different from Hideyoshi’s expansion into Korea, Nobunaga’s expansion into Mino, or Naran emperors’ expansion against the Ainu/Emishi to begin with. The country has a history of samurai culture that included several hundred years of conflict and conquering in the name of the emperor. WWII may have differed on scale but the ideology was not new or different than before. If by samurai culture you mean the pleasantries and formality developed in Edo’s 200yr peace then I concede the point but I think that is rather short-sighted.

Finally, here is a 'W' stamp from a Mantetsu and an interesting 'Patent Patent' stamp from a mumei Kai Gunto. It is upside down here but which is how it looks when holding the nakago. Also interesting is that it is in English?

Here are two anchor stamps, a Showa stamp, and a star stamp from a Kaneaki katana in 1944 mounts. Almost all star stamps I have seen have been mounted in 1944 Type 3 "NLF" mounts. I've only seen a couple in Type 98 mounts. I wonder if this had something to do with the timing of implementing RJT/stamping.

Here are two Nagoya stamps and two Nagoya-like stamps, but alas I'm not sure what they are.

Here are some Seki stamps off Showato.

I think it is signed Kanemichi. Here is a page from Sloughs reference noting he was a Rikugun Jumei Tosho. As with many Seki blades, they were not always signed by the smith so that may explain stylistic differences in the mei.

Late Muromachi to Momoyama would be my guess.

Also - how is the fuchi being too big for the koshirae evidence the fuchi was manufactured in Showa? Could it not be possible the fuchi was made earlier and then incorrectly mounted later, perhaps in Showa?

Regarding the design, are you sure the f/k are trying to depict Kiku-mon and not the tehen and tehen-no-kanamono typically found on multiplate kabuto? Given the theme of the f/k is a multiplate kabuto, I would expect the latter to be more likely. The proportions of center to petal size would also be grossly off if this was meant to be a Kiku-mon. Perhaps the maker was trying to surreptitiously sneak in a Kiku-mon? Not sure why. Here is the link where I found the below examples for reference: http://www.Japanese-helmets.com/armor_s ... lmets.html

I agree - I don't see why they are necessarily Showa pieces either. I also don't see how the kashira is of better or differing quality than the fuchi. They look exactly the same in terms of design and manufacture.

All – thanks for the additional comments and discussion, especially those aspiring to perfection. Reinhard – I appreciate the detailed response and background info. The tsuka is mounted on a wakizashi that I’m pretty sure is not ShowaTo. However, based on Reinhard and Curran’s comments I wonder if the koshirae was assembled sometime in Showa. The saya does not have kozuka or kogai slots. The tsuba is Shoami I think. More feedback and discussion is welcome. I can post pics of the sword too if it factors into the discussion or if people are just curious. Matt

Reinhard - can you provide some grounding for your comments?? :?

Ron - thanks for the kind words. I appreciate critical statements so long as I can learn from them. If Reinhard would be willing to share his reasoning I would like to learn from his perspective and understand his analysis of the piece.

How can you tell?

Thanks for the kind feedback. Mark has great eyes and spotted the Kabuto theme where I had missed it. Much thanks to him for taking and posting the pics.

Hey Maria, Your research is correct. It does look like a WWII Japanese sword. These swords were carried by officers and called Shin Gunto. Most likely the sword was manufactured in the 1940s as part of the war effort. Looks like it is in decent condition with some slight rust here and there. If you would like more info, you may want to get some pictures of the 'tang' for us. The sword's tang is revealed if you take the handle off by removing the peg about 1 inch below the handguard. I have circled it in your photo. Japanese characters on the tang can tell us the swordsmith and maybe the date the sword was made. For sword care and some other basics, please refer to the 'FAQ' section at the top left of the page. Lots of good info there. Also, here is another good link on Shin Gunto: http://home.earthlink.net/~steinrl/military.htm Matt edit - must've posted just after ya Mark

Bummer - I was looking forward to these. Are there still any existing options to cover your financial expectation or boost membership? You could raise price 50% or so and it would still be < $10/month. Advertising on SFI, WAF, Int'l boards like INTK or French Nihonto Forum, or other forums where sword collectors trawl could find add'l membership. Getting dealers w/ websites to add a link could increase membership. Finally, how about selling your service through Ebay? You could get great exposure there. Just some thoughts as I was really looking forward to this!

I would be interested. Would we be able to post follow-up informational questions? By informational, I mean not argumentative, provocative, trolling-type, etc...

Here is an interesting article from Ohmura's "Military Swords of Japan" site: http://www.k3.dion.ne.jp/~j-gunto/gunto_138.htm. While it mostly speaks to Gunto, it addresses, and questions, the practicality of Japanese swords made since the end of the Sengoku jidai and aligns with some of Suishinshi Masahide's observations/thoughts. It also frowns on the art sword movement for allowing the image of swords to become detached from their original intent ("not distorted, not break and can be cut well" of the golden rule of a Japanese sword"). Worth a read. Chris - are any of the books you mention regarding WWII performance available in English?