sanjuro

Groan...... KM. I call to your attention a shortened, not drastically so, but shortened none the less, nakago on the sho blade. (What you refer to as a battered nakago). I further call to your attention the multiple ana, both filled and not filled on the dai nakago..... Prima facia evidence in each case, of some degree of suriage. Now, perhaps if you can tell me what your definition of evidence of suriage is, we can discuss the differences in our comparative realities. :D

The shortening of a blade if done correctly does not as a rule weaken a blade unless the blade itself had a weakness of some kind inherent within its original form, which is subsequently accentuated by the shortening process. I'm thinking here of forging faults that are moved by virtue of the shortening process to a more stressed part of the newly proportioned blade, thereby providing a weak spot. It is unlikely that a blade with such a weakness in the first place would be chosen to have suriage performed on it. The weight is of course altered and dependant upon the distribution of weight throughout the original blade, balance may be altered to varying degrees dependent upon the amount of shortening and the subsequent loss of mass and of curvature. Suriage is not just a matter of lopping off part of the nakago and cutting new machi. The proportions of the blade (Principally the nakago), are reshaped to provide the correct rake and balance. A katana for instance is generally more blade heavy than a tachi, despite the usually greater length of the tachi blade. Tachi have longer tsuka and usually longer nakago. Loss of part of the nakago does not neccesarily adversely impact the balance of the blade given its altered form and method of use as a katana. Given that katana of the Shinto period were generally modelled on the cut down tachi blades of the Nambokucho period, the shape and balance seem to have historically proven themselves in use.

Martin. Easy boy....... If it wasnt for Bill Gates, most of us wouldnt be able to hold this conversation. Lets just spare a thought for which side our cyber bread is buttered on. :D

Kunitaro san. I think it is not as simple as I would wish it to be.... :D As you say, many daisho were actually assembled from shortened koto tachi and wakizashi by different makers, and then mounted en suite. History and popular usage however has accepted this and my ideal daisho by the same swordsmith is seldom the case except in sets that were made as new in the Edo Period....... This is one reason I have never aspired to owning a daisho. I also think that I shall continue to focus my collecting on my beloved tachi.

Kunitaro san. I am in complete accord with what you say. I have three different koshirae for my iaito. It was a matter of formality or propriety for the occasion that determines the koshirae used. The koshirae you posted was fine indeed, and i would love to own such a fine set. My point however was more concerning the blades themselves. If they are not matched, as in by the same maker, then it is not in a purist sense a daisho. Blades by disparate makers do not in my opinion qualify as daisho. We have dealers these days who pair unassociated blades and call them a daisho on the basis that they are similar in style or that they have matching koshirae. This is in my view incorrect. A daisho should in reality and to be truly classified as daisho, be by the same maker if in shirasaya and also have matching koshirae if they are mounted.

I dont mean to sound like a nihonto snob, but I have to agree with Franco here. A daisho koshirae is one thing, but a mounted daisho must have not only the matched koshirae but also matched blades. Otherwise any two blades could be mounted as a daisho as long as the koshirae matched. Unmounted blades (in shirasaya) that are not matched but only associated cannot be considered a true daisho pair, so why should that change when the blades are mounted? Anyhow, as Jean says, we flogged that subject to a standstill a while back. Dont know that we reached any concensus though.

Hi Boris. I'm probably reiterating something you already know, and I cannot for the life of me find an illustration of it. However, during my research of tachi mounts and styles through history I have come across the mention of handachi style on a number of occasions. There is a passage in Sword and Same' by Joly and Hogitaro that refers to handachi as the normal tachi with obitori removed to be used by warriors as a camp sword when not in armour. This was worn in katana fashion thrust through the obi. A variant of this was to leave a single obitori and attach a sageo cord. The fashion apparently became adopted also for shorter blades either uchigatana or early shorter katana blades to be mounted in tachi style but with a loose ring or later with a kurikata. The reference is quite specific about the removal of both obitori however, and also the way in which the sword was worn under those circumstances. The period involved was late Kamakura if I recall correctly.

That sort of gels with what was troubling me about this pairing. I think that these O seppa are not intended for this tsuba. Firstly, they appear earlier than the Tsuba. Secondly, the tsuba has hitsu ana in the form of a double kogai ana. This was a practice of tsubako in the Edo period. A tachi tsuba in the pure sense does not have hitsu ana, although some were later pierced with them to remount them on Katana. This tsuba seems to have been produced with hitsu ana, rather than having them pierced later. It is unusual to find a tachi tsuba that has decoration that would be hidden by the Oseppa if indeed it was intended to have O seppa fitted. Such tachi tsuba that were intended to have O seppa were usually plain or if decorated, the decoration would appear outside of the surface that would be covered by the O seppa. The O seppa are quite interesting. I think they are earlier just by the style, quality of finish and patination. They really are quite a fine set. (Just out of interest, I have a good quality plain iron tachi tsuba that these would match perfectly, should you ever wish to dispose of them) ........ :D

Hi Jason. Nice restoration job you are doing there. Just a quick question for you........ Did you acquire these pieces as associated? By this I mean were the O seppa supposed to belong to this tsuba? I ask this because the O seppa appear to me to be earlier than the tsuba, which is I believe Edo period. If they are associated then it raises a few interesting questions in my mind.

Brian. Having myself attempted to return a sword to its original owner family, (In my case a shrine sword), only to discover that they do not actually want it returned, I raise this as probably the initial line of inquiry. I know of others who have also tried to make such a gesture only to find out that the Japanese family concerned either cannot accept the sword or would not wish the sword returned. I agree this would be a fine gesture and a worthy pursuit for the NMB. However, the comparative rights or wrongs and their perception of trying to do this aside, I would think that in the first instance, the cooperation of the proposed recipient is of paramount concern and importance.

Roy. What exactly are you trying to achieve with this, and what are you proposing? The sword on your site has a price tag of one thousand pounds. Apart from the fact that it appears to be a late Koto piece according to the on site blurb and that it was surrendered by a chap who lived on a small island of the Japanese archeapeligo there is little extra information concerning repolishing or returning it to the family. (Do they actually want it back?). I confess, I am confused by your post. :?

Edited out. :|

Thats great! You have a good start then... Even before the books arrive. At least you know a low end one when you see it, and that puts you ahead of the game.

Good. Actually, I'm rather glad Mariusz asked that, since I have been wondering since the beginning of this thread if we are just satisfying a curiosity about the motif, or perhaps seeing a tsuba that interests the original poster as a possible acquisition. If the latter, I would then ask what would possess you want to buy this tsuba regardless of the motif. Now, since you dont want to buy it, and we have now been down this road a few times with tsuba you have posted, Why dont you want to buy it? Forget about price and whether or not you like the design, what is it about this tsuba that makes it unattractive as a collectable piece to you? So far the information has been coming from the members of this board to you. What have you learned from all of it?

Are we considering the possibiity of the inlay being precast? Why? Brass does not take kindly to precasting in such fine shapes, at least not with any regularity of definition. Why precast when wire is easier to work and holds a regular shape? The tsuba themselves bear witness that the inlay is done with wire and small shapes hammered down and pinched in a pre cut channel or area relieved to recieve them. I dont understand the point of contention. :?

Not to take sides here but as I understand it, Christian is saying that the plate is taken to finish prior to the inlay work being performed. Yet the examples given do not support that hypothesis. I have some experience with inlay work, having been a jeweller, and the examples posted here look more as one would expect in that the inlay work was done prior to the plate being finished, and the whole surface finished as a last step. There is no evidence that it was done otherwise It makes no sense to do it otherwise. Regardless of how inscutible Japanese tsubako may have been in the way they worked the metal, they would surely not have gone against an established method of production. It makes no sense to complete a plate that may be marked in the inlay process and thereby necessitate repairs to the finish, when all they need do is finish the plate after the inlay work had been completed. Am I seeing this in the wrong light or what?? :?

Gee.... That backside straight on shot of the Holbrook tsuba sure shows up some rather disturbing misalignments. The mimi almost looks like an afterthought, and the seppa dai now appears rather skewed. They were of course there to see in the angle shot of the front side, but not as noticeable. A good example of how the perspective of a photograph can mask the degree of such things. Also I guess of how one can get carried away by the motif rather than considering the tsuba as an artistic whole. I have to say that personally I am not drawn to either of these tsuba at all. Would they be generally considered as fairly mediocre examples by those who like this particular sukashi style?

I'm not a tsuba man by any stretch of the imagination, but I have seen a lot of them, and handled some beautiful examples both of design and of material. Its not so much a question of the design, more it is the question of how that design was executed and the quality of the base material that differs between schools (and quality) There were standard designs and the cherry blossom was one of the most common. Many schools were 'cross pollinated' as far as the basic motif was concerned. If you look at the two pieces you have sited as examples, it is obvious the ex Skip Holbrook tsuba is superior in execution. Its a little difficult to compare quality of material with only a photograph to go by, but it would appear that the second example is relying on an element of rusticity rather than the Holbrook tsuba which relies on a finer execution of the theme common to the two examples. Some of the more experienced and knowledgable Tsuba guys would be able to site more and finer differences.

Kikuchi yari. Some were remounted as tanto during the Edo period.

Patrick. To answer your question, yes its a fake. Its apparently cast. Chinese would be a good guess at its origin. Incidentally, the motif is a phoenix not a dragon. Neither Chinese nor Japanese dragons have wings (or feathers in their tails). Obviously you are looking on ebay for these tsuba, and you don't really know what you are looking at. No fault there, we all have to start somewhere. My advice....... Don't. Instead, look on dealer sites if you want to see real tsuba. Better yet buy a few books on the subject before looking for a tsuba to buy. A little education will at least arm you with some basic knowledge and the ability to spot obvious fakes. When you do buy, buy quality. It will cost more but it will be less painful in the long run.

OK.. lets get rid of the elitism tag you just hung around my neck. None of what I said was elitist in intent. If the statement of a point of view is interpreted as elitist then whats the point of this conversation? I might say you are a mass media elitist and devalue your input in a like manner. I do not doubt for a moment that popular media fiction and yes, even games play some part in capturing attention and perhaps ultimately, interest in nihonto. They are not however realistic, and surely are not expected to be. They are entertainment. Capturing attention is however not what motivates someone to become a collector, at least not in isolation. It takes forums such as the NMB and other avenues of information and interaction with people who collect or have the knowledge, to nurture that initial attention so that it becomes first a curiosity and then perhaps a deeper interest. Nothing does this ideally like the access to swords themselves, though this is by no means easy for the beginner. More importantly access to people who enjoy talking about their hobby. For all the value that mass media may have in access to information, there is still no substitute for contact with like minded people to fire someone's imagination. Passion is infectious. Nor is this alone enough. What makes a collector is a variety of inputs over a longish period of time. Those inputs may be legion or few but the compound influence they have is invaluable. Like you I came to nihonto through the martial arts, and I think there are many who have had that same beginning. In my case that interest in martial arts was not attributable to the media. Yet still there are just as many if not more collectors who have come to nihonto via a variety of other avenues and for a variety reasons. There is not one single source one can point to, and say 'this is the primary source of nihonto collectors'. Its OK to say that the mass and/or popular media will be the source of new collectors, and this may be so to an extent. To place faith in that source alone is however a mistake. Nothing operates in isolation, and the other avenues must also be nurtured, since they too contribute greatly to our ranks.

Just a suggestion on the bonji character..... Possibly Shaka

Well said Grey, it doesn't really matter which one of us is right, this tsuba is still not worth collecting.

Alex. Are we really hoping to find new collectors as a result of popular (and totally nonfactual) media? What sort of collector is going to arise from the Ninja fringe dwellers and ludicrous film admirers, or the game console addicts. Sure, those things can be fun to watch or play, but as a medium for motivating someone to collect nihonto or less likely tsuba, I have to say I have serious doubts. How many people I wonder became interested as a result of watching 'The Last Samurai', or 'Red sun' or 'Ran' to name but a few? How many people ran out to buy books on nihonto after playing 'Red Ninja' or 'Tenchu'?

One must also remember that in theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is. :D