paulb

Hi Jacques, no it doesnt look like any I can remember (working from memory because I am on holiday and away from any references.) however based on Kevins belief that the workmanship is close ( I may be misinterpretting what he said) i think the only way he can be really satisfied is to submit it to a shinsa panel. For what it is worth I think it is wrong too. regards

Kevin, It would be almost impossible to confirm the authenticity of your sword from images even if we had the skills to do it which mosst of us dont. If you were to post a better image of the signature it is possilbe that some might be able to confirm that it was gimei (false signature). based on pure statisitcs the liklihood is that it is not by O Sa. It is not surpirising that you believe it to be a good sword, if someone was trying to imitate a great smith they at least needed a good sword to use as a starting point. If you think there is the possibility of this being right the only course of action is to submit it to shinsa. If you are in the USA you may wish to put it in to one of the NTHK events coming up shortly. Alternatively you could send it to the NBTHK for appraisal in Japan. It may be that you defy the statistics and odds and this proves to be an important work. Based on what little can be seen in the images shown so far I doubt this is the case. however I wish you luck in your search. Best Regards Paul

Klaus, quenching in water puts considerable stress on a blade and unless well forged the process can damage or even destroy a blade (modern smiths quote a 10% failure rate in quenching). quenching in oil is more forgiving and puts less stress on the metal. therefore the failure rate is lower and it is possible to differentialy harden blades of lesser quality without introducing fatal faults. This is an over simplification but is the basic reason for choosing to quench in oil.

Clive, I was discussing another Gassan piece yesterday, a Tanto I think paperd to Sadakazu or Sadakatsu (cant remember which one) by the NTHK. this piece is a dead ringer for a Hosho blade from the late Kamakura. Could it just be that the Gassan smiths were making these as special order copies for someone wanting a Yamato blade? regards Paul

Hi, That is a huge subject which has had many posts relating to it. Many collectors with years of experience continue to debate about unsigned swords. Also a blade having a signature is no guarantee of quality. First step do a search here on Mumei blades and suriage blades. Also in the articles section you will see some some pieces on the subject that might help regards

amen

yes but we try and hide behind a humble facade, hadnt you noticed? Bowmen were expensive. They were regarded as superior to men at arms but were not part of the nobility. I think they were paid 6d a day at Agincourt where the average foot soldier was paid 2d. This was their ultimate undoing later on as a foot soldier with a musket was a lot easier to train and a lot less expensive. sorry for going off topic. I am hoping to see more of your work next week and will pay special attention to the cracks :D

I know and have seen it. It is beautiful but if I am really honest I would prefer it without the cracks With a name like Bowman I come from a long line of peasant stock what do expect sophistication???

Eric, that is an interesting point and reminds me of a discussion we had at an NBTHK UK branch meeting. We spent time in the morning looking at some beautiful swords and the afternoon included an excellent talk on Higo tsuba. One of the tsuba shown had a very prominent hole in the metal as a result of either an air pocket or corrosion. This was heralded as an important work and the fault regarded as a significant enhancement. If such a fault had been seen in the blades we looked at earlier it would have been regarded (rightly so) as a major problem. I confess despite very detailed explanation as to why it was felt this fault added to the tsuba I could not see it as anything other than an ugly hole which detracted from the piece. ( I guess I can see why I am not a fittings person!)

Every other mail on this thread seems to be clarifying a point made before. Hi Ford, No I didnt misunderstand you nor did I for a moment think you were criticising Victor, quite the opposite. I was concerned when Clive and Ian seemed to jump to his defence that my posting, not yours, had been taken in the wrong way (my fault not the readers) I have learned over the years that there are as many views, scientific, spiritual, and historical as there are students of the subject. While there are many I either dont understand or fail to agree with I would certainly suport their right to hold and express their opinion.

Hi Ron, Yes i am sure my eccentricities are as great or even greater than many others! However they are not generally seen on national TV. As said earlier it appears my negative view on this work is in the minority (so far of one) is that another proof of eccentricity? regards Paul

Dear Clive and Ian, Just to make sure I am not misunderstood due to lack of clarity in my earlier posting: Clive- the comment you quoted was Fords not mine and I think very much supported your point. What I actualy said was: My issue was not with Victor whom I have respected for as many years as I have been collecting. It was the response to what he said that I was commenting on. Again I dont really want to take up peoples time on this, Ford pasted a link to a documentary saying he liked it and why. I said why I didnt like it. We can differ in our view. I was not being critical about Victor only the style of the programme and the presentation which I still think does little to foster interest in the subject. I can accept that I am in the minority on this (as with many other things) If I gave the impression I was attacking Victor Harris in my earlier posting this was emphatically not the intention and I apologise. If it appeared I was commenting negatively about the BBC I have at least in part been successful. regards

maybe thats the problem I do take myself too seriously all the time!!! :D BTW I thought the next round was on you not me :?

Ford, nothing could be further from the truth, other than on this occasion where we can agree to disagree. I fully accept that the problem is as much mine as the programmes. I totally lack the patience to sit through and see through the silliness to enjoy the things that you obviously do. Regarding Victors comment I wasnt commenting on what he said, which one can choose to believe or not, I felt the way it was filmed and Dixon's reaction to what was said appeared both dismissive and patronising. Without wanting to labour the point (because I actually dont think it or my opinion of it are worth great debate) I think it was indicative of the BBC's continued attempt at dumbing down. If you have seen the latest programme on the Royal Insitutes summer exhibition with one of Dixon's team waliking round in beret and striped shirt carrying brush and palette (just in case we failed to realise he was talking about painting) you might undertand my over sensitivity to their current approach. Signed Miserable old English Git (AKA Paulb)

Hi Ford, I saw this when it first came out. I am normally a fan of Graham Dixon, who is extremely knowledgeable about fine art. I am afraid i fall in to the "Unimpressed" category on this one. I fail to see why he had to trivialise the subject to such a degree. I also thought Victor,s "listening to the spirits of the forge" also came across as pure excentricity. All in all I dont think it did very much to promote the subject and is one better forgotten. Regards Paul

Hi Mark do you have any more images of the blade?

Jason, You are right, you cant rule out what you havent seen. When carrying out research in this or most other fields you have to look at the most likely (and simplest) explanation as this is most likely the closest to the truth. The more complex your theories become the less likely they are to be accurate. You are entering the world of fantasy on this one. Something you are entitled to do and if it gives you enjoyment fine. However such fantasies are best not shared.

Hi Jean, Yes Sir I still dream about this one. The nearest I got to it was asking Andy if I could have a photograph If I had to have just one blade I think it would have to be an Awataguchi piece. I think the blade above is fantastic but the one I liked the most was one which was in a Christies sale in 2008. As far as I remember it didnt make reserve but I dont think it was ever re-offered. It was a Tokubetsu Juyo piece and was something very special. We can always dream!!

I have only ever seen one in hand and that was a long time ago. Although interesting to look at and I am sure difficult to make, the one I saw felt unwieldy and clumsy to hold. I am not sure if there was some practical reason for this style but I am guessing it was a fashion thing which, based on the number you see, wasnt hugely successful.

Thank you Ted, it is always worth remembering that the pieces that have the greatest impact are those where the elements and features work together to create a greater whole. I totally agree with your comments regarding hada, I enjoy Suguha more than other patterns, however the suguha hamon I enjoy mostly appear on Awataguchi, Rai, Enju and Aoe pieces all of which have a reputation for beautiful jigane. As you say I do not believe you can achieve a beautful hamon unless the jigane is of a quality to support it. Likewise the importance of shape is often overlooked. We sometimes tend to view shape as a means of establishing age but neglect its importance in the overall appearance and aesthetic. I think it was Walter Compton who said you never see a good sword with a bad shape. No matter how the other elements come together if the shape doesnt hold the thing together it will look wrong. I have put an example of an Awatuguchi blade below (with thanks to Andy Quirt for the image) which I think demonstrates this very well.

my pleasure Justin

Jason, I think you are looking at Lorenzo's comment the wrong way. Of course fittings fail hozon papers for many reasons relating to quality and authenticity in the same way swords do. What he is saying is that works by livng artists are not considered for papering. Remember the original and main reasons for papering is to confirm quality and authenticity. If the maker is still alive that attribution is not necessary as they can identify their own work.

Hi Chris, I agree with you totally there is no substitute for seeing swords in hand to understand the finer points often mentioned in descriptions of good blades. In fact I am not really disagreeing with anything. I would just hate us to get in the habit of dismissing a topic or discussion with the "you have to see it in hand" answer. (not suggesting anyone is or has done that as yet). There is no response possible to that point of view and everyone should agree. However it shouldnt stop us trying to explain and develop understanding with what material is available to us. If we do that then those who are desperate to learn but are unable to travel to source will quickly become disenchanted. Having spent 30 years travelling around the pacific rim on business I think my long haul flying days are pretty much behind me. I would hate to think that my ability to advance my understanding of the subject and its finer detail will cease because I can no longer visit Japan.

Hi Keith, yes I understand your point and it is indeed self evident that a tapered blade will have a different point of balance and that will effect the way it feels. I agree with you that blades with fumbari and those with a significant taper towards the kissaki will balance better in hand. My concern is that in the past at arms fairs the generalisation about koto being light and shinto heavy was used far too often, is too simplistic and could mislead. regarding weight, like you I have no idea how much is actually lost through multiple polishing but if the original thickness of a blade was say 8mm and after umpteen polishes it was reduced to 6mm then it has lost up to 25% of its thickness (assuming the level of reduction is consistant down the length) and therefore I guess up to 25% of it's weight. (You will note that physics along with many other disciplines is not a strength)

I am not sure if anyone has noticed but on several threads recently the comment has been made by different people that a particular trait is something that can only be seen and understood by looking at pieces in hand, or "it isnt something you can learn in books". This might appear to be a contradiction of the other much quoted mantra targeted at beginners about buying books not swords when you start out. I dont think anyone disputes the benefit of seeing an object in hand whenever possible. We talk about it almost exclusively in relation to swords and fittings but it is true of any art form. Given the opportunity I think all would prefer to do it. However as has been said before not all have the opportunity or take the opportunity to travel to Japan to see such work. As a result they have to view what is available to them and yes study images whether that is oshigata, photographs or screen images. I fully accept that this is a long way second best but I hope, otherwise I have wasted a lot of years, that with effort one can obtain at least some level of understanding from published work. I am afraid we appear to be getting in to the habit of terminating discussions with the suggestion that the only way one can understand a detailed point is to examine pieces in hand. While I agree it is preferable I do not believe it is exclusive and much can be learned by studying available literature.