Impressions of "Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords"

[cabowen]

Having recently received this new book through the generosity of a kind soul (thanks again Ted!), I was excited to read through it after hearing all the comments made about it online...

 

First, I would be remiss without giving credit to Paul for his excellent translation and collaboration. I know very well what goes into a translation like this and how much time is involved-great job Paul!

 

I would argue that this is a book that belongs in all collector's libraries for the simple fact that while I don't necessarily agree with everything the author postulates, there is more than enough valuable information in this book unavailable elsewhere which outweighs some of the rather contentious opinions given.

 

Specifically of value are the author's tips on recognizing quality. This is the major weakness most western collectors have and often the reason for the addiction and reliance on kantei-sho. Being able to tell a good sword from a bad one is the first step in sword appreciation and this book provides the benchmarks. Once one has reached this point, one can begin the study of what separates the good swords from the great swords-a decidedly more difficult task.

 

Another important area discussed, and I know of no other book which dares tread on this territory, is the various manipulations and alterations done to swords, sometimes for repair and sometimes to deceive. Most of this is rarely discussed outside of closed circles in Japan and I was quite surprised to see many of the tricks of the trade I have been told by several togi-shi openly illustrated and discussed. I would think this would also be a major benefit to western collectors who know very little about much of this. It can be a bit unnerving however to see the extent of what can be done with a sword.

 

The author does make many bold statements, some of which I would take exception to. Two that come to mind are his opinions that furisode nakago were never original and always the result of repair. I wonder if the author has ever watched a smith as he does hi-tsukuri, the shaping of a blade. To shape the nakago, the smith hammers the hot blade to thin the edge of the nakago. As he hammers, the displacement of the steel forces the nakago to curve naturally into an exact furisode shape. I have no problem believing that some smiths simply left the nakago in this natural shape and thus have my doubts that they are not original.

 

Another statement I would take issue with is a comment made that any blade that has no ware or kizu has had them filled with umegane. In the author's defense, perhaps he was referring to koto blades, though he made no such distinction and his statement could quite easily be taken at face value to include all swords. I have watched many swords being made from start to finish and unless someone snuck some umegane in when I wasn't looking, they sure looked flawless to me. I have many flawless WWII era blades that I doubt anyone would have taken the time to repair with umegane....

 

Finally, he quite rightly points out that yaki-ire is the most difficult operation in the creation of a sword and that the quality of a blade rests on the nioi-guchi thus created. He dismisses ware and such as "not a big thing". I would tend to think that if forging is not as difficult as yaki-ire then a first class smith capable of a first rate yaki-ire should be able to forge a blade without flaws. If we are judging blades on their artistic merits rather than as weapons, as he seems to imply by dismissing missing boshi, then surely ware and the like detract as well. It is hard to understand why forging flaws can be dismissed while hardening flaws can not when simply evaluating from an artistic standpoint. Perhaps I misunderstood....

 

Other criticisms are directed at areas of remission: the author clearly focused on koto with little on Shinto and even less on Shinshinto and gendaito. It would have been interesting to read more about later blades.

 

The author also clearly admires the works of Bizen and states clearly his reasons. It would have been nice to see more said in regard to the other traditions.

 

These are rather inconsequential criticisms in any case and again I would like to recommend the book without reservations.....Again, great job Paul-I look forward to your next!

[Clive Sinclaire]

Hi Chris

I agree with almost all that you say here and would be interested in your opinion of Nakahara's views on Mumei blades which he says "as a rule, I usually reject mumei katana". Reluctantly, I find some of his views on this quite convincing.

Regards

Clive

[Guido]

Chris, thank you for this excellent summary of my own thoughts - I got my copy two days ago, and spent the last two evenings reading and re-reading it. As you, I found many thoughts expressed quite agreeable, some theories outragous, and am still mulling over others. Quite a lot food for thought if nothing else.

 

I also agree that this book belongs in any well rounded sword library. However, I'm feeling uncomfortable recommending it to newbies, at least not as the first book on Nihontô a newcomer to this field of collecting should read. Challenging the (sword) establishment certainly has its place in advanced discussion, but can only lead to fruitful, educated discussions if there's a common ground based on the conventional scholarship of the last couple of centuries, and especially the last 50 or so years.

 

The euphoric recommendations of this book in another thread on NMB remind me of kids who don't have a drivers license yet, discussing the handling of high perfomance cars.

[Jean]

However, I'm feeling uncomfortable recommending it to newbies, at least not as the first book on Nihontô a newcomer to this field of collecting should read.

 

Agreed at 100% Guido

 

Reluctantly, I find some of his views on this quite convincing

 

Agreed Clive but not at 100%, there are a lot of O suriage mumei blades which if they could tell their story would disagree with the author's theory

 

there's a common ground based on the conventional scholarship of the last couple of centuries, and especially the last 50 or so years.

 

I discuss the matter over with Paul and here is his answer :

 

Many of the theories are pre NBTHK. Mostly of Hon'ami origin. Part of

Nakahara's thing is that the Hon'ami have a long history, whereas the

NBTHK are only 60 years old, yet had the monopoly on spreading

information.

[Guido]

Many of the theories are pre NBTHK. Mostly of Hon'ami origin. Part of

Nakahara's thing is that the Hon'ami have a long history, whereas the

NBTHK are only 60 years old, yet had the monopoly on spreading

information.

Did they put a pistol to people's heads? Did they use mass-hypnosis? I really would like to know how they achieved this omnious "information monopoly". And why didn't we hear about all those Honami theories before .... ?

[Stephen]

you know theres

when im backing Gman on this and Rinehard over the lootcollectors....is the world coming to a end.

[Jean]

Guido,

 

I suggest you ask directly Paul or Nagahara sensei.

 

Paul because from what I have understood from his translation he has been in close contact with the author and disciples (Foreword), Nagahara sensei because he is the one who is expressing these opinions fed back by Paul - Preface:D

 

I am not going to argue as I am only quoting (even you)

 

And why didn't we hear about all those Honami theories before

 

Goka den are issued directly from Hon'ami Ringa/Koson :lol:

[Brian]

I'm one that gives this book rave reviews. But only for the reasons already expressed here, and I would certainly not consider it the best choice for a first book. Or even a second or third. It needs a background of some knowledge to appreciate some of the points, and even to decide if you are going with some of the theories or not.

I consider the "glossary" type pages great..almost like a "Connoisseurs" with photos. And that is my primary encouragement.

I don't intend for it to be promoted at the expense of other excellent beginner or starter books.

 

Brian

[cabowen]

Hi Chris

I agree with almost all that you say here and would be interested in your opinion of Nakahara's views on Mumei blades which he says "as a rule, I usually reject mumei katana". Reluctantly, I find some of his views on this quite convincing.

Regards

Clive

 

Clive-

 

Yes, that is another opinion that gave pause as there must certainly be at least some blades of quality that were mumei by design. I am sure we can both think of at least a few reasons why that could be the case. Also, to say that because he has seen a few lowly Takada blades with orikaeshi/gaku mei that ALL good shortened swords should have the same is also, in my opinion, unreasonable. It all depends on who the owner was at the time of shortening....there were some incredible egos that owned some of these swords in the past and no doubt they did whatever they pleased...To use his logic, because we weren't there when the blades were made, we will never know for certain (if they were signed or not).

 

I also think that by and large many of his comments are mostly aimed at high quality works by famous koto smiths. Some of his opinions seem to suffer as far as I am concerned when the topic shifts to lessor and/or later work.

 

Personally, I do not own any mumei blades, then again, I don't own any koto blades either....I would not own a mumei shinto. shinshinto, or gendaito.

 

As far as the other comments in response to my original post, I agree that this is not a first sword book , which is also my opinion on Nagayama Kokan sensei's excellent kantei book. I believe in having the basics and accepted theory under one's belt as well before swimming into deeper water. It must begin with the terminology and fundamentals and for that Yumoto and Sato sensei's books are a good foundation.

 

On the Hon'ami vs NBTHK, clearly the NBTHK has the modern benefit of access to many more swords while the Hon'ami had the benefit of being closer to the history. The Hon'ami, historically, have kept their opinions and secrets to themselves, for obvious reasons, while the NBTHK, also obviously, is in the opinion business....Truth be told, there are many in Japan that tend to follow the author's advice about learning to identify quality and have thus freed themselves from reliance on any organized authority....in that both the author and myself are preaching the same gospel.....

[nagamaki - Franco]

First, I would be remiss without giving credit to Paul for his excellent translation and collaboration. I know very well what goes into a translation like this and how much time is involved-great job Paul!

 

Yes, Paul, bravissimo! Especially appreciate your expanded notes, explanations.

[reinhard]

clearly the NBTHK has the modern benefit of access to many more swords while the Hon'ami had the benefit of being closer to the history. The Hon'ami, historically, have kept their opinions and secrets to themselves, for obvious reasons, while the NBTHK, also obviously, is in the opinion business....Truth be told, there are many in Japan that tend to follow the author's advice about learning to identify quality and have thus freed themselves from reliance on any organized authority....

 

reinhard

[cabowen]

 

reinhard

 

I am at a loss to understand exactly what that adds to the discussion at hand...???

[sencho]

Chris,

 

You should be getting used to that by now!!!

 

Cheers

[reinhard]

I am at a loss to understand exactly what that adds to the discussion at hand...???

 

"closer to history"..."opinion business"

 

Do you really believe it is as simple as that?

 

reinhard

[cabowen]

I am at a loss to understand exactly what that adds to the discussion at hand...???

 

"closer to history"..."opinion business"

 

Do you really believe it is as simple as that?

 

reinhard

 

What is as simple as that?

[Mark]

it seems Chris is saying that it is a benefit to "know for yourself waht quality is" so you do not have to rely on the opinion or papers of anyone else. I agree that would be the optimum situation. But from a different perspective - we (individual collectors) may have a comfort level knowing what is good quality, but we only live (and care for a sword) so long, eventually someone who may not know much about swords, will need to pass them along to another collector. At that time "papers" or the opinions of the market (or those who drive it) will mean a great deal.

[cabowen]

it seems Chris is saying that it is a benefit to "know for yourself waht quality is" so you do not have to rely on the opinion or papers of anyone else. I agree that would be the optimum situation. But from a different perspective - we (individual collectors) may have a comfort level knowing what is good quality, but we only live (and care for a sword) so long, eventually someone who may not know much about swords, will need to pass them along to another collector. At that time "papers" or the opinions of the market (or those who drive it) will mean a great deal.

 

Playing the devil's advocate a bit, but why would you sell a prized sword to someone who needs a paper to tell them it is a good sword? I know of many collectors in Japan that are extremely careful/picky about who they sell to and will not sell an important blade to someone not "ready" for it....Again, maybe that is a best case scenario; many people seem more concerned with the financial end of things than what is actually best for the preservation of these blades....

[Jean]

I also think that by and large many of his comments are mostly aimed at high quality works by famous koto smiths. Some of his opinions seem to suffer as far as I am concerned when the topic shifts to lessor and/or later work.

 

For the fun and the theory on mumei swords by high quality smiths

 

http://www.sho-shin.com/bijutsu.htm

[paulb]

Chris,

While agreeing with much that you say I think your views on papers express an ideal which is not seen in any art field. I would dearly love to think that fine paintings recently bought at auction in a Scottish sale will find their way to appreciative homes and will be cared for by thiose who value the work. They wont. Likewise with swords it would be wonderful to think that those buying the best blades they can afford would cherish them and care for them with the respect they deserve. However experience suggests this is not the case. I would bet an analysis of this or any other message board would show the most frequently asked questions are "Is it real?" and "whats it worth?"

With regard to papers the importance and dependence has increased because the way we buy has changed. Many blades are effectively bought unseen via internet illustrations. While one can get an impression it isnt the same as holding a piece in hand. When spending large sums of money in this way their is some comfort in knowing the sword you are buying has had some form of authentication. I also agree with Mark, while I hope that I have some understanding of the quality of the swords within my collection at some point I will drop dead. If this happens before I have moved the swords on I would like the task to be as easy as possible for those left to deal with them. There is no doubt that papers will help. (BTW this is not something I plan to put to the test in the near future)

With regard to the book which was the original subject of this post mt view remains much as it was in the first post on the subject and much in line with Guido's comments. It has a lot of valueable information but for me this is countered by some of the less orthodox opinions which seem to be expressed as statements of fact. I regard this as a weakness and having great potential to mislead.

Best Regrads

Paul

[reinhard]

it seems Chris is saying that it is a benefit to "know for yourself waht quality is" so you do not have to rely on the opinion or papers of anyone else.

 

This is exactly what uneducated dealers are dreaming of.

 

reinhard

[Mark]

Playing the devil's advocate a bit, but why would you sell a prized sword to someone who needs a paper to tell them it is a good sword? I know of many collectors in Japan that are extremely careful/picky about who they sell to and will not sell an important blade to someone not "ready" for it....Again, maybe that is a best case scenario; many people seem more concerned with the financial end of things than what is actually best for the preservation of these blades....

 

Chris, i agree that is the best way to do it....... but if i do not wake up tommorow i do not have that oportunity. I was thinking that if my wife has to sell them it help

[cabowen]

Chris, i agree that is the best way to do it....... but if i do not wake up tommorow i do not have that oportunity. I was thinking that if my wife has to sell them it help

 

No argument with that harsh reality...My main point is that papers are a crutch for far too many- the result is people collect papers, not swords, and thus develop no real concept of quality....

[paulb]

Chris,

I think the "collect papers not swords" point of view has become over simplified in recent years. There is a wealth of difference between those who state they "want a Juyo sword" regardless of school age or history and those that when buying a particular piece at distance want some security that it has achieved a certain level of authentication and recognition of its quality.

I agree 100% with you that papers should not be used as a lazy substitute for study. I fail to understand how people profess to have a great love or interest in any subject but are then unwilling to put time and effort in to understanding that subject better.

While there are often examples quoted of papers being wrong, or attributions changed on resubmission I believe the reality is that the papering system currently in existence offers the best opportunity to buy with reasonable security in the the current global market. It has greatly enhanced the ability to buy from all parts of the world and opened the market to a broader client base. As with anything else it is open to abuse and fraud and examples of fraudulent papers appear regularly. However while not perfect it is the best we have at present.

Regards

Paul

[Stone]

I have Just got my copy,( I pre ordered mine) not had much chance to read it just a quick flick. Maybe the reason the book favour's koto is that their are "thought's for further

Volume's on Shinto ect. Some who know me will maybe remember that I made a few of the

remarks made in the polishing section some 20 odd years or more ago, And more laterly

written articles on the use of acid's ect that cause damage to swords. these were considered

to contaversial for publication. I look foreward to reading the rest of the book. Well done

Paul for your work on the book.

Regards,

Tony N.

[cabowen]

Chris,

I think the "collect papers not swords" point of view has become over simplified in recent years. There is a wealth of difference between those who state they "want a Juyo sword" regardless of school age or history and those that when buying a particular piece at distance want some security that it has achieved a certain level of authentication and recognition of its quality.

 

 

There is much to be said for buying from reputable dealers, nearly all of whom I am aware would offer a return privilege. How many would buy without papers simply on their own knowledge with this privilege? It does indeed offer security, much like a life jacket for those who can't swim. To continue the metaphor, some people are in over their heads and in my opinion shouldn't be buying a) at a distance and b) things they aren't knowledgeable enough to fully understand.

 

Thinking about the real value of papers a little deeper, I think it is safe to say that most signed swords, unless by oft faked smiths, can usually be verified without sending to shinsa. Even those by oft faked smiths can in many cases be verified by people with years of experience without needing a shinsa. Papers can not turn a shoshin signed blade by an average smith into a first class work. All they can do is provide an opinion that the blade is indeed by the smith whose name is on the blade, something as I have said, you really do not need a shinsa team to tell you in many if not most cases.

 

Papers do, however, determine the value of an unsigned blade by attribution and here is where mischief can be, and has been, done. If you submit an unsigned blade to three shinsa teams, you may very well get three different attributions. I have seen this happen more than once. Usually the owner will believe whatever attribution is the "best". I have also seen the same blade get different attributions from the same organization. An argument could be made that if you get different opinions it must mean that the workmanship is not clear and thus it can not be a first class blade in any case, so who really cares? The flip side is that a first class blade, even if mumei, in many cases will be readily identifiable by the obviousness of the workmanship, so again, what is the real value of the shinsa?

 

I suppose that if you saw these sort of things happen enough times you may begin to question the real value of papers in many circumstances as well.....

 

I am not saying papers do not serve a legitimate function in some instances, i.e., big name signatures (sometimes), or less than first rate mumei blades, (or for estate sales) but how many times have I heard the first thing someone say when told about or shown a blade, "does it have papers?" I have seen people when told no to then wave off the blade and not even look at it....

 

Perhaps some who do spend the time learning should be happy there are so many who rely on papers as it makes for that many more opportunities....

[paulb]

Chris,

I have no argument with the points you make. I have never bought a sword because it had papers or turned away from one I liked because it didn't. However I am equally sure that after 25 years of studying at distance I am still struggling to understand and often in over my head

I have always and would always recommend buying from reputable dealers and in my time of buying I have never been cheated, mislead or anything else by those people. Where I have caught a cold is when I bought from individuals or from less honest or to be generous less knowledgable dealers. The down side is I never got a $100K sword for $100 equally I never paid $1000 for something worth $10.

 

I think with a sword in hand I can see enough to decide whether I think the workmanship is good, the likely period and whether it suits my taste. Over the internet I think I can see most of these things but draw comfort from the fact they carry an NBTHK paper. If that means I am collecting beyond my skill level or out of my depth I guess I will just have to live with it as unfortunately I am no longer able to travel to Japan or the USA to see the blades first hand.

regards

Paul B

 

ps picking up your point b) about buying things they dont fully understand, I would suggest the vast majority of buyers in any antique field are buying things because they can and because they believe it to have investment potential. regrettably those who have a love for a subject and some understanding of it rarely have the funds to buy at the top end.

[David Flynn]

Here is a scenario. Someone is selling a sword that has been to Japan and polished. This sword has a signature, though hasn't papers. The first thing that springs to my mind, is, if the sword is worth being sent for polish, why not get papers whilst there? The second thing that springs to my mind, is, it probably didn't get papers, because it is Gimei. Now I have books with many signatures, Fujishiro for example. I am relatively confident to match signatures. I believe, I am able to pick a good sword. Now I come back to the sword in question. First is it a good sword? Is the sword priced where it doesn't matter if it is Genuine sig.? Am I able to take the sword and check the sig. myself before paying? The most probable action for me in this scenario, would be to leave the sword and buy something else.

[cabowen]

I have heard this many times: "if the sword was sent to Japan for polish, there must be something wrong with it if it wasn't papered"....No doubt there are instances when this is true but dismissing blades out of hand because they weren't papered when polished is foolish. I have had many blades polished in Japan both for myself and for others and didn't bother with papers in many cases. There are reasons for not papering- not everyone thinks they are necessary or worth the money. Personally I wouldn't spend the money if I was confident in the signature. If people ask me to have blades submitted when I send them for polishing, I do so and I have submitted blades which I planned to sell. Blades I intend to keep I don't submit...

[Stone]

I think the book has done an excellent job in bringing about such a lengthy debate, as yet I

have not had time to read anymore. But I think the debate on shinsa's is great, My beleif

here is " you pay your money and take your chance's" so to speak. For myself in the last

4/5 years, well in fact since Mr G. Curtiss organized the first N.T.H.K. team over here I have

had most of my pieces put through shinsa, and now having been fortunate enough to acquire

some more swords, that hopefully I will be able to submit to a shinsa in England in the not to distant future. My own reasons for doing so is to (hopefully when I have fallen off my perch)

make it easier for my family to sell on all but one of the swords that I am lucky enough to care for

in my lifetime. I do know of a sword that was submitted to variouse shinsa panels in 1988

was given certificate as genuine, 2003 got gi-mie but Bizen 1504-1528, 2003, appraisal

in Britain & thought to be possibly a shin-shinto copy ( as many of us thought possible) then

went to Japan given gi-mie 2005 ,in 2007 the signature was removed, hadori was done on sword,

not a full repolish received Tokubetsu Hozon as Bizen Ichimonji 1300/1345. This I would say

makes Mr C Bowen's correspondence correct!

Best Regards,

Tony N.

[Clive Sinclaire]

Chris

Isn't it a pleasant irony that you argue against the gaining of papers at shinsa (or more, the reliance of papers from shinsa I suppose) when you represent the NTHK-NPO that issues such pearls of wisdom!

Although most of the swords in my collection have been to shinsa, mostly NBTHK shinsa, I have never had a particular urge to send tsuba, of which I have about 50. Isn't it strange that the urge for authentication seems to apply mostly to blades but to a lesser extent on other things?

I am of the opinion that it is undeniable that, although to a lesser degtree in Japan perhaps, papers have a huge influence over the price of swords and this has led to a huge reliance on them as well as exploitation and corruption in some cases. I am from the school of thought that the only papers should be at Hozon level (in NBTHK terms) saying that the blade is genuine if signed and attributing it if not. It would then be up to the dealer or buyer to access the quality and agree a price accordingly, rather than a dealer saying this is a Juyo Token and therefore worth twice the price for a similar blade without such a paper. I think ths would make a far healthier market in swords and encourage potential buyers to know the subject better.

Clive Sinclaire