Tsuba casting molds ?

[Dan tsuba]

Hello all!

 

Well, over the 10 months that this thread has been on the forum I (and others) have done some serious time-consuming and painstaking research!

 

I now feel that I have pretty much exhausted all the references and research that I can do on the subject of cast iron tsuba being made in the Edo period (or before).

 

Now, as mentioned in part of my previous post (of November 7, 2022) –

 

“Now, I know from trying to find research relating to this thread over the last several months that there is very little (almost none!) historical evidence written about “cast iron” tsuba possibly being produced in the Edo period.

 

Maybe the “16th generation iron casting family” has some “family written” old historical documents on the subject. Or, at least, some knowledge of it that was passed down by “oral tradition”? Not that I am going to fly to Japan and interview the family! But it would be an interesting way to find out if more (or any) historical information about the possibility of “cast iron” tsuba being produced in the Edo period is still in existence.

 

“That may finally conclude this very interesting thread.  Either way: “If cast iron tsuba were produced during the Edo period” or “if cast iron tsuba were not produced during the Edo period” I consider this thread to have been (and still is!) fun!”

 

 

And just so the question of ‘written documents” by Edo period craftsman does not come up again (as it did before) let me add a quote from another post of mine also dated November 7^th, 2022-

 

“When the Tokugawa period began, few common people in Japan could read or write.” 

 

Anyway, that is why Edo period craftsman passed down their knowledge by “word of mouth” or what is known as “oral tradition”.

 

Although my personal opinion is that if this thread is read in its entirety (if someone can get through it all!), an interested individual has enough referenced and researched material on hand to make an informed decision on the subject (one way or the other!).

 

So, until I can find more research that I can reference or save up my money for a roundtrip plane ticket to Japan! --

I guess the adventure (or “crusade” – as Jean likes to call it!) will continue in one form or another! 

 

With respect,

Dan

[Spartancrest]

[Bugyotsuji]

In conclusion to a wonderfully educational thread, and for decorative effect…

cast in iron and copper,

 

 

[GRC]

Well, I decided to see what the Artificial Intelligence program “ChatGPT” could do to search for information related to this topic.

It’s astonishing how much information it was able to find from published sources.

 

Here’s a direct copy of my interaction with the AI program.

My questions are indented and bolded.

ChatGPT’s response are underneath and unmodified by me.

 

So don’t shoot the messenger, this is purely a transcript of what ChatGPT was able to find in published sources.

 

I have not vetted any the references that it has provided.

I will leave that to others to find or comment on I they already have a copy in their possession.

It will be interesting to see if there any discrepancies in what was reported by ChatGPT.

 

Here’s the link if anyone wants to explore what it has to offer.

 

https://chatgptonline.ai/

 

In terms of information gathering and processing, it really is a new World…

[GRC]

The availability of cast-iron ingots was previously left in the "unknown" category.

 

Here is what ChatGPT found:

 

Again, my questions and prompts are BOLDED.

ChatGPT's responses are underneath each prompt from me, and  I didn't change any of them.

 

ChatGPT offers its own little summary statements after it is asked to provide references for its initial statements.

 

 

Did Japan produce cast-iron ingots for commercial trade during the Edo period?

 

Yes, Japan did produce cast-iron ingots for commercial trade during the Edo period. The production of cast iron was an important industry in Japan during this time, and cast-iron ingots were used for a variety of purposes, including the manufacture of tools, weapons, and other metal objects.

 

One of the most important centers of cast-iron production during the Edo period was the Kamaishi region in northeastern Japan. Kamaishi was known for its high-quality iron sand, which was used in the production of cast-iron ingots. These ingots were then transported to other parts of Japan and sold for use in various industries.

 

The production of cast-iron ingots was typically carried out by specialist ironworkers, who used traditional techniques to melt and pour the iron into molds. These ingots were often standardized in size and weight to make them easier to transport and trade.

 

Overall, the production of cast-iron ingots was an important industry in Japan during the Edo period, and these ingots were used for a wide range of purposes both domestically and in trade with other countries.

 

Provide references for these statements:

 

Here are some references to support the statement that Japan produced cast-iron ingots for commercial trade during the Edo period:

 

"Iron and Steel in the Japanese Industrial Revolution" by Richard W. Bulliet (1992): This book discusses the history of iron and steel production in Japan, including the importance of cast-iron ingots for trade. It notes that cast iron was a major export item for Japan during the Edo period, and that ingots were produced in large quantities for use in various industries.

 

"Japanese Cast Iron: A Comprehensive Guide to Antique Tetsubin and Subtsubo" by Sandi Hopper (2017): This book provides an overview of cast-iron production in Japan, including the production of ingots. It notes that cast-iron ingots were a key component of the Japanese iron industry during the Edo period, and that they were exported to other countries as well.

 

Provide references about the production of cast-iron ingots in Japan during the Edo period

 

Here are some references that specifically discuss the production of cast-iron ingots in Japan during the Edo period:

 

"The Emergence of Iron Smelting and Smithing in Japan" by J. Edward Kidder Jr. (1989): This article provides a detailed history of iron production in Japan, including the production of cast-iron ingots during the Edo period.

 

"The Making of Iron and Steel in Japan" by Donald H. Shively (1956): This article provides an overview of iron production in Japan, including the production of cast-iron ingots during the Edo period.

 

"Japanese Cast Iron: Origins, Production, and Significance" by David W. Johnson (1999): This article provides an overview of Japanese cast iron production, including the production of cast-iron ingots during the Edo period.

 

"The History of Ironmaking in Japan" by Masayuki Kawaguchi (2015): This book provides a comprehensive history of iron production in Japan, including the production of cast-iron ingots during the Edo period.

 

Overall, these references provide evidence that cast-iron ingots were an important part of Japanese iron production during the Edo period, and were produced using various techniques such as tatara ironmaking and blast furnace ironmaking.

 

 

[GRC]

So clearly, Japanese-made cast-iron ingots were widely available for use during the Edo period, making casting in iron much more accessible within Japan.

 

I decided to ask ChatGPT about tsuba, then more specifically about cast-iron tsuba produced during the Edo period.

 

My prompts are bolded, and ChatGPT's unedited responses are posted underneath.

 

 

Do you know what a tsuba is?

 

 

Yes, I do know what a tsuba is! In traditional Japanese swordsmanship, a tsuba is the handguard that sits between the hilt and the blade of a Japanese sword, such as a katana. The tsuba is typically made of metal and serves to protect the hand of the wielder from the blade, as well as to balance the sword. Often, tsuba are also ornately designed with intricate patterns or motifs, making them a beautiful piece of art as well as a functional part of the sword.

 

Did the Japanese produce tsuba made of cast-iron during the Edo period?

 

 

Yes, the Japanese did produce tsuba made of cast-iron during the Edo period, which lasted from 1603 to 1868. Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18th century) onward.

 

 

[GRC]

I thought,

 

"Is this for real?", “It can’t be that easy for AI to make such a bold statement about something that has been debated on NMB for years... can it?”

 

So, I figured I should ask ChatGPT to provide references that support its statement of “Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18th century) onward.”

 

Interestingly, it provides references in sets of three, but then you can ask it to provide more, and it will.

 

It defaults to providing references in the language that you wrote your question in, but then you can specify that it give you sources from a different language, like Japanese 😊

 

It also gives a short little blurb for each reference that states how the book supports the statement.

 

Before I post the list of 42 references I gathered from ChatGPT before giving up, I thought I’d give a short summary of all the “blurbs” ChatGPT provided…

 

This time, I will BOLD THE UNEDITED WORDS FROM ChatGPT.

My words are NOT bolded:

 

·      Cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period.

·      Cast-iron tsuba were produced in large numbers during the mid-Edo period, with many being made from the mid-18th century onward.

·      Cast-iron tsuba were often decorated with elaborate designs.

·      Cast-iron tsuba became more popular at that time due to:

        Advances in casting technology

        Durability

        Affordability/Low cost

        Changes in the social and economic environment.

 

Only one refence (in English) was described as stating:

 

·      Cast-iron tsuba were often used by lower-ranking samurai.

 

 

A major point of interest is that these references include several publications from the NBTHK, the Tokyo National Museum, the Japanese Sword Museum, and the Japanese Agency for Cultural Affairs.

 

Some people, who are still uncertain about the possibility of cast-iron tsuba being produced during the Edo period, have been holding out for some sort of "authentication" from the NBTHK.

ChatGPT listed the NBTHK as a supportive reference multiple times.  

 

It is also interesting to note that there are multiple Japanese publications that include examples of Edo-period cast-iron tsuba.

[GRC]

My prompts to ChatGPT are bolded.

ChatGPT's responses are posted underneath and unedited.

 

Japanese REFERENCE LIST

 

Provide Japanese references that support the statement

 

Here are some Japanese references that support the statement that "Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18th century) onward":

 

1.「日本刀装具図鑑」(Nihon To Sogu Zukan) by Nobuo Ogasawara (2007): This book provides a comprehensive guide to Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to their durability and affordability.

 

2.「刀剣の美術館」(Token no Bijutsukan) by the Tokyo National Museum (2011): This book is a catalog of the sword fittings collection at the Tokyo National Museum and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

3.「刀剣装具の世界」(Token Sogu no Sekai) by Yukio Hirose (1995): This book provides a detailed history of Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba were produced in large numbers during the mid-Edo period.

 

Overall, these Japanese references support the idea that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period due to their durability, affordability, and decorative potential.

 

Provide more Japanese references that support the statement

 

Here are some additional Japanese references that support the statement that "Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18th century) onward":

 

4.「日本刀装具大鑑」(Nihon To Sogu Taikan) by the NBTHK (1994): This book is a comprehensive guide to Japanese sword fittings and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

5.「刀剣装飾の美術史」(Token Soshoku no Bijutsushi) by the Tokyo National Museum (1982): This book provides a detailed history of Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to advances in casting technology.

 

6.「日本刀装具の美」(Nihon To Sogu no Bi) by the Japanese Sword Museum (2006): This book is a catalog of the sword fittings collection at the Japanese Sword Museum and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

Overall, these Japanese references provide further evidence that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period, and were an important part of the development of Japanese sword fittings.

 

provide more Japanese references

 

Here are some additional Japanese references that support the statement that "Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18th century) onward":

 

7.「日本刀装飾大鑑」(Nihon To Soshoku Daikan) by Kazuo Taizawa (2009): This book provides a comprehensive guide to Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to their durability and affordability.

 

8.「刀剣装飾大鑑」(Token Soshoku Daikan) by Kiyoshi Takahashi (1985): This book provides a detailed history of Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba were produced in large numbers during the mid-Edo period.

 

9.「刀剣の美術」(Token no Bijutsu) by the Japanese Sword Museum (2001): This book is a catalog of the sword fittings collection at the Japanese Sword Museum and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

Overall, these Japanese references support the idea that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period due to their durability, affordability, and decorative potential, and are an important part of the history of Japanese sword fittings.

 

provide more Japanese references

 

Here are some additional Japanese references that support the statement that "Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18th century) onward":

 

10.「日本刀の鑑賞基礎知識」(Nihon To no Kansho Kiso Chishiki) by Kazuo Taizawa (2014): This book provides an introduction to Japanese swords and their fittings, and notes that cast-iron tsuba were produced in large numbers during the mid-Edo period.

 

11.「日本刀装具大全」(Nihon To Sogu Taizen) by Nobuo Ogasawara (1993): This book is a comprehensive guide to Japanese sword fittings and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

12.「刀剣の美術」(Token no Bijutsu) by the NBTHK (2010): This book is a catalog of the sword fittings collection at the Nihon Bijutsu Token Hozon Kyokai (NBTHK) and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

Overall, these Japanese references provide further evidence that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period, and are an important part of the history of Japanese sword fittings.

 

provide more Japanese references

 

Here are some additional Japanese references that support the statement that "Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18th century) onward":

 

13.「刀剣の美と文化」(Token no Bi to Bunka) by the Agency for Cultural Affairs (2004): This book is a comprehensive guide to Japanese swords and their cultural significance, and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to advances in casting technology.

 

14.「日本刀装具の美」(Nihon To Sogu no Bi) by the Japanese Sword Museum (2018): This book is a catalog of the sword fittings collection at the Japanese Sword Museum and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

15.「刀剣装飾の美」(Token Soshoku no Bi) by the NBTHK (2016): This book is a catalog of the sword fittings collection at the NBTHK and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

Overall, these Japanese references provide further evidence that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period, and were an important part of the development of Japanese sword fittings.

 

provide more Japanese references

 

Here are some additional Japanese references that support the statement that "Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18th century) onward":

 

19.「日本刀装具の美術史」(Nihon To Sogu no Bijutsushi) by Hiroshi Hirano (1988): This book provides a detailed history of Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to advances in casting technology and changes in the social and economic environment.

 

20.「日本刀装具図典」(Nihon To Sogu Zuten) by the NBTHK (2015): This book is a comprehensive guide to Japanese sword fittings and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

21.「日本刀装飾の技術」(Nihon To Soshoku no Gijutsu) by Masahiro Kubota (2019): This book provides an overview of the techniques used to create Japanese sword fittings, including cast-iron tsuba.

 

Overall, these Japanese references provide further evidence that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period, and were an important part of the development of Japanese sword fittings.

 

provide more Japanese references

 

Here are some additional Japanese references that support the statement that “Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18^th century) onward”:

 

22.「日本刀装具の世界」(Nihon To Sogu no Sekai) by the NBTHK (2001): This book provides a comprehensive overview of Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced during the mid-Edo period due to their durability and affordability.

 

23.「日本刀装具の美術」(Nihon To Sogu no Bijutsu) by the Tokyo National Museum (1998): This book is a catalog of the sword fittings collection at the Tokyo National Museum and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

24.「日本刀装具の世界展」(Nihon To Sogu no Sekai-ten) by the NBTHK (2015): This exhibition catalog includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period, and provides a detailed overview of their history and significance.

 

Overall, these Japanese references provide further evidence that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period, and were an important part of the development of Japanese sword fittings.

 

provide more Japanese references

 

Here are some additional Japanese references that support the statement that "Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18th century) onward":

 

25.「日本刀装具事典」(Nihon To Sogu Jiten) by Kazuo Taizawa (2010): This book provides a comprehensive guide to Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to their durability and affordability.

 

26.「日本刀装具図鑑」(Nihon To Sogu Zukan) by the NBTHK (2012): This book is a comprehensive guide to Japanese sword fittings and includes several examples of cast-iron tsuba from the mid-Edo period.

 

27.「日本刀装飾の美術史」(Nihon To Soshoku no Bijutsushi) by the Tokyo National Museum (2012): This book provides a detailed history of Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to advances in casting technology.

 

Overall, these Japanese references provide further evidence that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period, and were an important part of the development of Japanese sword fittings.

[GRC]

ENGLISH REFERENCE LIST:

 

provide references for this statement: “Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18^th century) onward.”

 

Here are some references to support the statement that cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period onward:

 

28. "Japanese Tsuba: From Simple to Ornate" by Gary Murtha (2014): This book notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period and were often used by lower-ranking samurai who could not afford tsuba made of more expensive materials like gold or silver.

 

29. "The Art of the Japanese Sword" by Yoshindo Yoshihara and Leon Kapp (1997): This book states that cast-iron tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period, with many being made from the mid-18th century onward.

 

30. "The Complete Guide to Japanese Sword Polishing" by Kiyoshi Kato (2012): This book mentions that cast-iron tsuba became more common in the latter half of the Edo period, and that they were often decorated with designs that imitated other materials like gold or shakudo.

 

31. "Tsuba: Japanese Sword Guards" by Julia Meech-Pekarik (1986): This book discusses the history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period.

 

32. "The Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords" by Kokan Nagayama (1997): This book also notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period.

 

33. "Japanese Sword Mounts: A Guide for Collectors and Connoisseurs" by Hiroko Kapp and Leon Kapp (2010): This book provides a detailed history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period.

 

Overall, it seems that there is consensus among experts that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period.

 

Provide more references for this statement: “Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18^th century) onward.”

 

34. "Tsuba and Japanese Sword Fittings in the Collection of the Cooper-Hewitt Museum" by Joe Earle (1983): This book notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period and were produced in large numbers.

 

35. "Japanese Sword Guards: Masterpieces of Japanese Art" by Hiroi Takahashi (2008): This book provides a detailed history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to their durability and low cost.

 

36. "The Art of the Japanese Sword: The Craft of Swordmaking and its Appreciation" by Yoshindo Yoshihara and Leon Kapp (2012): This book discusses the history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to advances in casting technology.

 

Overall, these references support the idea that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period.

 

Provide more references for this statement

 

37. "The Craft of the Japanese Sword" by Leon Kapp and Hiroko Kapp (2013): This book provides a detailed history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to their durability and affordability.

 

38. "Japanese Sword Guards: An Illustrated Guide for Collectors" by Ray Tsuchiyama (2017): This book provides a comprehensive guide to Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to advances in casting technology and were produced in large numbers during the mid-Edo period.

 

39. "Japanese Sword Fittings: A Collector's Guide" by Basil William Robinson (1979): This book notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period and were often decorated with intricate designs.

 

Overall, these references support the idea that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period due to their durability, affordability, and decorative potential.

 

provide more references published before 1970

 

Finding references published before 1970 may be challenging, as most of the important works on Japanese sword fittings were published after this time. However, here are a few references that discuss cast-iron tsuba and were published before 1970:

 

40. "Japanese Sword-Guards" by Torigoye Yukihira (1937): This book provides a detailed history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period.

 

41. "The Japanese Sword" by Kanzan Sato (1963): This book provides a general overview of Japanese swords, including tsuba. While it does not specifically discuss cast-iron tsuba, it notes that tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period.

 

42. "The Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords" by Nagayama Kokan (1968): This book provides a detailed history of Japanese swords, including tsuba. While it does not specifically discuss cast-iron tsuba, it notes that tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period.

 

Overall, while these references do not specifically discuss cast-iron tsuba, they do support the idea that tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period, which includes the mid-Edo period when cast-iron tsuba became popular.

 

This is me writing now:

At this point, I figured I would stop searching, since it started giving results that weren’t directly referencing cast-iron tsuba, just the increased production of tsuba during the Edo period.

[Larason2]

Chat GPT has frequently been shown to produce erroneous statements. All those tsuba could be references to wrought iron, and Chat GPT wouldn't know the difference. If most of the authors it is referencing don't know the difference between wrought iron and cast iron, it won't know the difference either.

[Larason2]

I asked ChatGPT "what's the difference between a Nihonto amd a reproduction?" and here's what it said:

 

"A nihonto refers to an authentic Japanese sword made by traditional methods and by skilled swordsmiths in Japan. These swords are highly regarded for their craftsmanship, historical significance, and cultural value. Nihonto swords are typically made using traditional techniques and materials, such as tamahagane (a type of steel), and they often feature unique and intricate designs.

On the other hand, a reproduction refers to a sword that is made as a copy or imitation of a nihonto. Reproductions can be made by modern swordsmiths or manufacturers using different methods and materials. They may attempt to mimic the appearance of a nihonto, but they do not possess the same level of historical authenticity or craftsmanship.

Here are some key differences between a nihonto and a reproduction:

1. Craftsmanship: Nihonto swords are crafted by experienced swordsmiths who have undergone extensive training and follow traditional techniques. The level of skill and attention to detail in a nihonto is typically higher than that of a reproduction.

2. Materials: Nihonto swords are often made using traditional materials, including tamahagane, which is a type of steel produced from iron sand. Reproductions may use different types of steel or alloys that do not match the composition of traditional nihonto.

3. Historical Significance: Nihonto swords are considered historical artifacts and hold cultural significance in Japan. They often have a documented lineage and may be associated with famous swordsmiths or historical events. Reproductions lack this historical connection and are not considered genuine historical artifacts.

4. Value: Due to their craftsmanship, historical significance, and limited supply, nihonto swords are highly valued and can be quite expensive. Reproductions, while they may be well-made, do not possess the same value as authentic nihonto.

It's worth noting that both nihonto swords and reproductions can be appreciated and enjoyed for their own merits. Reproductions can be more accessible to collectors or enthusiasts who are unable to acquire or afford a genuine nihonto."

 

So not a single sentence that describes how to actually tell the difference. Then I asked: "How can you tell the difference between a nihonto and a reproduction?" Here's what it said:

 

"Differentiating between a nihonto and a reproduction can be challenging, especially for those who are not experienced or knowledgeable in sword appraisal. However, there are several factors you can consider to help determine the authenticity of a sword:

1. Certification and Documentation: Authentic nihonto swords often come with certificates or documentation that verify their authenticity and provide details about their lineage, swordsmith, and other relevant information. Look for reputable certification from recognized organizations or experts in Japanese sword appraisal.

2. Signature and Tang: Nihonto swords typically bear the signature (mei) of the swordsmith on the tang (nakago) of the blade. The signature can provide valuable information about the sword's origins. However, it is important to note that some reproductions may also have signatures, so further examination is required.

3. Construction and Materials: Carefully examine the blade and its construction. Nihonto swords are typically made from a high-quality steel called tamahagane and exhibit a specific layering pattern known as hada. Traditional forging techniques, such as differential hardening (hamon), are also present in nihonto blades. Reproductions may lack these characteristics or display inconsistencies.

4. Fittings and Mountings: Pay attention to the sword's fittings, such as the tsuba (handguard), menuki (handle ornaments), and saya (scabbard). Nihonto swords often have high-quality, intricately designed fittings that complement the overall craftsmanship. Reproductions may have less attention to detail or utilize different materials.

5. Overall Condition and Aging: Genuine nihonto swords can exhibit signs of wear, patina, and aging that occur naturally over time. Reproductions may lack these signs or have artificially aged appearances.

6. Expert Opinion: If you are uncertain about the authenticity of a sword, it is advisable to consult with an experienced and reputable sword appraiser or a specialist in Japanese swords. They can provide professional guidance and examine the sword in detail.

Remember that determining the authenticity of a sword requires expertise and careful examination. It is crucial to rely on reliable sources and consult with professionals to make an accurate assessment."

 

So again, it doesn't actually know how to tell the difference. If it doesn't know this, why are we trusting it about cast iron? It says right on the page: "ChatGPT may produce inaccurate information about people, places, or facts."

[GRC]

Yes, I figured someone might say something like that...

That's why I asked for people to see if they have those references and to verify the statements.

 

However, the fact that ChatGPT specifically stated when a publication "did not directly reference cast-iron", among other statements that were listed above, gave me enough confidence in the results to at least post them here as sources to verify.

 

However, what it does make painfully obvious is that the established consensus is that cast-iron tsuba were being produced during the Edo period.

 

The idea that cast-iron tsuba were only produced in the Meiji era or later, is just an unsupported opinion.

[GRC]

So what exactly is your point Larason?

 

It seems like you posted a lot of irrelevant material to point out that ChatGPt had difficulty answering one question... which is not the question being addressed in this thread.

 

ChatGPT is only as good as the question that it is asked, and the published sources that are available for it to reference.

I'm sure there's a myriad of questions you could pose to ChatGPt that would be difficult for it to answer sufficiently.

 

On the topic of cast-iron tsuba being produced in the Edo period, however, it was very clear.

 

The published consensus shows that cast-iron tsuba were being produced in the Edo period, and in quantity.

It stated that repeatedly, with supporting references.

 

This entire thread has established motive, opportunity, and provided ample quotes and references to support the idea.

 

What published quote or reference has been provided anywhere to say otherwise? 

 

Again, the post-Edo argument just boils down to the opinion of a few individuals, and it has no supporting evidence other than attempts to deflect, deny, or cast doubt by using rhetoric to persuade people. 

 

I'll take the statements from ChatGPt, with 42 references (Japanese and English) over a non-expert's opinion any day. Especially when that non-expert, who specializes in a different aspect of tosugu production, has no evidence to support their claim.

 

As I have said in the past, It's now up to the post-Edo group to start dismantling each of those references (along with the quotes from Sesko, Haynes and Lissenden, among others, that were posted earlier in this thread), or find some actual evidence to advance their position.

[OceanoNox]

1 hour ago, Larason2 said:

So again, it doesn't actually know how to tell the difference.

Are the points listed not ways to tell the difference? I don't think the software could tell the difference between pictures of antique sword and modern reproduction, but that was not what was asked.

[OceanoNox]

1 hour ago, GRC said:

I'll take the statements from ChatGPt, with 42 references (Japanese and English) over a non-expert's opinion any day.

Those results are certainly impressive. I am a bit concerned about the citations, because so far I have not been able to find some of them via a quick Google search. Did ChatGPT provide actual links?

[C0D]

4 hours ago, GRC said:

ENGLISH REFERENCE LIST:

 

provide references for this statement: “Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18^th century) onward.”

 

Here are some references to support the statement that cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period onward:

 

28. "Japanese Tsuba: From Simple to Ornate" by Gary Murtha (2014): This book notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period and were often used by lower-ranking samurai who could not afford tsuba made of more expensive materials like gold or silver.

 

29. "The Art of the Japanese Sword" by Yoshindo Yoshihara and Leon Kapp (1997): This book states that cast-iron tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period, with many being made from the mid-18th century onward.

 

30. "The Complete Guide to Japanese Sword Polishing" by Kiyoshi Kato (2012): This book mentions that cast-iron tsuba became more common in the latter half of the Edo period, and that they were often decorated with designs that imitated other materials like gold or shakudo.

 

31. "Tsuba: Japanese Sword Guards" by Julia Meech-Pekarik (1986): This book discusses the history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period.

 

32. "The Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords" by Kokan Nagayama (1997): This book also notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period.

 

33. "Japanese Sword Mounts: A Guide for Collectors and Connoisseurs" by Hiroko Kapp and Leon Kapp (2010): This book provides a detailed history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period.

 

Overall, it seems that there is consensus among experts that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period.

 

Provide more references for this statement: “Cast-iron tsuba were especially popular from the mid-Edo period (18^th century) onward.”

 

34. "Tsuba and Japanese Sword Fittings in the Collection of the Cooper-Hewitt Museum" by Joe Earle (1983): This book notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period and were produced in large numbers.

 

35. "Japanese Sword Guards: Masterpieces of Japanese Art" by Hiroi Takahashi (2008): This book provides a detailed history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to their durability and low cost.

 

36. "The Art of the Japanese Sword: The Craft of Swordmaking and its Appreciation" by Yoshindo Yoshihara and Leon Kapp (2012): This book discusses the history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to advances in casting technology.

 

Overall, these references support the idea that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period.

 

Provide more references for this statement

 

37. "The Craft of the Japanese Sword" by Leon Kapp and Hiroko Kapp (2013): This book provides a detailed history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to their durability and affordability.

 

38. "Japanese Sword Guards: An Illustrated Guide for Collectors" by Ray Tsuchiyama (2017): This book provides a comprehensive guide to Japanese sword fittings and notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period due to advances in casting technology and were produced in large numbers during the mid-Edo period.

 

39. "Japanese Sword Fittings: A Collector's Guide" by Basil William Robinson (1979): This book notes that cast-iron tsuba became popular during the mid-Edo period and were often decorated with intricate designs.

 

Overall, these references support the idea that cast-iron tsuba were widely produced and used during the mid-Edo period due to their durability, affordability, and decorative potential.

 

provide more references published before 1970

 

Finding references published before 1970 may be challenging, as most of the important works on Japanese sword fittings were published after this time. However, here are a few references that discuss cast-iron tsuba and were published before 1970:

 

40. "Japanese Sword-Guards" by Torigoye Yukihira (1937): This book provides a detailed history of tsuba and notes that cast-iron tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period.

 

41. "The Japanese Sword" by Kanzan Sato (1963): This book provides a general overview of Japanese swords, including tsuba. While it does not specifically discuss cast-iron tsuba, it notes that tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period.

 

42. "The Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords" by Nagayama Kokan (1968): This book provides a detailed history of Japanese swords, including tsuba. While it does not specifically discuss cast-iron tsuba, it notes that tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period.

 

Overall, while these references do not specifically discuss cast-iron tsuba, they do support the idea that tsuba were produced in large numbers during the Edo period, which includes the mid-Edo period when cast-iron tsuba became popular.

 

This is me writing now:

At this point, I figured I would stop searching, since it started giving results that weren’t directly referencing cast-iron tsuba, just the increased production of tsuba during the Edo period.

Did you proof check those statements? 
Cause for example in "The Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords" not only there's no such statement, but it doesn't even mention tsuba in it.
ChatGPT can be a great tool, but not something you should put blind trust on

[ROKUJURO]

The speed of the AI-generated research is certainly impressive but the citations are not from newly made scientific research but always taken from man-made books. I see that old wrong statements are also cited, so I don't expect too much new insight from AI.  

If 'intelligence' is defined as the speed of information storage and processing, AI may be helpful and superior. Producing new knowledge (as opposed to old wrong information) is probably a thing we humans have to do ourselves.

But this may be a philosophical discussion....

[GRC]

ChatGPT is certainly not infallible, but I'm curious to see how many of the 42 references turn out to be incorrect.

@C0D I did state that I had not vetted the references.

 

I'm sure there will be some errors in there, which is why I asked for people to check to see if they have any of these references and verify/eliminate the statements from ChatGPT. 

 

For example, now we can potentially cross the "The Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords" off the list. Thanks @C0D.

By the way, do you have the 1968 or 1997 version?

Two different editions were listed in the references, and ChatGPT pointed out that there was no reference to cast-iron tsuba in the 1968 version, but there was a reference to it in the 1997 edition.

 

 

@OceanoNox: No, ChatGPT did not provide links.

 

With regards to images, I'm sure ChaGPT can't "interpret" or analyze images, which Arnaud (C0D) also suggest.

I would assume that it is only reporting "examples provided" based on descriptive captions that refer to the images in the books it is sourcing.  

But I don't know the details of how the algorithm works. 

[GRC]

Agreed, @ROKUJURO

AI such as this one, is only as good as its source material.

 

For example, the "worn by lower ranking samurai" statement is something we've talked about in the past, and I'd like to see some other source to corroborate that statement.

 

That's why I "singled it out" from the rest of the summary statements. 

 

Nonetheless, it is in print, so it's a source of reference material for ChatGPT. 

[C0D]

10 minutes ago, GRC said:

 

For example, now we can potentially cross the "The Connoisseur's Book of Japanese Swords" off the list. Thanks @C0D.

By the way, do you have the 1968 or 1997 version?

Two different editions were listed in the references, and ChatGPT pointed out that there was no reference to cast-iron tsuba in the 1968 version, but there was a reference to it in the 1997 edition.

 

 

If i recall correctly should be the 1997 version, i think 1968 version is only in Japanese.

You can also rule out "The Craft of the Japanese Sword", no reference to tsuba in that book either
I should check but also in "The Art of the Japanese Sword: The Craft of Swordmaking and its Appreciation"  but i don't recall any reference to tsuba there either.

So now it's 3 wrong quotes on 3 books, my guess is that it just takes titles regarding Japanese swords and put the quote you're looking for in it
Especially most of those books are not digitalized, so no way chatGPT could have read them

[GRC]

It's a fair hypothesis Manuel (C0D), since there are some known errors with ChatGPT, but I can't imagine that all 42 references would be incorrect.

That would be a colossal failure on the part of the AI algorithm. 

But that's also why this will be an interesting "check" on its reliability.

 

@C0D, do you have digital copies of those 3 books that you were able to search for references to "tsuba"?

I just want to make sure so we can definitely cross them off the list.

Let me know,

Thanks 

 

We can definitely cross off the Cooper-Hewitt reference.

I searched that one digitally.

It mentions cast tsuba, but it was specifically referring to castings in Yamagane, copper, and bronze.

So maybe it's also including references where the words "cast" and "tsuba" in the same sentence?

I wonder if I pushed the program too far by asking it to provide more and more references? 

Perhaps it started getting "looser" with its search constraints?

Just throwing out some initial thoughts... 

 

It's also interesting to note that ChatGPT was reluctant to provide references to publications that were from the early 1900s. 

There's 7 examples of cast-iron tsuba listed in the Hackshaw collection, with descriptions by Henri Joly.

[Rich S]

Don't trust AI.  It will lead you down the garden path to ????

 

[C0D]

2 hours ago, GRC said:

It's a fair hypothesis Manuel (C0D), since there are some known errors with ChatGPT, but I can't imagine that all 42 references would be incorrect.

That would be a colossal failure on the part of the AI algorithm. 

But that's also why this will be an interesting "check" on its reliability.

 

@C0D, do you have digital copies of those 3 books that you were able to search for references to "tsuba"?

I just want to make sure so we can definitely cross them off the list.

Let me know,

Thanks 

 

We can definitely cross off the Cooper-Hewitt reference.

I searched that one digitally.

It mentions cast tsuba, but it was specifically referring to castings in Yamagane, copper, and bronze.

So maybe it's also including references where the words "cast" and "tsuba" in the same sentence?

I wonder if I pushed the program too far by asking it to provide more and more references? 

Perhaps it started getting "looser" with its search constraints?

Just throwing out some initial thoughts... 

 

It's also interesting to note that ChatGPT was reluctant to provide references to publications that were from the early 1900s. 

There's 7 examples of cast-iron tsuba listed in the Hackshaw collection, with descriptions by Henri Joly.

I do have both digital and physical copies of the first two, the third only physical one.
I just checked it, it does show some tsuba and mention "pig iron" in a totally different section, nothing about tsuba made by cast iron.

So far no evidence those quotes were accurate

[GRC]

Thanks for the update Manuel (C0D) 

 

So we can officially remove these ones:

 

#29 & 36 (early and late editions of same book title  and author)

#34 

#37

 

[Steve Waszak]

I have been following this topic for a good while now.  Along the way, I have observed what appears to be a fundamental flaw in the approach taken by some to the question of when cast iron tsuba were (first) made, whether as a relatively rare occurrence or as a regular practice.  Connected to this, a particular gnawing question has only grown in strength.  And with these latest posts, a third concern has arisen.  So, I have arrived at the point where I feel compelled to join the fray.

 

To begin, early on in this long thread (as well as in the "last word on cast iron tsuba thread), it became abundantly evident that a certain outcome or "reality" was sought by some -- namely, that it would be acknowledged and recognized by all (or most) that cast iron tsuba were indeed made in the Edo Period, likely as a regular practice, from perhaps as early as the 18th (or even the 17th) century.  This position, for some reason, seems to have been embraced with some degree of investment in its being taken as not merely a valid possibility, but as a probability, if not even a certainty.  That is to say, some appear to have wanted it to be true that cast iron tsuba were made (as a regular practice) in the Edo Period.  Wanting something to be true and then hunting for evidence to support it is a deeply problematic approach in analysis and scholarship.  It is a fundamental logical fallacy that immediately throws deep suspicion on whatever "outcome" may emerge from the efforts involved.  Such an approach is deductive, rather than inductive, and is therefore less stable, right off the bat, because a deductive approach utterly relies on the initial premise (i.e. cast iron tsuba were make during the Edo Period) being true (or very highly likely).  The subsequent seeking of evidence to support and sustain that premise is then methodologically compromised by the biases, whether conscious or unconscious, that will infect the selection and analysis of whatever evidence ("evidence") is uncovered.  Any conclusions drawn via this approach necessarily become dubious due to the begging-the-question logical fallacy attaching to the fact that the initial premise remains unproven.  When it is seen by others that a deductive approach has been used, there will immediately be doubt about the conclusions reached, since it will simultaneously be suspected that bias will have infected the process by which evidence was found, analyzed, and accepted.  In short, if someone wants something to be true, and then goes about hunting for evidence to support it, whatever conclusions are then reached are, at best, in serious doubt (or certainly should be).  

 

An inductive approach to topics like these will always be the safer, more stable, more reliable one.  Do not begin with any premise, assumption, or belief ahead of time.   A good scholar will formulate well-considered questions to pursue the most persuasive answers to, without caring in any personally invested way what those answers might be.  Then, the gathering of evidence can commence and proceed with biases having a much lesser chance of contaminating the outcomes reached.  Analyzing this evidence -- again, with no personal investment in where that analysis goes -- allows for a thesis to be arrived at inductively, rather than one begun with based on a potentially shaky premise (deductive).  

 

As far as I can tell, deductive approaches have been far more prevalent in this thread than inductive ones.  In fact, I'm not sure I can recall any inductive reasoning being employed at all (but I can't be sure, and I haven't the time to comb through 10 pages, plus all the content of the "last word" thread on this topic).   Side note:  Sherlock Holmes actually employed inductive reasoning far more often than any deductive reasoning in his investigations, despite the popular idea that he relied on his deductive skills... 

 

This brings me to some of the most recent posts, those concerning the AI-located references/literature on the subject.  The much bigger issue -- a far more fundamental one -- regarding the many references that the AI search turned up, is that it doesn't seem to be recognized that most, if not all of these references are simply parroting a single original reference work, one that first made the claim that cast iron tsuba were (regularly?) made from the mid-Edo Period on.  It is not exactly a revelation to observe that Japanese reference works on nihonto and tosogu are notorious for repeating what sensei said.  Again and again and again and again.  Iemoto-ism has long been a thorn in the side of those looking to engage in and apply sound scholarly approaches to this field.   So, to find dozens of references that all claim and "reinforce" the "fact" that cast iron tsuba were made from the mid-Edo Period essentially means nothing, even besides the fact that AI-generated results are not to be trusted.  We could locate a thousand reference works that all agree that cast iron sword guards were being made, even as a regular practice, in the 18th-century, but if all of these references are simply repeating what the prior reference stated, the evidentiary value here is 0.00.  What would need to be uncovered is evidence in the form of an unquestionably reliable written work (preferably more than just one) contemporary to the time that the casting of iron tsuba was being done so that the practice could have been witnessed directly and thusly recorded, again, by a reliable recorder of the practice.   Short of this, to have some 20th-century reference work claim -- as a statement of fact -- that cast iron tsuba were made some 200 or 300 years prior, without providing any sort of concrete, uncontrovertible evidence, amounts to nothing more than empty words.  Until the Holy Grail in the form of an indisputably reliable contemporary record (or two, or three) is discovered, reference books -- as a form of evidence for the production of cast iron tsuba in Mid-Edo Japan -- will not function in that role.  

 

This leads me to the third part of this post, that concerning the perplexing question that has loomed over this thread the whole time:  Who cares if cast iron tsuba were made in the Edo Period?  Outside of some sort of peculiar curiosity regarding exactly when certain technologies arrived in a certain place (curiosity for curiosity's sake), who cares?  If the whole point for collectors, connoisseurs, and scholars of tsuba in learning to recognize the signs of an iron tsuba having been cast is to do so in order to avoid such tsuba, what difference does it made when it was made?  It is generally, if not universally agreed that cast iron tsuba are emphatically not worthy of being collected (unless one has a quirky sense of collecting focus, or one wants of collection of What Must Be Avoided).  Certainly, no such collection would be received as merit-worthy.  *Here, I use the term "collection" as a gathering of objects that has been curated via processes of serious study and scholarly analysis; I do not use this term to mean or be a synonym for "accumulation."  There is a vast difference between the two.  Since it is inarguable that cast iron tsuba are seen by virtually all as (incomparably) inferior to forged works, and since this means that the value in learning to recognize tsuba as having been cast is that doing so will allow us to avoid them like the plague, why should we care when such things were made?  I would find an 18-century cast iron tsuba (if they really exist) to be no more or no less unimportant and unworthy than one cast in the 20th century.  Both would be equally useless to me.  And, lest someone argue that 18th-century tsuba (if they exist) would have value as a mid-Edo artifact, this position collapses as soon as we remember that if what is sought is a mid-Edo artifact, one should pursue one of the forged iron guards made then.  Even an utterly mediocre forged iron tsuba is greatly preferable to a contemporary cast iron work (if such a thing exists) from the mid- or late-Edo Period.  

 

And so, to me, this is a topic whose intrinsic value does not warrant the efforts to determine whether cast iron tsuba were made in the Edo Period, and, if so, exactly when.  Beyond this, even if it did, a deductive approach used in the effort to determine the answers to those questions doesn't work.  And reference books here are next to useless, even if AI-generated results were infallible, because none can provide direct and reliable witness to cast iron tsuba having been made in the Edo Period.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dan tsuba]

Steve Waszak,

 

I understand what you are saying in your post and thank you.  

 

And as has been stated before (by me in this thread and other threads) the only way to tell for certain if a tsuba is hand forged or cast is to subject it to non-invasive or invasive metallurgical testing.

 

From doing the research for this thread I have found that the ingenuity of the Japanese craftsman is not to be underestimated.

 

Also, there are evidently many members interested in this thread as can be surmised by the number of views.

 

The bottom line is this:  If I bought a tsuba from a reputable dealer and spent anywhere from 500 to 3000 U.S. dollars (or more) would I be interested if it turned out to be actually made from cast iron and not hand forged (as I thought or was described as such)?  As stated above, “the ingenuity of the Japanese craftsman is not to be underestimated.”

 

What would you do if you purchased a tsuba that you thought was hand forged and turned out to be made from cast iron (and possibly hand worked)?

 

With respect,

Dan

 

 

[GRC]

Steve, there are many valid points in that post,

and your frustration with the pursuit of this topic is very clear.

 

So why should anyone pursue this topic at all?

 

Here are some of my thoughts on this, regardless of the “value” of the objects in question…

 

1-      It is necessary to investigating the statements about tsuba that are being stated as fact, yet do not appear to have supporting evidence. ie. dispelling the myths that are being perpetuated.

 

This requires gathering as much evidence as possible and “letting the chips fall where they may”.

If the evidence gathered ends up supporting or refuting any aspect of the existing views on the topic, or reveals that there is still no definitive answer, then why not try to find out?

Gaining any knowledge at all on the topic is better than to leave it unexplored.

 

2-      Establishing a timeline of what techniques were developed when, where and by whom, seems to be one of the main pursuits in the study of tsuba.

Why would this topic be any less valid, regardless of their value, or lack there-of, in terms of their “collectability”?    

 

3-      Learning about when such techniques began or were amplified, allows for the potential to gain further insights into the cultural, technological and economic conditions that led to those technical shifts.

Why wouldn’t someone want to add to that understanding? It would be adding one more piece of information into a larger whole.

 

4-      With regard to finding and citing references.

 

Yes, there is definitely the potential to reinforce an element of “sensei-ism”, where an initial printed statement could be propagated in publications by other authors, making the initial statement “appear” to be more valid. This is a very good good point that Steve made.

 

However, if you don’t do a literature search, then how will get to the root of what these statements are built upon?

It is entirely possible that in looking into the references which the AI is using to project a “consensus view”, we will find out whether the published statements have any supporting evidence at all. The references could end up being just another case of “so-and-so said so”.

I view this as just another avenue to dig up whatever evidence is available. So again, why not look into it?

 

Those are just my thoughts on pursuing this topic. 

[GRC]

On the separate issue of "proof":

 

If it came across as though I was using this AI-generated consensus as “definitive proof”, I apologize for that.

 

It should be made clear to everyone, that the consensus view was generated from the information that the AI program had access to.

This cannot be taken as absolute proof, unless the sources of information that it was based upon are validated.

 

Getting many eyes to look into those sources was my attempt to “crowd-source” the task.

 

Additionally, posting the AI-consensus served as a nice counterpoint to a post on another thread, where someone claimed the opposite idea as the consensus view, without providing any supporting references at all.  

 

As Steve was explaining in his detailed post, it is important to point out that this AI-generated consensus statement could be equally errant in its assertion. It’s only as good as its source information.    

[OceanoNox]

4 hours ago, Steve Waszak said:

And so, to me, this is a topic whose intrinsic value does not warrant the efforts to determine whether cast iron tsuba were made in the Edo Period, and, if so, exactly when.

I really disagree: because WE cannot find immediate value in a pursuit, does not mean it is devoid of any value. Just like unpublished research about negative results or neutral results can lead people to do the whole thing again, when they could have build up on some preexisting results, or put their efforts towards something else.

At the same time, the starting point (here believing that cast tsuba were commonly made) is not necessarily a bad thing IF honesty and integrity in the research is maintained: it should translate to "Were cast tsuba produced?" with a whole study on whether the casting technology was available.

N.B.: I have been on the "objective" side of this in research, where researchers who had discovered a specific mechanisms were trying to fit all results into their own theory, disparaging other theories to the point of dishonesty, while I tried to find what mechanism best explained my own results.

 

Otherwise I agree that we should look for primary sources as much as possible. Again, this is possibly a lifetime endeavor, as many documents are almost inaccessible (either destroyed, unreadable, or simply stored and forgotten somewhere).

[Steve Waszak]

First, to respond to Dan:  

 

I'm not quite sure what the commentary regarding the ingenuity of the Japanese craftsman is supposed to be achieving in this discussion.  If you're suggesting that they were so clever as to be able to invent casting processes and then master them so fully as to produce iron guards that looked 100% forged (which I've never seen any evidence of), what does that have to do with when such tsuba were made?  Could such testing determine dates of production when the object in question is steel/iron?  If so, has this ever been done on a tsuba whose presentation was so poor that it was suspected of being cast and an Edo Period product?  What were the results?   And if such testing cannot, in fact, reliably and accurately determine the age of an iron/steel sword guard, what is the point of the comment that "the only way to tell for certain if a tsuba is hand forged or cast is to subject it to non-invasive or invasive metallurgical testing"?  Setting aside the veracity (or lack thereof) of that statement for a moment, you seem to be conflating the matter of whether iron tsuba were cast and how one can determine this with when they were.  Since the bulk of this topic as pursued in this thread has been mostly focused on the question of when, rather than whether or how (although the "how" could inform the investigation of the "when," I realize), I don't really find this content of your post here very directly relevant.  

 

As to the matter of the popularity of this thread, oh yes, for sure it has garnered a lot of interest.  As I say, I have followed it, too (though my reasons have had much more to do with observing the analytical processes used than with any interest in cast tsuba, outside of the practical matter of knowing how to spot them).  However, I suspect that the majority of this thread's followers are mostly interested in the general subject of cast tsuba in order to determine how to identify them (if this is possible without the testing you mention), with the purpose being that of avoiding them at all costs.  As I said in my earlier post, though, if this is the primary reason for the interest in this thread, the question of when tsuba were first cast in Japan, regularly or otherwise, doesn't matter.  

 

As to the questions you ask at the end of your post, they both return to the matter of whether a tsuba is cast, not when, with a heavy underlying intimation filtering through both that a tsuba that turns out to be cast is a negative outcome.  Both questions exemplify and reinforce my point that what matters is whether an iron tsuba is cast versus forged.  Neither of your questions have anything to do with when a given sword guard was made.  The answers to your questions, incidentally, are "Yes, you damn well should be," and "I'd use it as a coaster or as a doorstop, if I didn't simply throw it away."  I would also go back to the drawing board to redouble my efforts to recognize the signs of cast works, although, if what you say is true that "the only way to tell for certain if a tsuba is hand forged or cast is to subject it to non-invasive or invasive metallurgical testing," then there would be no point in such efforts after all.