Flaws and faults

[cabowen]

Would be nice to move on from the artifact vs. art opinion, I think we get your position on it Chris:)

 

Cheers.

 

Louis

 

Then stop arguing with me!!!!! 8-)

[loui]

Hmmmm, i think you are wrong:)

 

LOL.

 

 

OK all done!

[reinhard]

It is interesting that Reinhard suggests the reasons for Yasutsugu's restoration of swords by yaki-naoshi was not to restore the "weapon-qualities" of famous swords damaged by fire at Osaka castle. I am unsure from where such inteligence originates but I would have thought that neither he nor I can know the precise reasons behind the restoration.

 

Clive, most of the best swords in the history of NihonTo were recognized as masterpieces and works of art (sic!) almost instantly. Many of them were made for famous personalities/families in the first place anyway. These swords were taken out of the grinding process of battles at a very early stage and were bestowed upon high-ranking personalities. This is the reason why so many of the greatest Japanese swords survived in excellent, even pristine condition. It wasn't all about sword-care, although sword-care was (and is) important, of course. - It was crystal-clear, even before the fall of Osaka castle, that no Shogun, Daimyo or any other high-ranking samurai would ever have to wield "Ichigo Hitofuri" in battle again. While retempering this particular sword, shodai YASUTSUGU was free to focus on the artistic details of the blade alone.

 

reinhard

[sanjuro]

Reinhard.

 

From what source are you drawing when making the assumption that it was, in your words -

"crystal-clear, even before the fall of Osaka castle, that no Shogun, Daimyo or any other high-ranking samurai would ever have to wield "Ichigo Hitofuri" in battle again".

Had this blade perhaps been designated an important cultural property at that point in history?

 

Had some Imperial edict been passed that there would be no more war? (Not that anybody in those times would have taken notice of such an edict had it been issued).

 

I resort to a little sarcasm here only to draw attention to the fact that you draw a long bow in making such assumptions when there is little if anything to base such a specific assumption upon.

 

Additionally, you cannot be sure of the motivation of Shodai Yasutsugu when he retempered the blade. Again an assumption.

 

I shall now 'fort up' for the inevitable siege. :D Caveat: I will of course yield to superior logic when it is presented.

[Eric H]

While retempering this particular sword, shodai YASUTSUGU was free to focus on the artistic details of the blade alone.

The process called saiha or yakinaoshi is executed on blades who have been damaged by fire, the hardend steel of the cutting edge became soft, the sword was no longer useful as a weapon.

 

Yakinaoshi was performed to restore the hardened edge of those blades, first and foremost making them anew full-fledged weapon....of course also to preserve blades by highly important smiths.

 

As nowbody knows what Yasutsugu thought when doing yakinaoshi, it is most likely, that based on his skill and knowledge, he has restored the hamon nearest to the one of the original maker, i.e in his style.

 

This might be also an assumption but it‘s logical.

 

Eric

[nagamaki - Franco]

FYI http://home.comcast.net/~colhartley/Oriental/retemper.htm

[Brian]

Guys,

I do pleeeease ask that we don't argue again, and keep this light hearted as we have done so far.

I do agree with Reinhard though..in that it is pretty obvious that many top level swords had risen way above the level of weapons way back then. Although I am not going to dig through archives to prove this point, it is pretty obvious how top level swords were seen. I really don't think the Kogarasu Maru and others were considered weapons even in their heyday.

Yes, they are kept functional...but still considered way more than weapons of war.

 

Brian

[reinhard]

Brian concluded very well what I was saying.

 

Reading my posts carefully, you will notice that I wasn't talking about retempering of NihonTo in general, not even about yakinaoshi of so-called "top-level swords". It was all about a very small group of swords treasured by daimyo or even by the shogun or by the imperial court itself. Kogarasu-maru", celebrated heirloom of the Taira clan, is a very good example. Others could be named like the "Tenka-Go-Ken" or some of the treasures possessed by families like the Tokugawa, the Uesugi, the Maeda, the Shimazu, the Kuroda, to name a few. The swords I'm talking about are representing the very best works of famous masters from old and many of them were recognized as masterpieces beyond weapons from the start.

 

It doesn't take a genius to understand, why these few swords I'm talking about were not used in battle anymore soon after their manufacture. All it takes is a small understanding of how Japan worked during feudal times and getting rid of romantic images. MASAMUNE f.e. is said to have worked for the bakufu in Kamakura directly. Believing that his swords were sold to common warriors is just naive (politely said).

 

You won't find it all in the web though.

 

For those who are trying to practice sarcasm, like Keith, I recommend the reading of more sophisticated books than those you'll find on lists for beginners. - Unfortunately I don't have the time to hold elaborate lectures here.

 

reinhard

[sanjuro]

No argument here..... I can appreciate the logic, the reasoning and the sentiment of what was said concerning the status of certain heirloom and Meito class swords. Just as I appreciate the quarter from which those opinions came. My sarcasm was as I pointed out, not intended to provoke, but more to ellicit an expansion of the statements made beyond mere apparent assumption. It doesnt take a complicated lecture to cite appropriate references so that others may consult them also.

Had I wished to provoke an argument, (a rather pointless pursuit), believe me, I could have done so more easily than merely asking a simple question in the remote hope that it annoyed someone.

Why is everyone so touchy?

 

Perhaps I should sprinkle my posts more liberally with smilies!

[steve oakley]

Hello

 

I have a katana with the following hairline crack in tha hamon. It is about 1cm long. Would this be considered a hagarami and as such a fatal flaw. The crack is not visible on the other side of the balde. The reason i ask is that i intend to take the katana to Shinsa but do not know if am wasting my time as it may be considered a fatal flaw. Obviously the katana needs to meet other standards to pass Shinsa as well. Opinions welcome.

Thanks Steve

[cabowen]

hagarami is not considered a "fatal" flaw in the way a hagire is. Provided the rest of the blade is sound and the mei valid, it should still paper.

[Lindus]

Glad to see this post as I asked this question befor but had no replies.

I have a very large Yari signed "Sukihiro" Shimada school and dated 1531,it has Hagiri,what are the thoughts on that as opposed the cutting weapons.

Roy

[steve oakley]

Thanks Chris

It is a mumei 29 inch blade katana that has not had the nakago cut down. From the shinto period. I knew hagire was vertical and fatal but wasnt to sure about this one as it was i the hamon.

Thankyou

Steve

[cabowen]

Glad to see this post as I asked this question befor but had no replies.

I have a very large Yari signed "Sukihiro" Shimada school and dated 1531,it has Hagiri,what are the thoughts on that as opposed the cutting weapons.

Roy

 

hagire is bad bad bad no matter if it is a katana or yari....

[BSA]

Interesting discussions. I have just a few things to add.

 

While it is seems that great swords were recognized for their artistic qualities early on, that did not necessarily preclude their use in battle. A lot of these top-class swords received the names we know them as today not just from their famous owners, but also from deeds performed with them; their martial use and reputation for superiority making them famous. Honda Tadakatsu's spear "Tonbogiri" was certainly used in war. We have evidence, especially during the Sengoku Jidai, of swords by fairly big name smiths being carried into battle.

 

These objects each have their own long history, so their use or lack thereof fell to the whims and preferences of their owners. This is the difference between say, driving a classic car or keeping it stored in one's garage. These were the precision weapons of their day, and a wealthy warrior would carry the best weapons he could into combat. While the "Ishida Masamune" is a Masamune, it still bares some battle scars. (I would be interested to learn exactly at what point in time these blows were inflicted upon the blade.) So it's not as if once a sword was recognized as something special it was hung up, never to be used again.

 

In the end you won't find a hard and fast rule, it's the nature of anything passed down through history. Some swords were thought of as beautiful when they received their first polish, others became famous through their quality in war; some were set aside to become heirlooms, while others were carried into battle in the hope that their superior quality would protect the owner.

 

Brandon A.

[gudis]

Most is said...generally the older a blade the more concessions regarding to the so called flaws are made. I add some pictures, all swords have designation Juyo Token.

 

There is a story of a blade with a fukure and a couple of small kitae ware...nevertheless the sword was awarded Juyo Token based on its superior quality and the smiths high reputation.

 

1 - Go Yoshihiro

2 - Naotsugu

3 - Niji Kunitoshi

4 - Norishige

5 - Soshu Yukimitsu

 

Eric

 

 

4 - Norishige is a Beautiful blade with a history, it looks like a battle wound to the edge. In my opinion that is a REAL sword with a history that are hard to match.