Build Quality Of A Nihonto By Sight

[fatrat2]

Hi All,

 

I am new to the collection of Nihonto. I have been searching within the forum on identifying or discerning the build quality of a sword in hand, but couldn't. Perhaps I have been using the wrong key words.

 

Ignoring provenance and history, how do you tell by looking at the sword that the sword is well made? Other than the obvious flaws... or is it even possible to do that, but i assume you can because judging the build quality is part of the whole Shinsa process. 

 

I apologize if this has been discussed but as mentioned I couldn't find in the older thread(s).  Appreciate your help. Redirect me if need be. 

 

Regards,

Chian

 

 

[PNSSHOGUN]

What is your idea of a well made sword?

[raynor]

Not to take words out of anyone's mouth, but lets say a sword as a functional cutting tool is what he means. Then one would look for function over beauty, tho with Nihonto they both go hand in hand with a good sword.

 

So no flashy kiku hamons, clear boshi on the kissaki, good well forged hada etc. but from personal experience you also need to hold a sword to tell if it is well made - balance and so forth.

[nagamaki - Franco]

The key word to look for is kantei (a word synonymous with Japanese sword appreciation). The 1st step in kantei is evaluating the sword's shape, good swords begin with shape (studying curvature).  The 2nd step in kantei (too often overlooked) is determining overall quality. Both of these steps call for training the eye to recognize what is excellent. Which requires looking at as many of the best swords as possible to the point, it is suggested, that viewing a bad sword will hurt your eyes. And so, the ongoing process begins.

[Ray Singer]

I would suggest the book below.

 

Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords: A Collector's Guide https://www.amazon.com/dp/1568365837/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_LiUtCbBJF9EVJ

[Greg F]

Hi Chian,

I second Rays recommendation of facts and fundamentals as its a very good book to help get a grasp of things and I find myself occasionally going back to it to refresh my learning on certain things. A must for anyone new to Nihonto.

 

Greg

[Dave R]

 I suggest looking for clean and confident lines. No wobbles or dips, the edge an even curve, and clear signs of the hamon relating to the edge. Are these lines continued into the nakago, is the filing on it clear and parallel, and does it end in a neat and clean manner.

 

 Look at as many swords in hand as you can. Books are good, reading is essential, but nothing beats looking at a lot of real swords held in the hand.

[raynor]

What about subtlety and control, for example some swords have notare hamon where the waves are synchronized on both sides of the blade, even the nie too sometimes.

 

I love a big active hamon resembling an active fire, crashing waves or twirling clouds, but I am more impressed when there is a subtle hamon displaying the smith choosing to excersice control with things like synched clean lines both sides of the ha, maybe with a little happy accident somewhere.

[fatrat2]

Thank you for the responses thus far. Maybe I am looking for something more concrete. It still is quite elusive in my opinion. I constantly come across words like ‘consistent jihada’, ‘bright nie’, ‘tight hada’... but how does one look at a sword and know it is ‘functionally’ sound.

 

Does having a lot of activity constitute good sword structure? Or only if the activities confirm to a certain school then it is considered ‘good’.

 

I am sure a Juyo sword has to be ‘well made’ but what sets it apart from the other Juyo’s and those that can go beyond that and pass Tokubetsu Juyo, other than conforming to said school and maker, coupled with provenance?

 

*Thank you Raynor... borrowed the word ‘functional’ from you. It’s is apt.

 

*I do have the book mentioned, Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords. It is very concise. But it is hard to apply when u have a few nihonto’s lined up in front of you and need to decide which one you want to bring home, assuming all have legitimate lineage.

 

Apologize for the vagueness but I am being as concrete as I can with my limited knowledge.

[John A Stuart]

I have often thought about this. Given that the basic design criteria are present, minimisation of detractors and education of these is present, in other words, the objective appraisal; it is that certain subjective assessment that gives immense satisfaction and is a personal overall prejudice we all have. Quality of craft that speaks on a personal level. John

[Ray Singer]

Yamanaka goes into detail on his opinion of what constitutes a high-quality sword, with heavy emphasis on the quality of the nioi-guchi. I do not agree with all of what he writes into his book, and on a personal level I take a very different approach to collecting from what he advises, however it is interesting to read his point-of-view.

[nagamaki - Franco]

... but how does one look at a sword and know it is ‘functionally’ sound.

 

Does having a lot of activity constitute good sword structure? Or only if the activities confirm to a certain school then it is considered ‘good’.

 

 

 

http://www.nihontocraft.com/Suishinshi_Masahide.html

 

From an early time of sword study it became readily apparent that what separated the different eras of sword making was that Koto swords had a direct connection to use, battle tested. There's nothing like having a steady stream of direct feedback. [Form follows function and is a product of the environment]. Yamanaka and Nihonto Koza both refer to this thought in their writings, Kentaro Yoshikawa sensei, too.

 

And just for the record, I enjoy and appreciate swords from all time periods. 

Edited January 28, 2019 by nagamaki - Franco

[seattle1]

Hello:

I believe you are asking about the functional qualities of the sword qua sword and not its aesthetic assessment characteristics for surely beauty is always in the eye of the beholder and that varies from person. Much useful can be gleane d from the writings found in Facts and Fundamentals, many observations found in the older issues of Token to Rekishi, particularly from the days of the late Yoshikawa Koen, and from someoff hand observations of Alber Yamanaka who was to write in his Nihonto News-Letter, Vol.II, No. 4 (April, 1969), p. 31:

"Today, we often hear reference to the Nihonto as an 'art sword'and this is quite correct since the sword has lost its primary function. (The) Japanese sword was made to kill and cut one's opponent with and its primary function was that and that alone.

During the Tokugawa Period, the Samurai, not having much opportunity to use these swords in combat, the swords started to be called the 'soul of the Samurai',however, the primary function of the sword should not be forgotten.

We are certain that no sword smith made or forged swords with the intention of turning out a great work of 'art'. though he certainly tried his best to turn out a very 'keen' blade.

Such being the case, the cutting ability of the sword was a quality very much sought after."

History is replete with blades that appear 'beautiful' but which might be functionally limited. The Mongol invasions showed that verticality in

the yakiba, 'beautiful' as they were would tend to break when used against the against the invaders armor and what was needed was the eventual restriction to less wide yakiba and minimized vertical height. By the same token shinto swords with wide hard nie hamon combined with tight ji-gane were prone to breakage, hence the enthusiasm for cutting tests. Masahide initially thought that going back to koto models was the answer but in his later years he focused on suguba. Those swords that cut well will tend to have fairly narrow yakiba, sometimes rather indistinct nioi-guchi and masame running close to the yakiba. Beautiful ?, perhaps, functional yes.

Arnold F.

Please excuse the poor editing above as I can't get it to behave, however the drift should be clear.

[fatrat2]

Thank you again for the responses.

 

... also, kitae ware is generally more readily accepted for older blades. Why is that? Is it safe to assume that at the folding stage of the blade, the compactness does not transcend to the core? Therefore, polishing over time exposes more and more of the core, thus more separation can be seen? Or is it that the consistency of a well made sword is more scarce before Shinto times (aka not as ideal workmanship). 

 

This I must stress is not generalization of saying that Shinto blades are better but perhaps due consistency of raw materials and blade-making environment, the outcome of blades are more predictable during later periods? Therefore, well made Kotos are harder to find and thus more sought after by seasoned collectors?

 

Chian

[Gakusee]

Thank you again for the responses.

 

... also, kitae ware is generally more readily accepted for older blades. Why is that? Is it safe to assume that at the folding stage of the blade, the compactness does not transcend to the core? Therefore, polishing over time exposes more and more of the core, thus more separation can be seen?

 

Chian

Both of the above are acceptable answers. Both core steel (less refined in most cases unless monotlithic plank like some KoBizen) exposed through repeated polishing and less homogenous steel than the later centralised-tatara procurement could engender are the cause.

 

However, it is a misconception that tight and refined hada was not available or was more scarce in Koto. Simply the mujihada of later blades is so prevalent that we sometimes confuse this for workmanship and craftsmanship instead of simply the homogeneity of central tamahagane. One needs to look at Sanjo/Gojo/Awataguchi work and of course Masamune, Kagemitsu, Kanemitsu, Go etc which not only has superior but also richer (more nie, more chikei etc) hada.

[raynor]

So Masamune was finally mentioned - why is he regarded as the best Japanese swordsmith ever? The answer should be relevant to this thread. I've never seen his work, not yet even near the level where I would be able to appreciate it if I did but it is all on the bucket list.

 

I dont think it was for the same reasons some say Prada or Versace is the best, that he became a buzzword among the social elite what with daimyos all wanting at least a tanto by his hand. I've read that his work was unique visually but also for practical reasons - he tempered steel successfully at temperatures never before done, and I believe perfected lamination?

 

In short his swords were better in form and function at cutting then those before and after, and it appears the why is yet to be answered.

[Gakusee]

Masamune needs to be seen to be understood / believed. The hada is tight, as inherited via his teacher Shintogo (Awataguchi lineage): but not only is it tight, it is magical - nie scintillates like crushed diamonds in the jiba (I.e. across the hada but also in the hamon as sunagashi and kinsuji). Furthermore, there are chikei that criss-cross the hada (again nie based but in a different formation).

Also, the hamon has this natural, wild feeling to it without being too gaudy.

 

Masamune inherited his technique of forging tight hada via Yamashiro/Awataguchi, so that was done before him. Also, rendering in nie was done before him and he emulated KoBizen and Hoki in the nie-laden hamon rich in sunagashi and kinsuji. He did pioneer some more intricate construction and indeed combined all the aforementioned elements in one, thus reaching heights of visual craftsmanship but also functionality. However, Soshu Yukimitsu also had marvelous blades, which at their best beat “average”/ lower-level Masamune. Go Yushihiro as well....

 

Anyway, Chian and Omar, welcome to this fascinating field. There are no straightforward answers or shortcuts here -just many years, decades of study and handling swords and discussing with Nihonto people live....

[raynor]

Thanks for the welcome, this is a rabbit hole I most enjoy stumbling down, especially after starting to realize just how deep it is.

 

So to simplify things, one could look for common practical construction factors, visual appeal nothwithstanding shared between the very top echelon of smiths to attempt to pin down what the best functional sword should be. From my limited understanding tight hada makes sense for blade integrity. Way out of my depth here but would not suguha do the same for hamon, as Suishinshi Masahide, Mr. back-to-koto dabbled with at the end of his career?

[Dalva]

Im new too but at glance and according to my exp on other type of blade, good Hada and Hamon seems show the quality of the Metallurgy. Itame Hada seems more often shows in Katana from Koto era or before 1500 AD. Although in Shinshinto which around 1700 to 1900 (I cud be wrong) we can see Itame Hada as Shinshinto in my quick observation is trying to copy Koto era Nihonto

 

So only using eyes observation for me I look for good itame Hada and good hamon. What is good itame Hada..for me it is a tight one because to me (i can be wrong) tight itame shows the folding skill of the blacksmith. As for Hamon, for me as long as it is clear and heterogen (having yo, kinsuji etc) sud be ok

 

This is just my 2 cents and im very2 new in Nihonto world

 

Cheers

 

Dion

[Hoshi]

This is a huge topic which needs to be broken down. But basically it boils down to this:

 

1. There is a common component of build quality. Let's call this the core. It's the stuff like good suguha, shaping, etc and this breaks down into two archetypes (Graceful vs Powerful). That's a topic in itself but we can basically say it's common. 

2. On top of the core, build quality of each tradition is then evaluated separately.

 

This means that quality=f(core_quality, tradition_component_quality). 

 

Few examples:

 

Bizen_component_quality = core_quality+f(Noie-Guchi (e.g.thickness, regularity and brilliance of the Noie-guchi))

Soshu_component_quality = core_quality+f(Flamboyance (e.g. harataki in the hamon))

Yamashiro_component_quality = core_quality+f(finesse and brilliance of the jihada (e.g. Uroie))

 

So if you want to evaluate the quality of Soshu tradition sword you don't use the Bizen criteria. This is all stuff you'll find into the old and more recent books. Based on this stuff you'll then get tiered judgements. e.g. Masamune is T1 Soshu, Yoshimitsu is T1 Yamashiro, Mitsutada is T1 Bizen, etc. It's not very clean because Soshu first gen is evaluated as Yamashiro for instance and sub-soshu groups (e.g. Norishige) are evaluated based on characteristic matsukawa, but that's basically a good rule of thumb. Then we have a few leaks, such as Aoe which takes the Yamashiro algorithm with its own little flavor. 

 

But the basic point is this: build quality is not evaluated the same way for all Nihonto. Some traits are weighted more heavily for some schools compared to some other when evaluating build quality. 

 

Cheers