Franco

Keep in mind that although a sword may meet all the basic requirements to pass Tokubetsu Hozon, the question of a sword's quality still remains the object of subjective evaluation. And once a sword attempts to reach the next level of Juyo or above, the sword's polish also comes into question. Regards,

From the images this is an excellent looking [Shinshinto period] copy of an earlier [Koto] period sword.

Hello, Pardon, a slight correction. It is incorrect to say that this piece is a naginata naoshi when in fact it looks to be an ubu signed shobu zukuri wakizashi . Otherwise, wish you lots of luck with your sale of this attractive piece. Thank you. Regards,

And all this time I thought the pointed end of nihonto was the important part.

I cannot speak for the NBTHK. What I can say though, is that the very first truly old blade I had the privilege of viewing and studying was a Ko Naminohira katana/tachi. What a fantastic blade. To date the best Naminohira I've ever seen. That blade at some point in time had horimono added. The horimono was primo, truly first rate. It is my understanding that one of the sword's previous owners tried a shot at having it pass Juyo. It was refused for the very reason it had ato-bori. More than that I do not know. Added horimono is not the same as gimei. Gimei is a corruption. Get over it!

A blade that is certified gimei? Are we talking about an actual certification or a shinsa working paper where one knew an NTHK pink paper meant the sword failed?

It has been more than ten years since I've played the game. So, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not aware that the NBTHK has ever told/tells a sword owner anything more when a sword gets bounced. Do they now? The NTHK and NTHK-NPO may be a different story? We are talking about the NBTHK aren't we?

Can't answer, I'm not going to be pretend to know anything about Japanese law.

Please, go ahead and discuss as much as you like or are allowed to on the NMB. Please, also, be careful not to confuse being given the truth straight up as being dismissive. Collecting nihonto requires a thick skin and being prepared for disappointment sometimes.

The sword is not mumei if it's gimei. Sorry, no magic papers. If memory serves, Chris Bowen said that these organizations must be able to defend their judgments in a court of law. Think about what that may mean. Their game, their rules. Participation is voluntary. Which means that when you decided to voluntarily participate, you agreed to play by the rules.

Do you accept with generosity or insult and offend the giver? How many Shoguns and Daimyo were expert enough at kantei to make the call? And again, do they hold their tongue or offend? Well, that's up to the current caregiver of the sword to decide, isn't it? In the words of Jim Kurrasch (paraphrasing) who was passionate about nihonto, measure three time before removing. Decisions, decisions! One can and might see where problems would develop here. So, let's say someone has a 'big name' sword, but the mei is clearly gimei. Perhaps, the mei was added on un-nefariously at a later point in time. Maybe by the original owner of the sword or a family member that had direct knowledge of the sword's history. But, still, the problem for the NBTHK is that this is not the smith's mei even though it is the 'big named smith's work.' So now, what is the NBTHK to do? Do they certify a clearly gimei sword? It is not difficult to understand why the false mei must be removed before they can legitimize the sword.

At risk of repeating myself, the statement above is jumping to a conclusion which is not based in reality. The NBTHK is acting as an advocate for the sword maker. That's it! Does the sword confirm the mei? If the answer is negative, then the sword has rejected the mei (Arnold Frenzel).

The NBTHK represents the interests of the original sword smith in question. Therefore, the sword must first confirm the mei. If the sword rejects the mei that is the end of the story as far as the NBTHK is concerned at that point in time. What comes next will be up to the sword's owner. NBTHK's game, their rules.

One thing to keep in mind is that the earliest swords began being copied even in early times. Which then begs the question as we analyze, kantei, a sword further, "is it live or is it memorex?" Now, the other thing to keep in mind at this point is that there are some things that smiths were very good at copying, but almost inevitably there will be details that give away the copy. This is not to say that the copy isn't an excellent sword on its own, it's just not the original. Regards,

Brian Tschernega on the West coast. https://search.yahoo...0&p=Brian+Tschernega

The problem is that an amateur polisher may not, will not, realize that they are working on a good or excellent sword. The problem is that a collector may not recognize exactly what it is they have or are looking at and off to the amateur or mediocre polisher it goes. Amateur polishers and even mediocre professional polishers do not understand the mistakes that they are making. Regards,

Good swords have been harmed and even ruined by amateur polishers. Excellent swords have been obscured by mediocre professional polishers. These things will continue to happen as long as sword owners continue to seek out and or recommend amateur polishers and mediocre professionals. When someone says 'this guy does an ok polish', what does that mean? Ok for who? According to what and whose standard? Amateur polishers that are sincere and serious will seek out an apprenticeship. It would be responsible for amateurs to set aside and put away their stones until that time.

Visible in the images, items for consideration in the final evaluation of this sword, a narrow boshi at the tip, low hamachi.

Colin, Thanks for your patience in answering and clarifying. Best,

Colin, In hope of understanding what you're saying and concerns? FWIW, an indirect reply. A story. My first introduction to kantei came while standing in front of the Rochester Study Group display table at a Rochester NY gun show. There I stood watching a stalky fellow walk up and hand a somewhat tall slightly bald professor looking gentleman a wakizashi. This tall fellow held the sword up to the dome lighting first observing its profile and then looking up and down the sword for about 30 seconds longer. He then turned to the stalky fellow and said a series of Japanese words which I didn't understand. Then, with permission this tall fellow took a pin pusher that hung down from his neck on a lanyard and proceeded to quickly and effortlessly remove the handle of this sword exposing the Japanese characters chiseled into the tang. As he read these characters, I recognized that they were the exact same words that he had said only moments before. The smile that came over the stalky fellows face said it all. My thought in observing what had just taken place was, 'I've just got to learn how to do this!' Knowledge, experience, of course. But the fact that kantei can be repeated, taught and learned, ending up with the correct answer time and time again is what makes it science as well. Regards,

Hello Colin, Old swords have a quality about them (the nioi, the nie, the ko nie) that are unique unto themselves which sets them apart. It's not that other period swords aren't excellent swords, they are, they're just not the same. The difference is visible. Chips alone do not prove that a sword had seen actual use. Without further detail about exactly what this scientific proof mentioned is, we don't know. Regards,

Colin, Not sure exactly what you mean by "validity"? FWIW, Images are not the greatest. The description statements may be valid, but I don't know how they can be verified based only upon these images. Which doubles down on the sound advice that nihonto must be studied in hand, especially if purchase or bidding is being considered without approval or return. This statement is talking about the presence of and referring to the quality (brightness, consistency, distribution) of the nioi (perhaps? possibly accompanied by ko nie?/nie?) in the habuchi/hamon. This is what would be expected in a Fukuoka Ichimonji blade (confirmation). Sounds like the ha may have been raised perhaps due chips in previous polishes?, and may, just may?, reflect upon some of the activity nearest the ha of showing signs of being polished down. Regards,

Well, that all depends. What is this blade? Some copies are actually good blades. Is this a good blade? why? why not? What schools were known for copying? Was this blade made by one of those schools? If so, which one? What makes this mei such an obvious fake? Was it meant to fool as this mei should fool no one? What other possibilities, explanation, might there then be for this blade? Did the original owner know this blade was a fake from its inception? If so, then what might be the explanations? Cost? What would have a genuine blade cost vs a copy? There's the lesson of realizing that it's not necessary to buy a sword to learn the lesson of not to buy such a sword. And, last but perhaps not least is the lesson of learning to recognize when it's time to let go of a sword. TTFN p.s. let's not forget what it was like to learn from nothing in what is an otherwise such a difficult discipline as the world of nihonto study.

In kanteisho it's the sword that confirms the signature and not the other way around. Based upon that premise why isn't this sword a Hizen-to? Or is it? And, if it is not a Hizen blade, then what is it? Why? Homework. Regards,

Sending private message.