Nice Find

[Henry Wilson]

If I you found them, would you tell....?

 

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ ... 028f2.html

[W K Clifford]

technically, these are not nihonto, am I mistaken? In fact, are they certain that these were not made in China?

[sanjuro]

Frankly I'm surprised that after 1200 years underground there is anything recogniseable left of them. So what now? do they restore them? Do they try and remove the blades to examine them? Lets face it... Its going to take more than uchiko and choji oil to make those blades presentable.

I guess we are not likely to see these on ebay anytime soon.

[Lorenzo]

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8802

 

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

I guess we are not likely to see these on ebay anytime soon.

 

These not for sure, but it's a matter of fact that in China are available lots of incredibly well made fakes of bronze weapons of any (chinese) historical period that sometime fooled

even museums. E-bay has the low-end of them as well.

[ehk]

Its going to take more than uchiko and choji oil to make those blades presentable.

 

It does look like if you give it one tap with the Uchiko the sword will fall apart. But I to think that after 1200 years it is amazing they still look recognisable.

[W K Clifford]

I was serious about the "made in china" question though. Are they sure that these were not imports from the mainland, known as the Tang Dynasty at the time? The Tang court was very generous...

 

Concerning Carlo's remark about good Chinese fakes fooling museums, recently there's been an interesting episode involving this sword:

 

 

 

This sword was buried for 2400 years and yet, when it was excavated in the 70s, there was no rust on it! and it was still sharp enough to slice through layers of papers. A small miracle. And it does have a mei written in an archaic style called 鳥篆 (because they look like birds...), very difficult to decipher:

 

 

 

it reads “戉王鳩淺 自乍用鐱”, believed to mean "越王句踐 自作用劍" (basically means that this is 句踐's sword, 句踐 was a famous warlord in the late Spring and Autumn period, roughly 2500 years ago)

 

Anyway, Shi, one of the experts involved in identifying the sword in the 70s now claims that he found an identical sword from a street vendor, and it is genuine! Man, I saw a poor picture of that sword, even I know it is a fake. He is a laughing stock now...Senility strike... terrible tragedy

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

This sword was buried for 2400 years and yet, when it was excavated in the 70s, there was no rust on it! and it was still sharp enough to slice through layers of papers. A small miracle.

 

The miracle would be to find rust on a bronze weapon as the one you're posting, of late Eastern Zhou Dynasty, excavated in Wangshan, Jiangling County, Hubei Province. But guess you meant "oxidization" . Not a miracle but the result of a very smart process of protecting the bronze surface, well described by Dr, Yang Hong. It doesn't work with steel, hence the poor conditions of most of the iron/steel swords in the two countries.

 

technically, these are not nihonto, am I mistaken? In fact, are they certain that these were not made in China?

 

 

I'm not so sure you've the knowledge to prove they *surely* are made in China. Are you sure to want to rise such a topic ?

[W K Clifford]

wow, Carlo, you are a very knowledgeable man !

[Henry Wilson]

Concerning Carlo's remark about good Chinese fakes fooling museums, recently there's been an interesting episode involving this sword:

 

What was the episode? I would like to know more....

[W K Clifford]

What was the episode? I would like to know more....

 

Sorry I did not make it clear, Henry, the story was described in the last paragraph of my last post, about this famous antique expert Shi.

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

wow, Carlo, you are a very knowledgeable man !

 

Yimu, don't take me wrong.

 

Simply, I've seen and continuously see a war between chinese, korean and Japanese

about the attribution of such and such a sword, in other board chinese and koreans.

 

My aim is to leave this sort of ethnical controversy out of this board.

 

Likely the swords in question are made with Japanese steel smelted with a particular

furnace now exctinct by far and with smithing performed by 3rd or 4th generation korean smiths.

 

But this is better discussed elsewhere because there are too many cross-cultural matters

and archeological questions involved.

[W K Clifford]

Hi Carlo, I understand your concern and appreciate your remarks. I would be the last person to start any nonsense about attributions. There is no subtext in my question (I asked it merely because I thought it was a amusing). Hence I would be satisfied if someone could answer it with one of these: 1. true 2. false 3. complicated.

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

Guess "complicated" is the closest one.

Make a search for Kokturk weaponry of the same period to see how complicated it really is.