george trotter

Hi Ford, if I may squeeze the last drop out of my two cents worth...can I just make a comment on my perceptions of Japaneseness in art. I think (not being trained) that i am referring to your classifications "Yugen" subtle profundity and "Mujo" impermanence. I once passed up the chance to buy a very simple tsuba that had a a couple of what I presumed to be Japanese stone grave? markers on it...or at least temple markers. On a few of the level flat parts of this little moss covered monument were small pebbles carefully piled on top of each other...some had fallen over and were scattered around. It was not til years later that I noticed, while walking walking in shrine areas, the very same thing; the little pebbles piled on top of each other, and also fallen over and scattered by wind and snow. I discovered that these are left by casual "strollers by", not necessarily related, who just feel the need to mark their connection to the concept of death, ancestors, themselves and the transience of life. Clearly, the standing pebbles are a metaphor for the living (connected in sprit to the dead) and the fallen/scattered pebbles are a metaphor for those who have left this life and joined the dead. I find this concept touching, sad,yet strangely affirmative of life. I sure wish I had bought that tsuba. As a gaijin, I may be totally wrong in my interpretation of the pebbles' meaning, but I "think" this interpretation I give it (and the tsuba maker gave it) is Yugen/Mujo? regards, George.

Hi Ford, well here it is a beautiful autumn afternoon, and I think I will plunge in to the dreaded lake of artistic influence. At my dismal level of artistic knowledge (or should I say lack of...), I can only say that any person in a position to look through this sequence of depictions and pick out any outside influence, let alone "western" influence must have a VERY broad knowledge of world art. May I (in my plebian way) start the ball rolling by saying, that "to me", the majority look to be native Japanese aesthetic. Out of these I would classify the following as containing some "visible" reference from outside Japan: fig 0011 "mountain and fisherman...China/Daoist. this is problem for me...is it influence or "borrowing/copying". Myoju fig 0014 "oakleaves etc in Sumi-e"...poss Chinese as the originator of Sumi-e...again, influence or borrowing? Namban 0019 "quasi-baroque Euro swordguard"...clearly evincing to me a borrowing from west...therefore, not really? "influence" but borrowing. Mitsuoki otsuki jpg "bridge and moon"...the most subtly evincing of "influence" (not a blatant borrowing)...in this case, a technically correct western perspective in length/depth, breadth and height. This is just me rising (or falling) to my level of expertise on Japanese/world art. regards, George.

Oh...well that's alright then :-) George

Hi all...is there anybody out there...? I hope I haven't said something to mess up this discussion have I? Regards to all, George.

Alf, he was a Seki sworsmith of WWII and started in swords at Seki in 3rd Sept 1942 (Showa 17). Out of interest, is his signature just two kanji and in "flowing" script (sosho), that is not the usual squarish type kanji? I ask because a Tadamasa Seki blade was my very first blade in 1971. Regards, George.

Peter, the small kanji on top are in mild sosho form...I can't find the first one but it seems to be ? Sen To (? fairy/wizard sword) Sorry, that's all I can find. Regards, George.

It occurs to me that perhaps I should clarify what I mean by "western influence" as opposed to "copying/depicting" western art/objects. In Japanese ukiyoe, it is well known that westerners and western objects were depicted. It is equally well known that the ukiyoe artists had a unrealistic grasp of perspective, often being able to show the back of a subject as well as the front (eg Shunga). In time, as the western contact continued, while the artists continued to depict their usual scenes in their unique Japanese style, a slow but steady correction to perspective becomes apparent...obviously learned from the west. Thus, I say that the depiction of a westerner/western object is just that, western "stuff" copied/depicted in Japanese art (like Craig's Kodzuka of Bow/banner etc), the subtle change/correction to perspective in Japanese art is sign of what we are calling "western influence". In other words "influence" is subtle and unheralded, while depiction/copying is just that, a blatant depiction/copying of a western object etc. IMHO. Regards, George.

I don't think I can contribute much here as my knowledge of tosogu is very sketchy ...I may have to include non-tosogu to make a point. Also my library on this subject is almost non-existant, so I will mostly read and learn. May I make one (I hope) helpfull contribution in terms of an "entry" date for western influence...for me it seems reasonable to focus this point to the Sengoku Jidai. We know that the effective date for western penetration into Japan was 1542...at Tanegashima. Firearms, Christianity, western dress, technology, languages, literature and various types of trade commodities, INCLUDING fish/vegetables deep-fried in batter...(yes, tempura is originally Portuguese) entered Japan from this date. Within a century the appearance of the Japanese concept of "western-ness" is evident in namban tosogu and nambantetsu in swords. I suppose it is true to say that in much of it, a grotesque distortion (depending on one's taste) of what they were "copying/influnced by" is evident, eg the tsuba imitating baroque western small-sword guards. Again...I am not sure whether these things are "western influence" or Japanese attempts at copying western art. I offer this time zone as a possible demarcation point to begin from...I am happy for more knowledgeable people to make adjustment or offer alternatives. BTW Ford, I thank you for your analysis of the horse dai-sho tsuba...I too think these are worthy of respect as examples of Japaneseness in aesthetic and execution. I am pleased they have remained a pair as the charm of the concept and the "cheekiness" of the artist would be diminished by their separation. Regards, George.

Hi Ford et al... what a refreshing change to see this topic addressed in such a reasoned and erudite manner, from what I have read so far, based on observation and study, rather than bias and prejudice. For me,(not being an art scholar), I have to say that very little in Japanese sword and related art strikes me as evincing a "western influence'. Many things are "western"...morion, tanegashima, certain arms and armours etc, but these seem to remain what they always were, (original or copies of) western objects. Their form and function remains unchanged, only minor functional accessories or materials change to suit local tastes/needs technologies or cultural taboos (eg, powder kept in a dried gourd, rather than a cow horn; brass springs instead of spring steel). In the case of their decoration however, a strong preference for maintaining a "Japaneseness" is evident (which we all love), but as we know, everything we love, like Japanese dress, architecture, literature, graphic art, applied art, government, religion, city planning, social heirachy etc etc is essentially borrowed from 8th-9th century China. In effect, what some in past threads have angrily insisted was "pure Japanese aesthetic" could be characterised as "Chinese art evincing a strong Japanese influence". I suppose what I'm saying is that most of the interpretation of the "westernness" of a given "influence" depends on the eye and knowledge of the beholder. Craig explained his reasoning for the perception of "western influence" on the kodzuka handle with bow, banner etc...it is quite reasonable, but is it western influence or rather a depiction of western objects by a Japanese artist? For me, the little "galloping horse" dai tsuba, and the little "horses hoofprints" sho tsuba of an earlier thread was a delightfully "Japanese" artistic conceit. If someone could use it as an example to illustrate in a dispassionate, scholarly way (without perjoratives), that it is indeed "western", I would be interested to learn. regards, George.

Hi all, I cannot comment specifically on the nerikawa tsuba itself, but can add a comment on them being lost to time. Having spent 13 years with a Maritime Musem and 26 years actively associated with materials conservators I can say the following with some certainty ...the reason a lacquered leather tsuba survived intact after centuries in a (fresh water?) lake is probably that the lacquer was pristine when it sank...no cracks or chips to allow the slow ingress of water to the leather. It is well-known that lacquerware recoverd from centuries old lake and ocean shipwrecks is often "perfect". Because there are no cracks or breakages in the lacquered trays,boxes etc, no water can get in to attack the wood inside. Perhaps a strong reason so few nerikawa tsuba have survived "on the land" is that they have more opportunity to be chipped and cracked in everyday use, which allows rain/humidity to enter the interior? Lacqerware recovered from salt water must still be appraised for salt penetration (it can enter glass and fireglazed ceramics too)...if not extracted the material, including lacquer I would imagine, can see the growth of salt crystals in the atmosphere and so slowly "flake to death". regards, Geo.

Hi Moriyama san and Morita san... thank you both for your help with our Taisho-Showa Jidai gendaitosho questions...your answers and references and oshigatas are very helpful to us WWII gendaito collectors. With your help the knowledge of these tosho is slowly growing in the west. We thank you. Regards, George.

Hi all, The attachment by Moriyama san is un-readable on my computer. Interesting that it says Inoue san's name was Jinsaku. I read it in Nihon Gendaito Shosho by Uchiyama (Part V page 4 ) as Inoue Katsukiyo Sadakane...that's what gave me the link between the two names...I originally thought this was evidence of two toshomei...which is correct....sorry I went off course Todd, I then thought it must be his "true" name. Well, its very interesting Todd...this use or different names ios more common than I thought. Morita san's 1944 Jumei Tosho prizewinner list is very interesting...it looks familiar, what book is it from?...I notice my own star stamped sword dated 1944 is by a swordsmith in this list...Nagao Kunishiro of Aomori. Regards to all, George.

hi Todd, I think Morita san's explanation must be correct...Katsukiyo is the personal name of Inoue Sadakane and seems to have been his toshomei before he was given "Sadakane" by the Gassan Sadakatsu/Sadakazu school (from Uchiyama sensei articles in NBTHK), and he must have used Katsukiyo in gunto, as your sword is dated 1944 and a Sadakane blade is dated from 1936 (Morita san's oshigata pic). I suppose another similar example of a tosho using a different name (I just remembered) in certain circumstamces would be Miyaguchi Ikkansai Toshihiro (who became Yasukuni tosho Yasuhiro in 1933) who used Ikkansai Kunimori when working swords at Okura Tanrenjo from 1937. The location of the forge and purpose of the work sometimes affects the use of mei. An interesting case. nice find Todd. Regards, George.

I agree, an interesting sword....IMHO not a boys sword. Without pics of nakago etc it is just a guess, but the slim dimensions of the blade (especially the bo-hi) remind me of some "sabre" type blades I have seen from late Meiji or Taisho or early Showa period. It may have originally been mounted as a kyu-gunto and remounted in Type 34/98 mounts when the change came. But, as you say it has only "44" on the nakago, I suppose it must be an arsenal blade, but still from the sabre-kyugunto period. Just an opinion, George.

Glad the clean-up turned out simple and effective...and no, no worries about stolen "thunder". I would also generally concur about rust removers/inhibitors...I recently saw a reasonably good sword 1864 with cutting test, but unfortunately the blade was black from some unknown rust treatment...so...some chemicals are definitely bad. Maybe this is a new thread, but does any member have a proven system to clean the isolated pit on a blade and stop further rust activity? I have a pit on a blade that I am afraid might be trying to turn into spider rust. regards, George.

In principle, I agree with Franco...it is not "normal" to be without a yokote line on a shinogi zukuri blade...but the reality of WWII gunto is that, (due to high volume production demands leading to shortcuts I suppose), it is quite common to see a gunto in original WWII polish which has a cosmetic yokote line, with no actual/distinct angle change from the ji into the kissaki. These yokote lines sometimes are quite hard to see after 60 years due to wear and scratching in battlefield use and postwar abuse. I would even venture to say that while a majority of gunto have "yokote" line in their polish, relatively few have the change of angle. I suppose it may be more commonly omitted in 1944, but I have noticed it quite often across dates from 1942 on...but only on gunto, not gendaito. try to give us a couple more pics please? regards, George.

Hi Rich, you have a nice looking sword and although I can't offer any new info on him, I can comment on the link with Minamoto Kaneharu. I am inclined to think that they are not the same smith, but may be related. Kaneharu is given in Hawley as 1912, KAN 25. I had a blade of his and it did seem Taisho, early Showa in shape, not your typical WWII gunto dimensions. he was a student of Minamoto Kanenori (Chris Bowen's list) so was quite good. My sword was a presentation blade and the oshigata I sent to Rich Stein's site so you can see it there under "Kaneharu (Minamoto)". I can tell you that from the strokes of Minamoto and Kane, they were not cut by the same man, also although you can't see in this oshigata, I can tell you that Kaneharu did not have kessho file marks, but was otherwise the same as yours. Nakago jiri is also different, Kaneharu being slightly more katayama kengyo. I don't know if this helps, it is just some extra info. Regards, George.

Hi David, Not meaning to be disrespectful to other posters, but the blade does not look buffed to me. It looks like the original WWII polish is still there, but a bit scratched, as is normal. You might take another pic or two of the kissaki area without the light reflection so we can be sure, but it is not uncommon on gunto to have no visible angle change in the kissaki line...that is, the "sweep" of the ji continues around into the tip without the usual change of angle we call the yokote line. The WWII polish usually has a cosmetic yokote line polished on, but this is often obscured by tiny scratches and wear over time...as yours seems to be. Just my opinion. regards, George.

Hi David, It looks like the handle had been changed. The tsuba, seppa and fuchi with press clip are Type 3 (intro 1943), but the complete handle with kashira (endcap with tassel), is from a Type 94 or 98 (intro 1934/modified 1938). It looks like someone was lucky enough to find a handle (tsuka) that fitted the blade, but one of the peg holes is now "extra"? regards, George.

Hi Jamie, you are correct, Japan is out. Unfortunately I am out here in Western Australia so I can't say anything about the US shinsa scene...but they seem to come up reasonably often...your US memebrs will be able to point you in the right direction for sure. Regards, George.

Hi Harry, I think you make some valid points... Removal of stamps has been mentioned, which is a pity in historical terms and you are correct that a shinsa panel will judge a sword on its merit, not on what history goes with it, but unfortunately, the swords must pass the pre-shinsa screening procedure of "stamped is banned...unstamped is accepted" for shinsa, so the shinsa team would not even get to see the "banned/rejected" swords...that is the problem. I think it would be a progressive step if this star stamp matter was raised with the swordworld leadership, but there is hope that these swords may start being papered at outside shinsa meetings, so it may come to their attention by this means. It occurrs to me of course that there is an "opposite view" to shinsa-ing star stamped swords...since we know, quite conclusively from records and respected opinion that these are true gendaito and the history of the RJT's who made them are well documented also, is there really any need to have them shinsa'd? The Toshomei and the star is the only shinsa one really needs to know it is gendaito...just a thought! On your last point... the "historical context" of a sword and should it/should it not influence decisions which are essentially about artistic merit has been raised before, but that is moving into the philosophy and politics of swords...so I'll leave that to another discussion. For my part, I am pleased this matter has been discussed and , I feel, some clarity has been brought to the matter of star stamped swords. Regards, George. I would be interested in some member feedback on this outcome BTW.

Hi Clive, Thank you for that very interesting observation...I think you have explained the matter of why star stamp swords are "ignored" and also why Yasukunito "were ignored" but then "became accepted" for NBTHK/NTHK shinsa. I had completely forgotten that living Tosho were not shinsa'd. I think this fact, combined with the later ban on "arsenal stamped" swords explains much that we have wondered about on this thread...why some gendaito were eligible for shinsa but not others. As I interpret your information...Many/most WWII Rikugun Jumei Tosho, Minatogawa Jinja Tosho and Yasukuni Tosho re-entered swords after the war, so lived on and produced swords into the 70s, perhaps 80s...so of course their wartime and postwar work was not shinsa'd. When they had largely died out their swords became eligible for shinsa, so Minatogawato, Yasukunito and post-war swords by former Rikugun Jumei Tosho began to appear in the shinsa system...but...as the prohibition on "stamped" swords was now in place, the war-time star stamped blades of RJT were thus ineligible for shinsa, while the Yasukunito and Minatogawato, being unstamped, were now beginning to appear with papers...this explains how yasukunito were "once ignored" and then "became accepted" and why former RJT postwar blades appear with papers but their wartime star marked ones (usually) do not! I hope members will correct me if they disagree with this finding...but I think it is the most logical. I venture to say that since we know the NTHK Yoshikawa? Grp will accept star stamps for shinsa outside Japan that members should submit them, I think they would be papered as true gendaito. Perhaps it is time the matter of Tamahagane gendaito with star stamps was raised with NBTHK leadership as they are clearly a special group that deserves a second look from that body. I thank you most sincerely Clive! I think you have swept away years of confusion, half-truth and rumour about star-stamp gendaito and shinsa. Regards, George.

Hi all, on the point od a scabbard liner causing rust each time a sword is placed in it sounds serious. Without knowing how long the sword was left in the liner between checking it is hard to be specific, but it sounds like there is some rusting agent in the wood. Maybe it is sea water?. If you are going to the trouble of removing the liner to scrape and clean, it might be worth while, if no obvious rust cause can be spotted, to consider soaking the liner halves in clean, distilled water for a week or two...then pour out the water and refill and soak for another two weeks in distilled water...this will eventually leach out any salt...the more water changes and number of soaks (6 months would be good), will (should) clean out the salt (if that's what it is). If you had a means to test each used lot of water for salt you would only need to continue the treatment as long as salt showed in the water. Once clean you can let dry thoroughly and then re-glue with rice paste glue (I once used "Selley's Aquadhere - a PVA glue?) and got instant rust. Perhaps the easiest remedy is new liners from Fred Lohman...but you'd have to send the sword? Hope this helps, George.

Joe, I was just quoting from Toko Taikan p.164. BTW, I think the tanto's mei and yasuri are closer to the Fukuda Yoshimitsu mei posted by Morita san...just my opinion...whether actually him...well...study, study. Regards, George.

Strange, I have a sword very similar to this illustrated and the nakago is the same shape and the mei is Shigekuni...if not for the fact that mine is an unknown gendai maker, I'd be tempted to say that mine is connected with this school. The translation I gave when compared to this at nihontocraft shows that I said his father was Shigemitsu...I looked again and yes, I wrote mitsu when it says kiyo. Also I wrote Fukuyama..it is of course Toyama and it is Gorouemon not the alternative reading Banuemon. well, you seem to have a nice sword by the looks of it. Regards, George.