Gakusee

Thank you very much, Andy, for the very exhaustive response. Appreciate it. For one-two years I was a member of the NBSK, but it seems to me they do not need gaijin or try to keep us informed or involved. At least it was like that a few years ago. The NBTHK and NKBKHK at least send magazines, organise lectures / trips / exhibitions for foreigners and keep the international community much more engaged and educated. On the other points - very interesting perspectives. Keep up the craft and art please. Maybe one day we shall meet in Japan, when I find the time outside of swords and work.

Omiya Morishige, as per the kanteisho papers, is plausible. Attached below are two Juyo examples - second one below around 69 cm nagasa and the top image around 72cm. The bottom image below - described by the NBTHK as sakizori and the other as koshizori. Both described as having chu-kissaki, while I would have characterised the longer one / top image to be with closer to ko-kissaki but difficult to say from oshigata. Interestingly, the bottom image below even has what appears in the oshigata as fumbari, so evident are various Kamakura features across both blades (small chu-kissaki, fumbari and koshizori). Note that both have shortish nakago, like yours. But they have different dates - one in 1400s and one in 1500s. So, as Kiril said, even later in time, there were koshizori blades with smaller kissaki in utsushi manner. The shape guides very broadly, but you need to look at the kitae first and foremost. Jigane is key to ageing and so is hamon. Ganbatte!

Nishioka san has a couple of deshi / employees working in his studio together with his wife, who is a kumihimo artisan. There was a very informative article and set of interviews with all of them in the Katchu magazine (either the 2020 or 2021 issue) of the Japanese Armour Society. I am glad that Andy has started shedding more light on this fascinating craft, its traditions and intricacies. Hopefully it is preserved, but as is the case with so many traditional arts and crafts in Japan, it is unfortunately in jeopardy since very few young Japanese follow in the footsteps of previous masters. It requires hard work and perseverance. The more various katchushi, both in Japan and in the West, educate us, the better for the art and people who appreciate it. It is informative to hear different perspectives from several artisans. There seem to be somewhat more people who restore / repair armour than there are armour makers. Andy - what is your view on restorers, both in Japan and in the West? Next: is there a katchushi “craftsmen” association in Japan similar to the sword-related NBSK, which itself is comprised mainly of swordsmiths, sayashi and polishers (as opposed to the museum / evaluation /education focused NBTHK)? I am a member of the NKBKHK, which focuses on appraisals, preservation and education in relation to Japanese armour. Nishioka san is a senior member of that body. But are there even enough such katchu craftsmen in Japan to justify a pure “artisan” organisation? This could comprise armour makers who forge metal parts and assemble armour or people specialising in leather or dying or braiding etc. In the sword world, there is a strict differentiation and segregation between the different crafts of swordsmithing, koshirae making, polishing, kodogu and tosogu making, etc. That differentiation has resulted in supreme quality as the skills and knowledge required are very different. It seems to me that in the world of armour, katchushi learn to make and do everything themselves even though ito braiding / lacing is a very different skill to metal forging / forming, for example….. Thank you for your views.

Most dealers can do that for you. As well as probably people like Bob Hughes “Keichodo” etc. Actually, Tanobe sensei is very personable and friendly. Have not had the chance to meet Tokugawa san yet, but from friends who have met him, have heard he is down to earth and friendly too.

The latter

The mei does look like Mitsushige in your photos. There are plenty of Muromachi Bizen and Bingo Mitsushige smiths (p 628 in Markus’ Index).

Well, thank you in any case for the beautiful images! The tsuba are great.

Pietro - any of the Natsuo or Ishiguro :)?

Well, it depends on what you mean by that generalisation....The role of bushi, from landowners who had to protect their land to landed gentry to conscripted warriors to codified military caste changed quote a bit over 7-8 centuries! My interpretation of your statement (and apologies if misconstrued) is that actually what you are thinking of samurai probably can be narrowed down to the period 1550-1615 (which is when their behaviour was quite codified and they were the exalted warriors we romanticise about and actually fought and so on). Before then, the behaviours were different and they were summoned, trained, equipped more sporadically and differently. After that, they just became a military class but lived mostly peacefully. So charts such as the pyramidal hierarchy cited above are snapshots at a given point in time and are representative of a certain period.

Some interesting quotes from literature, which shed some light on mei. Nihonto Koza (Afu translation) Koto part I p4, Honma Junji: In reference to old mei (Heian and Early Kamakura swords), he writes: 'One point which must especially be written about is the mei style. The reason that it is large is because it was made to resemble the writing style of Wei, Shin, and the Six Dynasties of China, and these are extremely interesting when viewed as knowledge for the judging of calligraphy. Come to think of it, this mei style is not something that is seen only in KYOMONO, the mei style that is seen in KO-BIZEN and other works of this same period is about the same. All of them, while appearing old and unskilled, have a certain character and an appearance of antiquity.' Not only did they know what they signed, they emulated Sino- calligraphy and culture. Nihon Koto Shi (M Sesko translation), p 22 (e-version): Honma Junji writes: 'Entering the Japanese Sword Age, it became a custom that swordsmiths signed their smith names on the nakago, but there is no extant work of the Shōsō´in Depository that has a smith’s name inscribed on the nakago. There are two swords that have characters on the blade amongst 100 tachi of the depository. These characters are inscriptions that praise the swords, but are not swordsmith’s names. Two treasure swords with kinzōgan are registered in ‘Shutsuzō-chō’ (出倉帳, a list of swords coming both in and out of the collection). There are notes about the two swords on the list, “Jiden” (次田) and “Daishō Saku” (大小作) (there is a record on the list that the swords were taken out of the depository on the 26th day of the twelfth month of Tenpyō-Hōji drei [天平宝字, 759]). Though I have not been able to confirm that they are smith’s names or their titles, it is uncertain whether these inscriptions chiselled on the blade or nakago. According to a clause included in ‘Taihō-ritsuryō’ (大宝律令, legal codes) that was issued in 701 [AD], swordsmiths were ordered to sign their names on the nakago of their works, therefore, there should have been swords with smith’s names on their nakago in that period. How should we understand the actual fact that there is no extant work with a smith’s name in the sword collection of the Shōsō´in Depository? Possibly tachi categorised as kingin-densō-tachi that were worn by emperors and court nobles, might not be recognised as weapon, therefore, they were not to be subjected to the code. However, musō-tō in ō-dabira style should have smith’s names on the nakago since they are to have been used as weapon. I wonder if the clause of the Taihō-ritsuryō was not practised by swordsmiths and resulted in a mere scrap of paper? Incidentally, the ‘Engi-shiki’ (延喜式) codes issued later orders to officials in charge of swords supplied to the government, to sign their names on the swords, but this did not apply to smith’s names. Meanwhile, swords for sale in the market were still subjected to the clause of the Taihō-ritsuryō codes.' The Shosoin swords being mostly from Nara and earliest Heian period, precede the traditional Japanese swords, yet had inscriptions! Furthermore, the formal edict meant that smiths had to learn how to sign their tangs as that was a legal requirement. The earliest sword school being Yamato, originated in / around monasteries (which were seats of education and knowledge). Same text as above: 'My theory, that the origin of Yamato swords comes from the swords of the Shōsō´in Depository, is as mentioned above and justified from the view point of workmanship and geography. There is no doubt that Yamato smiths had had intimate relationship with temples since the medieval period and supplied the temples, which had many armed monks, with swords. Especially, I am sure that swordsmiths who belonged to big temples such as the Tōdaiji (東大寺) and the Kōfuku-ji (興福寺) enjoyed their special patronage. Referring to the case of Tegai Kanenaga (手掻包永), his school name ‘Tegai’ coincides with the name of a gate of the Tōdaiji and it means smiths of the Tegai school lived near the Tegai Gate (手掻門) of the temple. Incidentally, there is an address called ‘Tegai-chō’ (手掻町) which still exists in the temple town today. Kanenaga is the founder of the Tegai school and was active in the middle of the Kamakura Period. The facts mentioned above prove that the Tegai school had a special relation with the Todaiji.' While speculative, it is likely if the smiths coexisted and co-worked with the erudite priests would have assimilated at least some literacy. As mentioned in other posts (Reddit referenced article?), the Japanese society was erudite and probably more so that Western societies. Reference from the 3-volume “A History of Japan” by G Sansom, 1st volume in the enclosed photo. Who in the 9th century elsewhere compiled a list of books available in the country? I need to check some of the great M Eastern and Indian and Chinese civilisations but my conjecture is it will be only very few nations. And one could go on and on, putting together sufficient evidence that there was ample erudition in their society, the smiths existed/worked mostly in centres of erudition and knowledge (as that was where the clientele was), that their mei are so well studied that experts notice how tiny atari or chisel strokes are made and superimpose on that analysis of patina and ageing et cetera et cetera. It simply requires patience and desire to read books and study….Unfortunately, the world of Nihonto is not one where 5-10 Google searches or 10 clicks of the mouse will produce ready answers or where ChatGPT makes any sense. One needs to persevere and respectfully and patiently study.

Being literate is very different from knowing how to chisel two kanji of a signature. Being able to chisel 2-3 kanji, or recognise them, does not make one literate. If you notice, very few of the early swords had nagamei, ie long signatures. That is probably because the smiths indeed were mostly illiterate and only memorised or copied very simple nijimei or sanmei signatures. Such rudimentary understanding and knowledge of the smiths in earlier periods, ie limited to writing/chiselling their own name perhaps, explains various idiosyncrasies such as certain smiths chiselling certain kanji or parts thereof in a reverse manner to the usual / standard.

This fukure is too close to the habuchi for appropriate horimono.

Interesting. Well, clearly more pictures will help - including of the sword tang and also close-ups of the text on the wooden scabbard (shirasaya).

Jeremy Sometimes we tend to oversimplify matters. Subjective preference might or might not be right for a certain sword. It becomes a matter of personal (in this case, Western) interpretation of what a traditional Japanese object should look like and is juxtaposed versus a Japanese perspective and aesthetical interpretation. Sometimes these two are misaligned and sometimes they are aligned. What I have observed is that we often tend to judge a polish as good or bad through our Western perspective and also on the basis of indeed cheaper, rushed or substandard polishes encountered in the West (and sometimes Japan). Therefore, I do not subscribe to views such as “we have seen this and that many times over an extended period of time in country X or country Z” if said country is not Japan. Indeed outside of Japan we often do not have swords in current or top polish. As mentioned in the other polish thread, older polish (even if it once was hadori) could appear as close to sashikomi if abraded with uchiko over decades. So, sometimes people think they have seen sashikomi polish when actually they have seen a sword in an older polish that has been uchiko-ed away. Also, viewing or photographing swords head-on (sword lying on its side and us viewing it directly perpendicularly from above) might not show us much if the hadori is there and blending hamon elements and I sense that characteristic is what makes some members complain about hadori and express a preference for shashikomi. But through observing the sword longitudinally and pointing to a light source, the same hadori can reveal the “hidden elements” and in addition allows full appreciation of the jigane head-on. I have also seen instances where a sword was finished in a certain way that raised some questions in my mind. Why did the polisher not bring out the hamon more or the hada even more? The polish was good but not what some in the West call “Juyo polish”. After careful discussion with the polisher it transpired that he had noticed a small sub-surface fukure (barely detectable by a polisher and invisible to the common observer). Accordingly, the polisher did not undertake further grinding and only highlighted as much as he thought would not bring up / burst the fukure (which only he noticed and many experienced people missed) and yet would allow appreciation of the sword. Such subtleties and insider insights are normally lost on most people, who would only comment on how “good” or “bad” a polish might look superficially. So, to answer your question: it is probably a mix of experience (ie, seeing older polishes or substandard polishes); preference for a specific type of viewing/ experiencing the blade (ie, head-on immediate appreciation of hamon); own interpretation of what traditional or appropriate is (ie, Western perspective on this, even though various articles and interviews have mentioned that hadori is older than what we think and that “traditionally” in the old periods swords were finished differently from sashikomi / hadori finish as we know it today) and various other personal reasons (which might include a specific belief or liking of swords that come up better in sashikomi). So, my overall advice is to research and study extensively / thoroughly before forming an extreme opinion such as this polish is better than that, so one should always go for that polish.

Ok, Colin, let me share what I have discussed in person with Tanobe sensei. It was not an in-depth discussion but a brief one as we covered other topics. However, it contradicts the pure 'preference-based' thesis and illustrates how one is perhaps slightly better than the other in certain circumstances. Sashikomi is particularly appropriate for nioi-based (or perhaps this could be extended also to very, very fine/tight ko-nie which is close to nioi) hamon with clearly defined choji or gunome-choji. Think Mitsutada, Moriie, etc. In fact, he recommended a specific polisher, adept at a particular type of polish and specialising in a particular Gokaden school, for a specific sword of mine. That particular sword (I am not going to disclose further details as that is not relevant) is a mid-Kamakura Bizen blade that fits the aforementioned modus operandi. Furthermore, the jigane has some hadatatsu, which is a signature trait of the school/smith. The new sashikomi polish replaced a previous highly skilful hadori polish and not only accentuated the choji beautifully but of course clearly delineated them. Some of the smaller choji and some of the togari gunome previously were not clear until viewed sideways. Furthermore, it subdued some of the o-hada / hadatachi and toned it down, making the jigane appear better, smoother, etc (outcome of the nugui used in there). Hadori, as others have said, eg in the other polish thread that dates to 2013 (where George Trotter and Chris Bowen exchanged lots of useful views, insights and information) could presumably also be good on choji and Bizen-like hamon. In fact, most swords nowadays indeed have hadori. But that polishing style seems to be particularly apposite for Soshu-like nie and jihada, where it spectacularly brings out the jihada, jinie, and overall nie in the entire structure. The jigane becomes more visible and clearer. Presumably in swords where you have notare midare or a simple wavy or suguha hamon (eg Yamashiro), you do not need the sashikomi to bring forward particularly visually striking formations such as flamboyant choji/o-choju/fukuro choji etc). Moreover, also when you have jinie and chikei, etc, you want the maximum luminance and translucence of the jigane (which hadori highlights). Hence the result is the wet, oily look in some of the Kamakura masterpieces. To elaborate on my earlier point above about each of the two styles potentially being done ineptly. Tanobe sensei has also commented on sometimes certain polish not being appropriate for a certain sword. In fact, I have seen numerous examples where the hadori has been too bright or too aggressive for a venerable old sword. One of mine is polished in a very respectful and delicate manner, as it behoves the dignity of an old Ko-Bizen beauty that it is. Eventually, yes, we as collectors and temporary custodians might express a predilection for one or another polishing method. However, that does not mean that it is right for the sword or that it has been done right. That is why we need to respect and listen to experts.

As Manuel said, Nanbokucho koshigatana seem to be the type in which kozuka and kogai were initially popularised and later the koshigatana gave way to the uchigatana and daisho. However, there are koshigatana with slots for kogai or kozuka dating to 12th century and earlier. Such have been found in Kasuga Taisha and archeological sites. There are various images of Nanbokucho koshigatana with kozuka and kogai but below are the earlier relics not often seen. Slots for kozuka are visible. Courtesy of Katchu magazine (NKBKHK) vol6 Jan 2023 and the author Ueno Shuji sensei who wrote the extensive treatise on medieval koshigatana. As to larger blades, Matt E/Tensho’s example of katchushi tsuba is very telling. Also dating to roughly Nanbokucho.

Sashikomi can also be poor and overt and inexpert. Some blades are more appropriate in sashikomi and some - in hadori. Both styles can be done poorly. So it is rather pointless to say one is better than another. That is the message I keep hearing from professional togishi.

Steve mentioned the notare midare hamon being majestic.

Does Tanobe sensei really describe this hamon as “majestic”? What is the Japanese term please? I have not seen it used like that so will appreciate the kanji please. Thank you.

Kodachi at this size

I am aligned with Jacques here. Either ubu or close to ubu and slightly suriage. A lot of these Muromachi katateuchi were in the 60-65cm ballpark. A few of the better Norimitsu swords in the 1460-1480 period attached, including the JuBu. One (oshigata / earlier Juyo) is signed Saemonnojo.

John, that is truly impressive! We need to make better use of your multitude of skills in our local To-ken dealings! Extremely well done! Best wishes

The quoted sum of $500k does not sound accurate, unless we are discussing the national treasure replica of a Heian armour that took traditional kachushi 3-4 years to build. For $50k-100k you can buy Juyo Bunka Shiryo authentic antique armour, so you can imagine how many you can buy with $500k. Of course, in some of the recent Sotheby’s auctions, prices went stratospheric for some of the Daimyo armours but even then the top armours went for $200-300k. Prices have subsequently normalised I hope/ think.

Congrats and well done for being analytical and observant. Few people nowadays make an effort to analyse….

That is just pure excellence….Remarkable perseverance and determination!