FBJ

I can appreciate all points of view, but the main reason for my response was that I felt your response was pretty damn condescending, as if because I'm a westerner that I somehow automatically have an incomplete or incorrect view of the relationship between the arts. Nevermind that I've spent the better part of the last eleven years practicing my art and thinking about how iaido and kendo are similar. What's more, you then proceed to disparage -- as most not in the federation tend do -- the merits and usefuless of seitei iaido and kendo as "watered down" facsimiles of what you consider more authentic budo, choosing to make your counterpoint with bold type and capital letters. I've heard all manner of rationalizations from non-federation types about our curriculum, the manner in which we conduct our examinations and taikai, and often it comes from folks who's moral horse is so high that instead of falling in line with the rest of folks in the organization, they avoid examinations, and competitions on account that these things somehow don't fit the spirit of some ultimate budo they have in mind, then in the end they run off to find organizations that often share what I'd consider their extremist points of view. Obligatory smiley..

Yes of course, but I was referring to those that instructors insist their students call them 'sensei'. To me its something that should be left to others to decide if they wish to call you that. Some of my students call me "sensei", some call me "sempai", while the vast majority assign no titles to me and instead refer to me as "Mike" and I willingly play no part in influencing which of those they choose. Makes no difference to me.

You're just as maligned by the snobs as I am, me being a iaido practictioner in an AJKF-affiliated federation. There are some that wouldn't even give Toyama-ryu a second thought in terms of being what they'd consider a Japanese budo with real history simply because it's post-restoration. Dumb as hell, yes. The attribution of some oddball mysticism that somehow overridingly legitimizes a school of swordsmanship simply because it was invented before the samurai class was abolished is a cancerous attitude that I see with increasing frequency. For sure, but even then it's likely the fraud artists with fabricated histories that would insist on others calling them 'sensei' because, yes, it is about ego. Ah well. I'm not aware of anyone with any real experience insisting that anyone refer to them as sensei. In fact, being a iaido instructor myself, I've had new students ask me what I'd like them to call me. I have to tell them that it isn't up to me to decide that, but at the very minimum call me by my given name.

Nonsense. It's rather once there are rules in place, I can't do what I want. And therein lies the basis for why many disillusioned former kendoka and iaidoka quit the federation, adopt their one-sided snobbery and project their inadequacies on those that remain in the various federations. At its heart, it's often a matter of crushed expectations and fractured ego complexes. It's an odd and rather irritating phenomenon, but the bulk of people with that attitude appear to populate koryu-only dojos, mortally afraid to utter any Japanese word ending in "DO". I see it all the time.

Just wow. Just about every Japanese teacher of notable rank in the AJKF opine that kendo and iaido are almost inseparable in that when practiced together, they compliment one another in solidifying understanding of distance, timing and pressuring an opponent. You disagree because I suspect you fall into the category of practitioner with a koryu-centric superiority complex, content in the thought that you're apart from the big, monolithic federations who teach "watered down" kendo and iaido and by extension are dismissed by those like you who are convinced their arts are older, better and more authentic. If anything, it's that attitude that I find to be prevalent in the west and to me it smacks of the holier-than-though extremism often borne of those that were once part of larger federations, but for whatever reason -- be it failure or some other factor that limits their progress -- seek instruction in the various dispirate, koryu only dojo that sprinkle the budo landscape. It's okay Keith, saying "iaiDO" won't harm anyone. "KenDO", same deal. You mention you once practiced kendo. Why did you quit? Obligatory smiley:

Apologies for chiming in on this late, but I've read Nakamura's article several times and and much as I'm inclined to respect the opinions of those that came before, I still conclude that he isn't terribly wise. His conclusions are based a deeply narrow cognitive framework of Japanese swordsmanship in general. For starters, the core of his criticism seems to be centered on kneeling techniques. What's more, he almost completely dismisses the clear and obvious link between kendo and iaido. For anyone with even moderate experience in either, not seeing the similarities and encouraging study in both for the most comprehensive education in Japanese swordsmanship demonstrates that one's sentiments extend past their odd logic. He's just the sort of person that would join a iaido dojo with his head filled with preconceived notions and quit six months later. As a person that teaches iaido, I've seen it time and again.

Suppose so, but that's potentially a whole other can of worms there. I was going for broad categories of Japanese and Japanese-styled swords regardless of their age -- traditional swords, swords intended for batto/iaido and imitation or display swords and how those definitions combine depending on how they're used (or not). I'm not sure how the Japanese use the term, and whether or not they are inclined to extend it beyond the commonly accepted definition of the term being a newly created sword by traditional methods; i.e., a present day nihonto. If the term is used literally, I feel it could refer to any sword that's fresh off the press -- traditional or otherwise, possibly even Japanese or otherwise. I say "Japanese or otherwise" because I have heard some Japanese refer to western swords as shinken as long as have an edge and are capable of cutting. For example. If the definition is that of a newly created nihonto, then I figure we can substitute all my nihonto entries on my list with shinsakuto, as long as I enter at least one or more other categories (gendaito, koto, shinto, etc.) to differentiate the ages of nihonto. It would become a spider's nest at that point to be sure.

Not my quote.

Sorry for hijacking the thread. I'm posting this again because us westerners are still stuck with the flawed understanding as to what separates the various grades of Japanese, and Japanese-styled swords. A nihonto and iaito are not necessarily two different things, for example, but a nihonto and mogito are. Don't let anyone (or in the case of the Wikipedia page for 'iaito') con you into thinking any of these terms are prestigious. Fully all of them have very clear cut definitions. My 2010 shinsakuto, built for me as a practicing iaidoka, is also a nihonto as it was forged in Japan using traditional methods and signed by the swordsmith. Because I practice with it, it's also an iaito -- three definitions that apply to one sword. I have heard all manner of opinion of what makes a nihonto or doesn't, or why iaito aren't nihonto, and often those opinions differ on whether the person making them are collectors or martial artists. I find it silly for example to think that some might not consider my shinsakuto iai blade a nihonto because they have it in mind that somehow it uses inferior materials or has a lesser polish, isn't old enough, et cetera, as if a nihonto has to meet some nebulous standard of quality to be considered one. This is snobbery. If we adopt the terms of a foreign language, I firmly believe we need to use the terminology as those who speak it natively do. All nihonto are shinken. Some shinken are nihonto. Some nihonto are iaito. Some shinken are iaito. Most iaito are mogito. No mogito are nihonto. Some mogito are shinken* No mogito are shinken** Some mogito are iaito. Some kazarito are shinken Some shinken are kazarito No nihonto are kazarito. No iaito are (or should be) kazarito. Most mogito are kazarito. * Outside Japan. ** Inside Japan. Thanks,

From this site.

Ah, roger. I've been thinking all this time that Mitsuhiro was his artist name. Now I know.

Out of curiosity, and since it was explained to me prior to purchasing the sword that the person (Kanetsugu) that oversees the Akamatsutarou school would be creating the sword with his son's help (artist name 'Mitsuhiro'), does the attached image suggest that Kanemitsu and Mitsuhiro are the same person? Not that it matters to me, since it seems all of Kanetsugu's sons and brothers are very accomplished swordsmiths, but I was curious mainly so that I have accurate information about who they are. Thanks again!

I haven't read through all the posts here, but I'm very familiar with sniping. My advice. Use sniping software over a sniping website. Purchase an Auction Sentry license (one-time purchase, lifetime updates). It will allow you to itemize as many auctions concurrently as you want. It sits active in your task tray and will run even when you're away from your machine. It's very much a set-it-and-forget it sort of thing. This may have already been said, but sniping is no guarantee you'll win an auction, but it will help you win more items for lower prices. Early bidding wars are great for sellers but are a nuisance for buyers. If you see an item on eBay that carries value but there are no bidders, either it's early in the auction or snipers are poised to strike. Sniping is generally used to eliminate the manual bidders who submit low maximum bids from the equation. If you're a budding sniper, familiarize yourself with how eBay increments its bid intervals, and how to bid certain values to maximize your chances of taking the auction if someone else bids the same as you. In other words, bid in 0.01 cent increments or higher. I generally bid at my maximum plus 99 cents.

Fantastic! I really appreciate the time you all took to translate this for me. Thanks everyone!

Hi friends, I had the tang of my shinsakuto photographed by a dojo mate recently when I had some wrapping work done on the tsuka. I use this for iaido (non-cutting): http://www.flickr.com/photos/10669139@N02/6691791943/in/photostream I know what the majority of the mei inscription reads, however the finer details in the date and creator kanji elude me. The bits and pieces I have are that it was made in Higo province by Kanetsugu and Mitsuhiro of the Akamatsutaro school sometime in 2010 (Heisei 22). What do the month and day values read? May I kindly ask someone to provide an exact translation please? Thanks!

Thanks for all the input, guys. I managed to fit the tsuba to my nihonto with surprising ease. The middle part of the nakago ana held to the tang quite snugly. There was virtually no vertical looseness at all. Rotational looseness was expectedly another story though. I managed to shim it real tight with several small slivers of a coffee stir stick on all edges of the opening for good measure. All in all, no modifications to the tsuba required. The end result is that it holds even better than my current tsuba and it looks great. Can't find my still camera right now, but I'll post some pictures once it turns up. Regards, Mike

Good points, both of you. I imagine the round seppa-dai was to ensure the uniformity of the kamon along the outside. I figure that with an oval seppa it wouldn't look completely odd; it would still come off as a symmetrical 'eye' shape. To me, it seems to definitely be a katana tsuba given the kozuka hitsu-ana though. Were there swords that would require the nakago to be shaped this way? Definitely a strange one. While I'm here, here's a quick update to my first post on the board. I received my shinsakuto nearly a year ago with the tsuba mounted on it. Great fit. I haven't taken the sword apart so I don't know if the nakago ana was modified in any way, but I suppose we'll find out when I fit this new one on.

Some of you might remember that I tried to score a nice edo period tsuba with a silver fukurin off eBay. As a iaido practitioner, I'd always wanted a nice tsuba with fukurin to compliment my 2010 shinsakuto, mostly because they look elegant; not to mention that many high-ranking Japanese iaidoka use them. Well, I scored one and the price I earned it at appears to be a fantastic deal. Perhaps at least a couple of you were participants in the auction? http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie ... 925wt_1139 I've read a bit about this design and the matsukawabishi kamon that's featured on it. Interesting to say the least. What are your impressions? Thanks, Mike H.

Seventh dan. There's about fifteen years difference there. Mike H.

I been asking about how this turned out too. It's unfortunate that you haven't had anything completed in the the amount of time you've given the smith. Hope it works out for you.

Understandable. Suppose I'll default to the how the Japanese use the term since there are no cheaper, machine made live blades in Japan (that exist legally anyway) so those don't enter into context for them, otherwise I'd go insane when our high-ranking iaidoka visit from Japan in the next few months and inevitably call my shinsakuto a shinken, and I'm certainly not open to arguing with them. LOL!

Yep, but the apparent point of contention to me is why western collectors appear to be reluctant to call iai or tameshigiri blades made in Japan nihonto. I'd conclude the swords in both your examples above are nihonto given both are made in Japan and it's illegal to produce anything but licensed, traditional swords there. I'd like to know why in the case of Japanese blades "shinken" is seen to be apart from "nihonto" and in going along with that distinction, why they're assumed by a lot of people outside Japan to be somehow less distinguished than nihonto. It's interesting overall, because on one hand you have those in Japanese swordsmanship circles with their own set of definitions about the swords they use, then you have collectors with a seeming whole other set of definitions. I won't disagree that forcing these hard distinctions makes it easier to get your point across about what you're referring to -- iaito often meaning an aluminum imitation versus shinken to mean something with an edge, for example. Maybe it's me, but my brain is throwing up error conditions all over the place when I hear that my shinsakuto is a iaito and shinken all the same when others insist those terms are only loosely related. Heh.

No, your nihonto is a shinken (true blade) and will always be one, whether or not you use it in training. Having said that, if you want to remind your mates that you have an authentic blade, call it a nihonto in the dojo -- otherwise call it a iaito, since you use it for that purpose. "Shinken" is probaby your best bet in the dojo though, as you want to send the constant reminder that you can sever limbs if folks get too close to you.

This is the first time I've heard this as an assumed meaning for shinken (literally true sword, taken to mean any Japanese or Japanese style blade with a live edge). The terms I most often hear for swung blades are iaito (iai-yo), "batto-yo" or "mogito" in the case of the ubiquitous aluminum alloy blades in the sword art world. I've found there is a tremendous overlap in these terms, and it can get confusing at times considering folks seem to have differing understanding of what each category of sword entails.

I've tried. I've seen a number of odd categorizations of swords, often at odds with how the Japanese categorize them in their native tonue, however I'd rather believe they fall into two broad categories -- nihonto and mogito. Nihonto are Japanese sword made in the traditional sense, while any non-traditional Japanese styled blades may be considered varying degrees of imitations ranging from kazarito to iaito, to some kinds of shinken; all able to be slotted losely or confidently into one or both of those categories. The distinctions quite rightfully aren't as distinct as us westernfolk make them. I've read several statements, often from western collectors who appear to categorize nihonto as any smith made Japanese blade pretty much made before a certain time period and/or of a certain artistic value (read, high). I don't agree with those categorizations. My 2010 shinsakuto made for the purpose of iai is as much a nihonto (and shinken) -- a Japanese constructed, tamahagane based traditional product albeit with far less artistic value -- than a koto Masamune. It's also noteworthy that according to many who have spent at least moderate amounts of time in Japan and in sword/swordsmanship circles, that the terms 'shinken' and 'nihonto' are pretty much interchangeable there. Given the context-driven nature of the Japanese language, the overlapping definitions are a given I figure. I wrote the following awhile ago on a Japanese swordsmanship forum after someone made a similar statement. I only recently added the various kazarito sections and haven't scoured the updated list for logical gaps: All nihonto are shinken. Some shinken are nihonto. Some nihonto are iaito. Some shinken are iaito. Most iaito are mogito. No mogito are nihonto. Some mogito are shinken* No mogito are shinken** Some mogito are iaito. Some kazarito are shinken* Some shinken are kazarito* No nihonto are kazarito. No iaito are kazarito. Most mogito are kazarito. * Outside Japan. ** Inside Japan. By all means, if you disagree or if my understanding lacks in anything I say, fill in the blanks for me.