tagonagy

I was under the impression that non traditionally made Gunto were illegal in Japan. However, I came across this: http://www.e-sword.jp/sale/2011/1110_1022syousai.htm It looks like the sword has a seki stamp, which I thought meant a non-traditionally made blade; and it has registry certificate, which I thought was only issued to traditionally made blades.

As far as I know, Swords cannot be papered if the smith is still alive. I would think that post war swords made be deceased smiths can be papered. I'm pretty sure that modern smiths are required to sign and date their pieces, nearly all the post war swords that I've seen have both a signature and a date.

Chris, your assessment of Iaito seems to imply that they are inferior to art swords, which I don't think is entirely fair. Art swords and Iai/Tameshigiri swords are made to different criteria. With art swords, the beauty of the hamon, jihada and hataraki take priority. Since they are meant to be appreciated by connoisseurs, an art polish is needed to bring out the beauty of the blade. With martial arts swords, factors like length, balance, tachikzae (in the case of Iaito), and lateral strength (in the case of tameshigiri swords) are more important than the jihada, hamon, etc. A high grade art polish in a martial art sword is futile since these blades will be handled, and often scratched. To draw an analogy, Art swords are like dress shoes, while Iai/Tameshigiri swords are work boots.

A really big indicator that the sword is a production blade, is the fact that the tsuka is double pegged.

There has been talk at the NY Token kai http://www.ny-tokenkai.org/home.htm about hosting an NTHK shinsa. How likely this is, I'm not sure. The last shinsa in NY was in 2006, so maybe we're due for another one.

I've been wondering about blade activity. Is its value purely aesthetic, or is there a practical side to hataraki? I remember reading that ashi keep chips in the hamon from getting too large. I also remember hearing that utsuri acts as a kind of shock absorber to prevent chipping. Has any one else heard this about other hataraki like sunigashi, tobiyaki, jinie, etc?

The one thing about this blade that struck me is the fact that there is no date on the tang. I've never seen a shinsakuto without one before.

From http://www.samuraisam.net Has anyone used this stuff? On either a Nihonto or a modern production blade?

A few reasons why I think Shinsakuto may be a little neglected. 1)One thing to keep in mind about art, not just nihonto, it becomes more valuable after the artisan is dead. Van Gough sold two of his paintngs while he lived. 2) Many shinsakuto are copies old masterpieces. No matter how well make, a copy is a copy 3) There is a paucity of information, especially in English on post-war swordsmiths. While there are a number of good introductory books (The Craft of the Japanese Sword, The New Generation of Japanese Swordsmiths, Modern Japanese Swords and Swordsmithscome to mind) There are no books about shinsakuto that go into the depth of antiquite blades like Nagayama's Connoiseur's Book of Japanese Swords 4) There is something to be said about a sword's historical value. No shinsakuto was ever carried by a samurai, and that means something to alot of collectors. Having said all that, I think that shinsakuto are wonderful. I own two post-war blades and they are the pride of my collection. I think that shinsakuto are of higher quality (i.e. stronger, sharper, more activity) than most blades made after sekigahara. Shinsakuto are made as weapons not as objects d'art. In fact,on http://www.e-sword.jp nearly all the shinsakuto for sale are marketed as being suitable for iai and tameshigiri. I know it's not thesame as being used in battle, but it is the closes nearly all of us are going to get.

At the Art of the Samurai exhibition in the Metropolitan, the oldest sword that had a hamon was a chokuto from the Kofun period 7th century. According to legend, the curved single edged nihonto was first forged in the 8th century.

The Boston Museum of fine arts has a rather nice display of Japanese arms and armor. The Metroplitan Museum of art's display, in NYC, is quite good too. There is a museum of arms and armor in Worchester, MA, but I went there only once, and that was more than twenty years ago. I strongly reccomend getting in touch with a sword club/tokenkai. Boston seems to have had a tokenkai at one time. Here is the info I managed to find at nihonto.com: BOSTON TOKEN KAI - Meetings held 3rd Thursday, monthly. Contact Rad Smith, Box 26, Newton, Mass. 02159. New York has a tokenkai that is quite active http://www.ny-tokenkai.org/. I've been to a few of their meetings and the members always bring several nice swords. The really great thing about a tokenkai is that you can handle the swords and learn how to examine and appreciate a nihonto. Members can also give you leads on dealers and shows. Hope this helps.

I haven't found any consistant info on the Muramasa smiths. Hawley lists seven smiths who signed their blades 村正. Ther dates are 1362, 1394, 1444,1457, 1501, 1532, 1573, 1624. Their value ranged from 10-60. Yumoto lists Muramasa, who worked in 1362, and Muramasa III, who worked on 1429. This implies a Muramasa II. The JSL database lists five Muramasas between 1360, 1521, 1521-32, 1528, 1573. Nagayama says only that, "Several generations of smiths used this name" He also listed some of the typical characteristics of the Muramasa school: nioi deki of irregular width, the hamon on the ura and omote sides mirror each other. The Nakago is distinctive and is tanagobara-gata. I've only seen two blades signed 村正. Neither had any of the characteristics listed above. One was privately owned and had NBTHK Koshu Tokubetsu Kicho papers. The other was displayed at the recent Samurai exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of art.

Does anyone have the results of previous competitions?. I've searched this forum and google and only managed to find the results of 2005 and what looks like a partial list of 2007.

I thought there was a Japanese trained polisher in New York too.

Did the Kicho papers have a watermark, like the Hozon do?