Adrian S

Hello Veli, Yes, the results were consistently within 2% variation. I also tested the machine on known steel alloys ( hairdressing scissors I manufacture ) and it picked the alloy and was spot on every time! For $56,000 the HHXRF had better be too good to be true! I'm told that over 7,000 units have been sold already and it is proving to be very accurate in the field. I am also a little skeptical so that is why it is important to run the cross check laboratory trials on prepared samples next. But I must say, the variations are significant enough. For example Titanium readings on the blades varying from 0.008% on a Shinshinto ( most of the Shinshinto had none at all ) to a whopping 0.064% on an old Koto tanto blade I tested. That's a lot more than a small variation, that's eight times the Titanium level or a 800% variation. This is promising, but I must stress again, it is too early to draw any realistic conclusions. We may be looking at 20 or more different steel categories to establish patterns for. It's a big job, it may take years. cheers,

Hello Veli, Yes we did do multiple readings on the same spot and achieved consistancy. Yes we also trialed different spots along the same blade and got consistant readings again. As I stated before, this first trial was to assess the viability of the HHXRF for this purpose, which we did. The time available to us was limited. Before the next trial I am preparing some calibration samples that will also answer some more questions on the impact of the surface condition and preparation (i.e. corrosion, Japanese polish, nugui). The next step after we have confirmed the effect of surface preparation will be to confirm the results of the HHXRF on the calibration samples with full labratory test. Assuming all goes well, we will then conduct an extensive trial, for which purpose I will rent the machine for a week and will at the same time collect as much data as possible. A methodology will need to be worked out and I'm relying on the technical department to assist me although I already have some ideas of my own. I would like to get the testing proceedure down to 10 minutes per sword. As far as relative differences in concentrations, even from this very first trial we are seeing significant variations, although it is too early to make any reliable calls on what they mean. We need to test far more swords to see the pattern in these variations. Once we see those patterns emerge then we can make assessments of how significant the variations need to be to form classifications. Does that make sense? Early days yet Veli, we can't ask too much at this stage. cheers,

G'day Ford, Yes well.. they had better be real good ninjas. Anybody who knows me knows what I'm talking about. Most of "them" have bigger things to worry about right now I would say. The science has been well known in Japan for 80 years or so, it is just that the non-destructive testing procedures are finally catching up with the the science. I can see this technology becoming common place for all sorts of collectables and art works. It is already being used to detect fake diamonds and fake gold artifacts. Its unstoppable, and inevitable that it will be utilised for nihonto and kodogu for that matter. With the fakes out there getting better and better, we need to find a new edge. In the end I think it will create a more robust and confident collecting community. cheers,

G'day Ford, All the nakagos in the trial were ubu. Chris is right, the analysis dosen't show you where the hamon starts, in the case of this sword it is obvious anyway. It told me that the nakago was not steel but iron. The comparisons are easy to see, here is a chart with the nakagos highlighted. Notice that although the HHXRF dosen't give carbon figures , it dose give an estimate of the remainder which is the LEC column. Notice also the silicon readings. My opinion is that the more the high silicon iron ( ie tamehagne or watetsu) is folded, the more it loses silicon. More tests on known osuriage blades should bear that out. This sort of discrepancy with ubu nakagos was across the board on every sword we tested. For my next trial, with the trial samples I will prepare a clean nakaogo which will be left corroded on the other side to give a comparison of the effect of the surface rust. Nothing is proven yet, but I know pretty much that the nakago metal is quite different to the blades. I will of course prepare a full paper after all my trials have been concluded.

G'day Mel, The HHXRF can be accurate up tp 1/100,000 parts. From the initial readings, the variations I'm looking for are quite a bit larger anyway, so the sensitivity and accuracy will be adequate. I am more concerned about the effect of the surface preparation and fine tuning the calibration. When I have the calibration samples made, which are blade and nakago sections prepared as, corroded, filed clean and with Japanese polish on the same piece, I will have some more answers as to the effect of the surface preparation. I already have some very strong indicators and will be looking for these indicators to occur over a larger sampling to be able to draw conclusions. So far the figures are correlating nicely with historical knowledge and previous analysis by others. I will update everyone in the New Year when I run another trial. So far I can tell you. I tested a sword that was judged by a shinsa team to be a re-temper because it was judged osuriage. The reason given was it must be a re-temper as the hamon started at the machi. The analysis proved catigorically that the sword is in fact close to ubu with just a slight trim of the nakago. I was very pleased to be able to prove that! cheers,

G'day Chris, Any pictures of the blade? cheers,

G'day Eric and all, At the time of Koetsu the art of kantei was in its infancy. Previous it was considered impolite to discuss a sword's value and standing as a genuine article in company and especially in front of the owner. Koetsu had to temper his opinions to suit his employers the Maeda who in turn were dealing with the sensibilties of the Imperial house, Nobunaga and Ieyasu. I wouldn't blame Koestu for a few bad calls. He had others to answer too. As far as being a perfect imitation, if a smith could do the work, he's sign the blade himself! We would see some signed examples of his magnificent workmanship, wouldn't we? I agree with Honma. The current exhibition at Sano interestingly shows Yasutsugu saiha and copies, side by side and in the same room as the best Soshu smiths. Not even close in my opinion. In the Yasutsugu copy the yubashiri was sparse, looked awkward and contrived and the hamon definately had a shinto style habuchi. I haven't seen a Kunihiro, Kotetsu, Shinkai, Sukehiro even close either. The best was Kiyomaro, he was just a little closer, but no Cuppie doll. The NBTHK has disputed many of Koson's attributions over the years. So if the stamp is good or not, or the paper is a fake, a new origami is in order to confirm his opinion anyway. In the end they are all opinions anyway. Kajihei was very good. I have a gimei Naotane that I suspect is Kajihei, but there is no official confirmation. Nice blade! I've had it for years and won't part with it. cheers,

G'day Piers, Nope, the sample has to be clean and in one piece and free of contaminants. cheers,

G'day to all, A few years ago I proposed the possible use of Carbon 14 to determine the age of nihonto. I said I would update you all on any developments. Recently I have been discussing this project with the head scientists at the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization ( ANSTO ) discussing the feasibility of the Lawrence Livermore University methodology. For those of you interested here is an article that gives some interesting background information. http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/03 ... -0305.html Now here's the latest. 1) Sample size of ancient steel can now be as small as 0.10gram and still get a good result. That's good news 2) The last 300 years are not giving an accurate C14 dating as the atmosphere during this period had extra C12 and C13 that doesn't allow a true reading. Effect of the industrial revolution I guess. That's bad news, though I suggest more research is needed on this information 3) Swords with recycled steel will be a big problem as the readings will be way off. That's more bad news 4) Steels produced in a blast furnace using coke or coal as fuel will not be able to give a reading. Bad news for imported steels , especially from early Chinese imports using their ancient smelting techniques. 5) C14 test would cost about $1200. That's real bad news My conclusion is that C14 dating will be impractical for the time being due to problems with attaining accurate readings on nihonto and because of the destructive testing procedure. The good news is that the scientists I have discussed this with say that multiple non destructive C14 readings using micro lazer ablation will be possible in 10 or so years. At the same time dating will be possible using other radioactive isotopes (this may help date non-tamehagane steel types). The multiple readings will give us a better chance with recycled steel blades, assuming some new steel was used in the blade somewhere. We will have to wait until then,

G'day Mel, The XRF scanner with calibration can run about 2% +/- on most elements. We don't have enough data yet to draw any solid conclusions. But lots of interesting figures to ponder. cheers,

G'day Chris and all, Some of the symbols look tribal?? Or is it just the photo. Early Mokusa smith gimei? Maybe Ainu decoration with tribal meaning, Just throwing it out there :lol: I'd like to see the blade. Found this photo of Emishi-to on Paul's site recently

G'day Eric, I'll probably get myself in trouble for this opinion. So I had better make things clear CAUTION: HYPOTHETICAL ASSUMPTION APPROACHING! I said that I have seen 29 Masamune ( I didn't count some I have seen 2 or 3 times :D ) . Out of that total 22 are recognized and have some paper or designation. Now I can tell you that there is two or even three distinct levels of workmanship in these sword. My theory is this. The Hojo Bakufu were preparing for a potential 3rd invasion from the Mongols. For the purpose of equipping an army and becoming self sufficient in the northern provinces for weapons, the Hojo "summoned" three of the best swordsmiths in Japan and established the Soshu school. These smiths still worked in their own style, the first Soshu blades being produced by Kunimitsu. From that time relatively few smiths names appear in the "direct Soshu line" for the next 100 years. My point and my hypothesis is that the factory had assistants working for them, recruited from the local smiths (refer connoisseurs book pg 198, first paragraph) whose names are not left to us. I feel a multitude of weapons were produced in a '"standard grade in Soshu style " and only special order pieces were made of the highest quality by the masters hand. Therefore my very contentious statement is , "out of 29 Masamune's I've seen, only few are special order pieces of the highest quality and artistic merit, the others may well be of the second grade or later work" That brings me to this tanto. First, wrong sori, wrong nakago (my opinion) . I can see some glimpses of chikei and inazuma , but no yubashiri. Maybe Soden Bizen, would need to see it in my hand. cheers,

G'day Guido Eric and Paul, :lol: Guido, I've put on a couple of kilos since then! :lol: Eric, I didn't say I'd buy one from the internet either. If a Masamune is for sale on Fleabay, then it definately is a fake. But, it may well have been a good sword once upon a time, except the hamon looks like it drops off. Dosn't look like Masamune to me, to date I've now seen 29. Seen quite a few without papers too. In fact there is a recornised Japanese expert on Masamune who owns a ubu tachi (yes thats right , ubu!), no papers. If you own an unrecognised Masamune the best you could ever hope for is "Masamune Den" , and even to get that is long hard road. Chris hit the nail on the head. cheers,

g,day to all, Any better photos of this piece Eric? I wouldn't buy any Masamune with any type of paper, but I'd buy one without a paper (if I had the money that is) :| If you need a paper to own one , then you're not ready to own one. cheers,

G'day Chris and all, Up until I saw this blade I would agree with you Chris that Warabite-to are primitive. But this example on the Sano DVD shows skilled workmanship. Tom Helm posted this on another site. So maybe it's more correct to say Emishi rather than Ainu. The reason I make the correlation is that archeological evidence shows that most Warabite-to dug up (not all) are in the Northern areas of Honshu and Hokkaido. I remember seeing a Nat Geo special that traced through DNA the Ainu to the Amur Valley people and back to the Eastern Sythians. The Warabite-to design dosn't seem to come from China or Korea. Was it a Emishi design? Or maybe even Sythian? I would like to see any dug up in the Amur Vally or the Kiril Islands, haven't found one. Would love to hear from Peter Bleed and Tom Helm. cheers,

G'day Alan, Its not semantics, the Kera-oshi method changed the process of producing tetsu in Japan. Prior to that the bloom product was not tamehagane as we know it, it contained little directly usable steel, and all the kera was reprocessed before becomming steel usable as sword steel. You could not break up the bloom and pick out steel like is done today, it was too indistinguishable. The Kera-oshi method was the first to produce steel as a intended and direct product of the bloom. Previous to the Kera-oshi method all proto tataras produced basically wrought iron and cast iron ( I prefer to use the term cast iron as pig iron is a modern term derived from a 19th century process where the cast iron was cast into a tree like mold with bulbous apendages resemmbling piglets suckling, and actually it is not the same process).Before Kera-oshi steel was produced by either the co-fusion method or the older method of decarborisation and/or carborisation forging. The cylinder stack smelting method ( I assume the half buried cylinder type) that developed in northern Honshu and spread south is actually a different method than the box method which later developed into the tatara. Some authorities quote that sand iron was used in the cylinder type, but most now agree that this type of smelter was used primarily for processing iron ore (magnetite) not iron sand. The half buried cylinder produced cast iron and wrought iron. With the inovations of the box type and the tatara smelting sand iron, the cylinder type disappeared from use. Now, I know that information about early smelting techniques is muddy. The inforamtion has even changed over the time of my research as new discoveries have been made. You and I would not be the first to disagree on these points. We can not be specific about changes in the sword steel either. What I do know is over time the chemical make up of sword steel changed and evolved, my research is trying to shine some light on these changes. Agreed on the Maganese for Bessemer steel. But I need to research more on Yasugi crucible steel and changes in the steel produced by Japan after adopting modern methods in the 1880's. Alan, this quote dosn't have much relivance without knowing the context of the information. Those figures show a low silicon cast iron?? Not steel at all. With the Phosphorous and Maganese it could even be a modern pig iron?? Iron was produced in the Chugoku regions for a 1000 years both from iron sand and iron ore, and it is still a steel producing area today. We can quote different authorities on that statement too because I know there is some disagreement about the archeology. But this quote from Hitachi sums it up best. Frankly the pre-history of the Tatara is not of as much interest to me as the science and the analysis of the steel. What caused differences in the steel may be a thesis for others to work in the future after we have some solid data from the science. cheers,

G'day to all, Yes, the great thing about this board is that is a mirror of currently accepted theories and facts. Excuse me if I sounded ignorant as my intent was to guage a reaction to the acceptance of this fact before making a supposition based on it. I think it is acceptable to speculate that nearly every smith knows the value of old steel and that is it kept as a valued and prized commodity for use on special swords or, for example edge steel to improve the asthetics. Now I have been asked by a friend to make it clear when I'm speaking in the hypothetical as this can confuse the facts. CAUTION: THE FOLLOWING IS HYPOTHETICAL AND HYPNOTICAL I think recycling was always a big part of swordmaking culture, particulary going rignt back to Heian. Not just old spades or hinges etc. but of outdated and damaged swords. At this point I would like to refrain from using the word tamehagane as this word is a considerably recent made up word and really only refers to kera-oshi tatara steel. With your permission I will refer to iron and steel used for swords with a more generic term tetsu. George you are right, the chemical analysis project shows that recycled tetsu could be a spanner in the works. For example, the generally accepted fact that Hideyoshi's sword hunt resulted in thousands of swords being sold to Ming China needs to be examined. The Japanese were selling swords to China 100 years before Hideyoshi. Did all Hideyoshi's swords eventually become recycled into Shinto swords? (of course he kept the good ones) What about captured weapons from Korea? For that matter, what about captured weapons from the Mongols , or before that from the Ainu? OK, that gets me to my point. Sorry it's been labourious to get there. Recently I visited the Sano Museum and while I was there purchased the Japanese video about "The Roots of Sori". To cut to the chase, it shows in quite some detail a polished warabite-to. I was amazed! The sword showed strong itame hada, plentiful and large chikei, gorgeuos sunagashi, inazuma in fact it looked like a Soshu sword! Historically the Hojo Shikken moved their capital to Kamakura pushing the Ainu further north, but it also pushed them away from their iron smelters in the Kanto region. Strategically very smart to deprive the enermy of their main source of tetsu for weapons. Anyway, my hypothetical is "Soshu tetsu and sword production techniques developed from the Ainu. A cause and effect lead by interesting results from studying and recycling Ainu warabite-to. Soshuden is created by assimulating Ainu tetsu production techniques and by using the same source material" Historically we see the Ainu style of iron smelter design being of the vertically oriented half buried type going back to the 9th century in this area. Has anybody heard a similar theory? I have more to add but want to get some feedback from the others. Just a little thinking outside the box. cheers,

G'day to all, It has occured to me that it may have been far more smiths than Kotetsu who recycling older steel articles including swords. Since he actually had a reputation for doing so along with a reputation for excellence in swords, it may well be that many of the better Shinto smiths also practices this method. Has anyone seen any reference to steel recycling? cheers,

G'day to Aussie collectors, Some of you may know that for some time I have been working on research into scientific analysis of the Japanese sword. It has been an on again off again project of mine for the last 20 years. Recently some advancements in non-destructive testing has inspired me to continue this work. Anyway..., this is a call out to Australian collectors for sword blade remnants I can use as reference and calibration samples. i'm looking to gather a dozen or so 10cm pieces , hopefully from different swords from different periods. It dosn't matter if they are gimei, have hagiri, nioigiri or whatever as long as they are swords made from tamehagane. These sword pieces will be partially polished and the ends prepared, polished and etched to show the structure. I want to send these samples for XRF lab testing which will eventually give me calibration samples for a Hand Held XRF spectrometer. (please refer to the Digital shinsa thread ). Please contact me by email info@sydneytokenkai.com if you have an old fatally flawd sword to donate to the cause. I'm asking Australian collectors to donate as the postage will be a lot cheaper within Australia. Anyone overseas who is willing, of coarse I will accept your donations too. thanks in advance,

G'day Ford and all, Yes, quite correct, we will need analysis of tamhagane kera. I am sure the Wako Museum holds samples of kera and iron slag recovered from different archeological sites. I am planning a trip there for research. I will also need lots of broken blades from different eras to make calibration reference samples. I have a source who can also provide C14 dated verified sword blades from Korea, Vietnam, Tibet, China and Mongolia. He is involved in similar research with asian swords, armour, smelt and blacksmith sites etc. I feel this data will be necessary once we start looking at older blades. I will also need data from English steel, Wootz other forms of Nambantetsu. The list goes on. TRIAL CONCLUSIONS Primary goals are. 1) Establish the feasibility and accuracy of this technology for our purpose. Answer: The Hand Held XRF Spectrometer (HHXRF)is a feasible tool to use in the chemical analysis of Japanese swords. Although its current accuracy would need to be improved to some degree to get the desired results from small amounts of trace elements. After talking to the technical support team, the opinion is that the HHXRF programming can be adjusted to take into account very small traces. I will organise a new trial on my own collection once we have established that this is viable. 2) Establish the presence of variables i.e chemical compounds and specifically trace metals in the finished Japanese swords. Answer: These variables and trace elements are definitely there in the finished sword blades Secondary goals, Added bonus would be 1) Discovering "possible" indicators that may be present to determine tamahagane or western steel or other as the source material. Answer: This trial definately proved that indicators can be read to determine the presence of Bessemer produced steel and Nambantetsu. 2) Discovering "possible" indicators that will with more data determine school characteristics. Answer: This trial proved that with more data some school characteristics will became evident, although many schools will have similar characteristics which may make it impossible to evaluate for example a Bizen blade from a Bungo blade of the same era. SUMMARY With advances in this technology, the assemby of valid data and reference sampling I feel the HHXRF will become a valuable tool to assist in the assessment of Japanese swords. I do not feel that it will become a replacement for Shinsa but a tool that can be used to assist determinations. I also feel it has great value in detecting some problems associated with sword collecting such as welded in nakagos and Shinshinto swords made to look like O-suriage Koto. It may well be of great assistance in determining Nambantetsu and sword construction. In the end a good Shinsa team could give us the same answers anyway. This device may find its greatest role is determining information about swords in the "unpolished state" outside of the Shinsa room. Every day collectors are making that big choice "Will I or won't I spend thousands of dollars having this rusty sword polished and sent to Shinsa?" I can also see this device being valuable for providing a chemical fingerprint to assist in the registration of mumei blades and may one day be in use for Airport Customs determinations for example. I will be organising in the near future a more extensive trial if we can tweak this machine to give us better readings on trace elements on the blade metals. In the meantime I will be asking for donations of sword pieces, broken sword blades etc. from my fellow Australian collectors and will also be researching more background information. Eventually all my findings , including data charts will be published online and in print. thank you all for your time and fine comments regards,

G'day Ford and all, Yes, asterix means too low to detect. You make some good points. I had thought about the effect of nugui as well. This research is only just beginning, I will definately be making some trial calibration samples. I intend to have both polished and unpolished surfaces and also have the trial samples certified by the full lab test version of the XRF spectrometer. That will give us a better comparison for calibration although the supplier also has certified calibration samples (not of swords but of elements ). The XRF scanner was set for maximum penetration i.e 0.5mm below the surface. I'm not quite sure how that works but i'll take the technicians word for it for now. If you look at this page from Hitachi you will see that the sand iron is very high in Titanium and Aluminium with some trace Chromium http://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/tatara/nnp020603.htm Titanium and Aluminium is what I've been looking for in metalics. Interestingly Chromium is comming up across the board even in the nakagos. It seems to be hard to get out of the tamehagane and even the Bessemer steel. Now compare the Titanium columns. In the blade metal tests (not the nakagos) it is all over the Shinto blades and the Bizen and Bungo blades from Koto but it virtually disappears in Shinshinto, Gendai ( the tamehagane samples that is) and interestingly the Koto Mino blade. My assumption is that it indicates a similar source material, maybe Chukugo mountains sand iron tamehagane for example. Maybe in Shinshinto the higher tatara temperatures were able to remove the Titanium. As for the Mino blade, the sand iron may be from a different source low in Titanium. It is way too early to call it an indicator, but would like to see what more sampling produces. Now compare the Aluminium colums, it only shows up in nakagos. It may be that at the temperatures required to make steel rather than iron, Aluminium can be removed in the slag. Very scare in Koto, Shinshinto (except the bessemer steel Tosa blade) but heavy in the Shinto, except it disappears in the Sukehiro and the Bungo blade. In fact the Sukehiro and the Bungo blade are very very similar. Now the Mino and the Shinto blades are also very similar, except the Mino blade is the only one showing Phosphorus. There are definately avenues to investigate in further trials. I will study these figures some more over the weekend and then do some comparison charts listing the similar readings together. Very interesting indeed. cheers,

G'day George, Firstly, I must say your questions are most intelligent and well thought out. I can tell you even from the initial results, Kantei and Shinsa will never be replaced. You can see that the results from the Bungo blade and the Eisho Sukesada were almost identical. Unless smiths are known to do something peculiar or strange the chemical analysis will never be able to determine a smith with certainty. Many Shinshinto schools, Shinto schools and Koto schools used the same source material. I must say that the readings from the nakagos gave the best results. As the nakago was a "less worked" material, the trace elements remained in higher percentages. The readings from the blades however were a little disappointing. We noticed that as we read the Gendai and Shinshinto with tamehagane, we saw on the screen no trace elements at all. The Shinto and particularly the Koto blade tamehagane however were showing all sorts of trace elements as the readings were progressing on the screen. This was the moleculles being sorted right before our eyes. Unfortunately the readings were so low that they were at the limit of the detection ability of the equipment. When the machine gave a final reading , it disregarded the trace elements that were borderline. When we tested the Oei Bizen blade metal the trace elements were stronger. The operator is confident that in the very near future this technology will improve its detection capability to a level that will make our job easier. George, they tested the Spear of Destiny, a priceless relic that was supposed to have pieced the side of Christ. Unfortunately it was 400 years too young. It's still a priceless relic anyway. This technology is not going to go away, ultimately we will all have to accept that science is here to stay. The collectors of the future will be much better of because to it. As far as testing Kokuho and Meito goes, I'll leave that to the Japanese to do. Personally I think that type of sword should be left alone and not put on trial to speak, the history and the provenance alone outweighs the importance of any test results. cheers,

G'day Harry, The need for a clean surface is obvious to get a good read. But this device is designed to test coating thicknesses as well, yes it only reads on the molecular level but can penetrate up to .5mm deep. We had it set for a penetration reading. It can read under the surface corrosion of a nakago although it wouldn't get a good read on a heavily corroded item. Even though it can penetrate that deep, one swipe of uchiko would remove more material than this machine does. I'm not planning any research into Damascus , but I have been researching Wootz and other Asian steels cheers,

G'day to all, Here are the rest of the results. I have studied them and can see many trends and possible indicators already. At this stage I would like to invite those with some metallurgical experience and knowledge to study the results carefully and contact me by PM. All the blades in this trial were signed and highly papered. I can not and will not give out any information as to the owners of trial blade samples. In the future my intention is to accumulate data on more similarly signed and highly papered blades. I will allow owners to withdraw blades from the data before publishing if they are unhappy with the results. Here they are cheers,

G'day to all, Curtis, you got it, like DNA , it is the little differences that will be indicators. For example, when we find high levels of Molybdenum and Vanadium in a steel it is NOT tamehagne. Just like some DNA indictors will tell us if you have an asian ancestor. John, this is a direct cut and paste from Hitachi Sorry mate Robert T (Takahashi), you nailed the answers to George's questions perfectly 10 out of 10 If you want to get the best from this information and learn a little about the steels, read through the entire section on Tatara on the Hitachi website. This is a great resource. http://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/tatara/nnp01.htm Although my research dosen't agree with everything, I most certainly support 99% of this material. In a nutshell it relates to changes and advances in Tatara technology over time. Basically this is what it says. The development of the Tatara can be broken down to 3 distinct periods. 1) Pre Tatara; The archeological evidence shows that the Tatara of the type we know, that specifically smelts steel from sand iron only appeared in the mid Muromachi period. Before that time iron in the form of "wrought iron" and "cast iron" was produced in a more primitive fashion. I'm sure this statement will fire up a few comments so here is a quote from Hitachi 2) Early Tatara. The first Tatara were not capable of achieving high temperatures due to the use of the box bellows to supply air (oxygen) to the smelt ). Tamehagane from this type of tatara is highest in metalic inclusions and impurities. 3) Mid period Tatara. At the end of the Muromachi, tatara operations centred in the one area of Japan. the Chukugo mountains in Shimane (where it still is) . The technology of the foot belows and a new method of cleaning the sand iron before the smelt improved the finished quality of the tamehagane. Now the steel is considerably cleaner with lower levels of impurities. By the beginning of the Edo period the tamehagane from Chukugo was distributed in Osaka through the steel merchants set up there ( and to some extent regulated by the Tokugawa ). NOTE: At the same time we see the advent of Nambantetsu, imported by the Dutch and also shipped to Osaka for distribution. So came the advent of the "Castle town" sword schools who basically went shopping for their raw materials all in one place. ( as with many sword related facts, there are always the exceptions) The mid period Tatara produced tamehagane until roughly the end of what we know as the Shinto period. 4) Modern Tatara, the adoption of balance bellows to the Tatara changed the finished tamehagane again. Now the Tatara can achieve much higher temperatures which means all the metalic tramp material can be removed leaving behind iron, carbon and silicon. A super clean tamehagane, and the worlds cleanest silicon steel. This is still the current method of tamehagane production. There is more to it, but basically I am looking for indicators for the "type of tamehagane" relating to the Era and also I am looking to classify Nambantetsu ( I beleive there was more than one type). Changes in the readings on different parts of the sword also give clear indicators to construction, which again can indicate Era of manufacture. Gentlemen. the Shinsa is not dead, far from it. In fact this tool in combination with the Shinsa process will enhance and compliment each other and give us a much clearer result. It will take some time to collect data, even years, but i intend to make it a personal project and I'm looking for all the support I can get. The other results will be up soon. regards,