estcrh

I agree, it would be a great poster

Brian if you think it will be useful go ahead.

Ken I actually just made it by the editing together the written guide and the visual guide into one chart.

Try this one out, Sato's guide and the visual chart combined. http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/origi ... 90cab6.jpg

Agree....it looks like a shamshir axe Persian origin but no idea how the kanji got there Actually a "shamshir" is a sword, a "tabar" would be the name you are looking for. This is not a Japanese style of axe no matter what is written on the blade, having a metal plate run down the handle is an Indo-Persian style, the head is an Ottoman/Syrian/Mamluk form. Hereis a link with many types of Indo-Persian axe. http://www.pinterest.com/samuraiantique ... r-and-axe/ Here ia some typical Japanese axe (ono) shapes

Link to a full size version that is right side up.. http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/origi ... 063b9b.jpg

Jussi, I cleaned your pic up.

Piers, all opinions would be welcome by me, however I am not sure how the current owner would feel about any negative findings as it sold in 2008 for $23,445!!!!...that would be an expensive fake.

Thanks John, just wondering what I was missing in the translation. One question, if the smith died in 1851 how did he participate in the Boshin war (1868)?

Ron, this may interest you, I just ran into this picture, no way to tell how old it is but an interesting solution to aiming one of these.

Very nice, can anyone translate the basic information?

Jean, that is the size of the house in square feet, in meters it is equal to 445.9 I believe, 4800 sf would be quite large.

Ron, I am assuming the same thing based on the fact that the Koreans were using actual rockets before the Japanese began using firearms. I have read that the Koreans used cannon to fire rockets at least by the 15th century, but I do not know what the age of the types I posted would be. One use mentioned of rockets in Korea was against pirates.

Ron, your bo-hiya could pass for an original, nice work. There is not much information on this subject in English, it is possible that the bo-hiya was based on the Korean chongtong, a type of cannon arrow. Here is a link to a Wikipedia article I created on the subject and a gallery of related images. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo-hiya http://www.pinterest.com/samuraiantique ... le-cannon/ Here is a picture showing how bo-hiya eventually evolved into whaling harpoons in the 1800s. Three sizes of Korean chongtong.

You can find nice used stands in Japan that while not particularly old or elaborate (or expensive) have a certain look that a brand new stand just does not have.

Florian your right, I posted a couple of examples here. viewtopic.php?f=66&t=17658

Nice looking blade, Shinshinto (new new swords 1781–1876), actually many types of armor were worn and used for the entire Edo period, these types of thick tanto would have been quite useful in the right situation.

Ben, I can not comment much on the tanto other than to say that it looks like a good package to me personally, much better than many that are higher priced, but I have purchased several non sword related items from them and they communicated well, shipped fast and the items were as described. The yen is at a good exchange rate presently as well.

The question was How do you know what he means by this exactly, I am explaining how people who own and discuss armor use the terms he was asking about. If you say for example that you have a "yoroi kabuto" you will get laughed at in an English speaking forum. If you or anyone else has some knowledge of how these terms are used in another context then by all means say so but do not pretend to be able to read the mind of the original poster.

Guido, thats not how most English speaking collectors, dealers etc use these words, no one says "yoroi kabuto", we just say "kabuto" along with a descriptive term such as "zunari kabuto" or "suji bachi kabuto". Why would we say "yoroi kaburo" when we are not talking about a helmet, and if we were talking about a helmet we would not need to add "yoroi", maybe in Japan they use these terms the way you mention. We would use "yoroi" to show that a certain item is armor related or is armored, such as "yoroi hakama" (armored pants) as compared to just plain "hakama", or "yoroi katabira" (armored jacket) to differentiate from a plain "katabira". To English speaking people who have an interest in Japanese armor "katchu" simply means Japanese armor, "tosei gusoku" describes the new type of plate armors that came into use during the 1500s as compared to the older types of scale based armors, "gusoku" means a full suit of armor, "haraate", "haramaki", "domaru", "o-yoroi" are specific types of armors.

One of several companies that take other peoples items currently for sale in Japan and try to middle man it to you at a steep mark up. Often these items can be seen for sale on Yahoo Japan for a much lower price at the same time they are on ebay, not illegal, just much more expensive than if you found the same item being sold by the real owner.

Yoroi would be used to describe something that is armored or used along with armor, yoroi hitsu/bitsu is a armor storage box, yoroi doshi is an armor piercing knife, yoroi hitatari is clothing worn under armor, yoroi katabira is an armored jacket. Katchu is a general term for Japanese armor, like if you were a katchu fanatic, you could say that you really want to learn more about katchu. Gusoku is the term for a suit of armor, if you see a suit of Japanese armor you could say that you saw a fantastic gusoku today.

You will need more detailed images showing all of the associated parts before anyone can tell you if it is a matching armor. The present images are very blurry, check to see if the backing cloth of the suneate (shin armor), haidate (thigh armor) and kote (armored sleeves) is the same, and if the kusari (mail) is the same every were, also the odoshi (lacing) should be the same type on all parts.

TO UCHIKO OR NOT TO UCHIKO: ILL EFFECTS OF UCHIKO IN REGULAR SWORD CARE AND MAINTENANCE.* S. Alexander Takeuchi, Ph.D. Department of Sociology University of North Alabama January 24, 2004 Since I am not a polisher nor a Nihon-to appraiser, what I think personally about this topic may not have much merit, especially after many experts including real togi-shi (i.e., polisher) have already explained elsewhere possible ill effects of abusing uchiko. Here, I just want to share what I have learned from one of Japan’s "Ningen Kokuho" (i.e., Living National Treasure – the highest government recognized honor for a traditional craftsman in Japan) togi-shi, Kohkan Nagayama, through his books. In a book interview, Kohkan Nagayama (1994[1973]), one of the Living National Treasure togi-shi in Japan, rather strongly recommends *against* regular use of uchiko on finely polished antique blades. He explains that the major purpose of using uchiko when cleaning *antique Nihon-to* is to remove old oil. However, no matter how good the quality of the uchiko may be, the uchigumori-to powder repeatedly rubbed against a finely polished blade (that skilled togi-shi worked so hard on) will eventually dull the subtle activities in ha and ji-hada over time.... Thus, Nagayama clearly says that it would be ideal if we could remove old oil on finely polished antique Nihon-to blades without ever using uchiko. In his retrospective essays, Nagayama (2000) also mentions about the ill effects of repeated and prolonged application of uchiko even on the blades that are still in the process of being polished. There, he explains that if the entire process of polishing takes too long, it will require the blade to be oiled at the end of each day until it is finally finished: However, this will also require the use of uchiko every beginning of the day to first remove the oil applied on the blade... Since uchiko is "finely ground polishing stone" after all, its use should be kept minimal (even for the purpose of cleaning and maintaining the blade) in order not to scratch or "kill" the polished activities in the steel. Now as to the "widely spread misinformation" (in Nagayama’s and several other Nihon-to authorities’ opinions such as Ogasawara, 1994) that "repeated use of uchiko on a polished blade will make the blade look even better," Nagayama (2000) also clearly denies its validity and even condemns the polishers who would give such an account to their clients. According to Nagayama, even though laypersons may not be able to tell, polishers ought to know better whether or not another polisher has cut corners in doing his job. If the blade is polished skillfully and meticulously, it will much less likely loose its finely brought-up activities and other aesthetic characteristics over years: Such a blade will only get "tasteful" over years of cleaning with uchiko *only because* all the activities aesthetic characteristics are already brought up properly. In other words, Nihon-to blades must look their best when they have just been polished properly. Therefore, when a polisher tells his client that "the blade will look better over years if it is cleaned with uchiko regularly," he is admitting that his polishing job is not good and [taking advantage of the naive clients by] using such a misconception as an excuse for his poor work... It is still a question if other reputable polishers will totally agree with Nagayama’s rather strong assertions against the use of uchiko. However, I tend to believe there is some truth in these strong opinions when such opinions come from a professional who has achieved in his profession the highest honor and recognition that his national government designates... References: Nagayama, Kohkan. (1994[1973]). "Togi." [Polishing.] In Tadashi Oono (Ed.) Nihon-to shokunin shokudan. [The tales from Nihon-to craftsmen.] (1st Ed.) Pp. 57-72. Tokyo, Japan: Kogei Shuppan. ISBN 4-7694-0051-9. Nagayama, Kohkan. (2000). Nihon-to wo Togu: Togishi no waza, me, kokoro. [Polishing Nihon-to: The skills, eyes and spirit of togi-shi]. Tokyo, Japan: Yuzankaku. ISBN4-639-01554-2. Ogasawara, Nobuo. (1994). Nihon_to no kansho kiso chishiki. [The fundamental knowledge of Japanese sword appreciation.] Tokyo, Japan: Shibun Do. ISBN4-7694-0053-5. [Note. Nobuo Ogasawara is one of Japan’s leading experts in the academic study of Nihon-to. He is also the chief executive officer of the Nihon-to division at the Tokyo National Art Museum.] ********** *The original article appeared on the old Bugei Sword Forums in 2003. This version has been edited slightly from the original post. Copyright © by S. Alexander Takeuchi, Ph.D.