Jacques

Don't make me look like an idiot, it's impossible. All I want is for someone to show me that you can keep a large kaeri on a real naginata naoshi. Having said that, I know that nobody will be able to do it...

To add to the confusion https://www.japaneseswordindex.com/polearms.htm

No. No demonstration and you present us two different swords. The problem with a naginata naoshi is that we don't know what its form was before it was transformed, so we can only base it on existing naginata. What interests me is what is physically possible, nothing else.

Once again, demonstrate to me that it's possible to keep a kaeri on a naginata naoshi (what technique is used) I know of only one exception (picture attached). Having said that, I wonder if NBTHK isn't lumping everything into the same basket : true naoshi and made as if...

https://www.nipponto.co.jp/swords/JT988980.htm

Okay, let's explain how to make a naoshi: you must take the moto haba into account and make sure that the saki haba is less than the moto haba and that the sori is reasonable, even if it's often saki sori. Try to do this while keeping a kaeri, bearing in mind that the width is only reduced from the mune side and that on a naginata the saki haba is greater than the moto haba.

Once again, there are real naoshi naginata and swords made in the style. Just imagine what the naginata looked like before the tip was reworked. Here's a naginata (Tadatsuna) with a normal boshi - try to imagine the boshi once you've practised the naoshi, the kaeri will have disappeared.

I don't care, you'll just have to show me how you can keep a kaeri while practicing a naoshi. When a student asked me how CO2 works as a greenhouse gaz i gave him a detailed explanation

It's not me who says it... https://note.com/katana_case_shi/n/ncbfeb610f9b2

He gives only the broad outlines, taking no account of variations in work or the differences that can be observed between generations. For example, he says that the hada of the Rai school is made of ko-mokume; in fact, the hada of this school is a ko-itame very often mixed with ko-mokume. Let me be clear, I'm not treating this subject lightly, it's for me a subject to be studied as seriously as physics or anthropology. That's probably what sets me apart from most of the people who frequent this forum.

We definitely don't have the same approach to this book. For me, it's too general and, above all, contains a large section devoted to the basic characteristics of swords: zukuri, kissaki, nakago jiri, yasurime etc. etc. Someone who already has some knowledge should be comfortable with all these terms, and I've often found that this wasn't the case for many.

Please don't confuse naginata naoshi with naginata naoshi zukuri...

We have a very good example with X. Internet is a good tool if you know how to sort... And sorting requires knowledge. As far as I'm concerned, I know absolutely nothing about medicine, pharmacy or aeronautics, so I trust those who do and i keep my loud mouth closed on this subjects

On a true naginata naoshi, boshi must be yakitsume

An opinion is just that, an opinion. What bothers me is when someone tries to pass it off as established fact. I'm a scientist and I know from experience that not all opinions are equal. Kirill's opinion about NBTHK isn't worth a cent. I'd love to dismantle every one of his pseudo-arguments, but I'm prevented from doing so by Brandolini's law...Just an example: Nagayama's book is for complete beginners, not for people who already have some knowledge... About the article I linked, it's full of nonsense, but I know that no one here has the ability to see it - it's the same for Kirill's “paper”...

I've been asked to write an article a few times, and I've always refused because I don't think I'm legitimate enough to do so. Anyone can write anything, but that doesn't make it a valid reference. An example (i choose it for a reason) : https://www.skyfall.fr/wp-content/2016/05/Earth-Science-Reviews_FG_2016-.pdf

Kirill, how many shinsa have you participated in? I read your paper, which is not based on any serious references. If I were a reviewer for an appropriate scientific journal, I'd reject it. Now, if people can't see the difference between a real specialist and a self-proclaimed expert, I can't help it.

I'm sorry, but I can't comment on the quality of a sword without having had it in hands, I'm not an extralucid clairvoyant. The flood destroyed the forges, not the swords that were made before.

This kind of mei is often an indicator of kazu-uchi mono.

Hozon = traditionally made and the signature is good, nothing else. No quality question in hozon.

I'd say if you're a beginner an iaito is sufficient and as they're not steel they're light.

Masashige changed the engraving of the Shige kanji since Kyowa the sword in question was made in Bunka, that said I don't trust this mei, It should bear the Kai no kami (甲斐守) title received in Kyowa 3

There are times when you have to keep your mouth shut or you'll become unpleasant....

Atobori have been used in all eras, often to rebalance a blade which has been suriage or to mask a defect (fukure) revealed by polishing.

This kind of sentence is a red flag for me As the certificate is no longer recognized by the NBTHK, this sword can be considered without papers.