sanjuro

Martin. It is very difficult, make that impossible, with the pictures provided to give any definitive answers. It is difficult enough with really hi res pictures. We have only partials to see so far and no idea what the entire blade looks like at all. So, better pics if possible. No promises even then. Now, for the sake of discussion, I'm going to play devil's advocate. If you are going to ignore the horimono then because we do not know who wrote it, also ignore the sayagaki. What we are left with is a mumei blade. Is it likely to be a Shimada blade? Frankly it could be anything. Knowing a little of Shimada work, it would not have suggested itself as a Shimada blade to me on the basis of what we can see. Shimada hada is usually fairly distinctive and this doesnt quite cut it as a Shimada example. It could be Shimada but I doubt it. Sukemune/Sukehiro are not to my knowledge particularly sought after smiths in any case, Hirosuke shodai and nidai being arguably the most well known of the school and much earlier although Sagami Tomishi (Yoshisuke 1) a student of Masamune, reputedly founded the school in 1455. There are what appear to be slag inclusions and open folds or some forging flaws in and around the smaller of the two horimono. At least one of these blemishes seems to coincide with similar blemishes within the dragon horimono on the opposite face of the blade. Fatal flaw? Perhaps, but photographs can be misleading. The ha is reduced by polishing. A Shimada blade (if it is a Shimada), would have had a wider hamon than this. Ergo, this is a somewhat tired blade that is not a particularly recogniseable or good example of Shimada work. It also has potentially undefined flaws....... These are just my own initial observations based on limited pictorial evidence. I do apologise for what may seem a negative response to your query about being left in the dark, but sometimes the darkness hides only a creature of greater darkness within. On the other hand it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness....... God, I hate cliche's. However, since you appear to like the blade, can you live with this blade's shortcomings either real or suspected?

In comparison to a well cut artistic horimono, this one is fairly ordinary bordering on relatively ghastly. Intruding into the shinogi as one of the elements does, and disrupting the line of the hi is not well located in any interpretation of artistic. The overall effect is clumsy and contrived. The dragon appears to be disproportionate, (Skinny in the front half and fat below the hind legs) Sorry but that's how it looks to me in all the photographs. It screams "I am hiding something". As Chris has said, these are located in such a way as to hide defects. Those defects have probably been uncovered by repeated polishing and the horimono added to disguise them. It may not be what you want to hear, but it is definitely 'out there' as a caution. It may also be worth a mention that although I have been an admirer of Shimada (and Soshu generally) work for quite a few years, I have seen very few Shimada blades with horimono as original features.

Henry. I assume by the website that this download can only be done on a mac pc or an apple I thingamajig (My laptop became quite indignant when I tried). I have neither..... Thankfully. Is there a version for Microsoft or perchance even Blackberry??????? Something a little less exclusively leftfield or technologically specific????? I realise that mac is the new black, however I am but a poor lad from Oz and not up there with the avant garde techno types. :D

Just an observation: In as much as the sword is concerned, the fighting on the beaches would have of necessity been a dash and slash affair by mounted samurai, as well as fighting on foot. The Mongols were armed with short bows which allow for very fast release and good penetration at close quarters. The bow, similar to those of all asian plains peoples had a pull of about 45lbs. At close range that would drive an arrow right through most armours. The mounted samurai would of necessity needed to attack at the gallop and keep moving, since a stationary horseman is easily swarmed under by superior numbers. The slimmer swords of the time would not have been as effective under such circumstances, being not robust enough to deliver a telling slash at the gallop against the armour of the Mongols and showing a tactical weaknes in this respect. Following this example it would have been a logical progression to produce a sword that was broader and heavier that held a keener edge and would supply a more powerful slashing stroke. There is no doubt that swords underwent a change at this point in history and there would have indeed needed to be a catalyst for such changes. Perhaps the evolution of the sword would have taken this course in any event, but one needs to allow for this experience with a foreign invader to have some impact upon the weaponry of the time. I cant agree with Henry that this was 'visit' as opposed to an invasion. You simply dont visit another country armed to the teeth and in your thousands without some sort of military objective in mind. An expeditionary force perhaps?????? :D At any rate not a 'drop in sometime over the weekend' situation. I believe that the second 'Visit' entailed a lot of horses in the ships that were sunk prior to the Mongols off-loading them. Had they established a beach head and brought the horses ashore, the fighting may well have been a lot more widespread and fierce.

Mark. I'm not sure what question or questions you are actually asking here. You have basic origin information on both swords, any more than this will be the result of study and use of reference books on your part. What exactly do you wish to know? Perhaps we can recommend books in which you will find additional information?????????

If this is the reason then it failed horribly. This horimono as Chris has observed is not a good quality one. At best it was more likely done to hide some defect, or more recently to make the sword more 'appealing'. I would go for the former reason.

Need much more and better pictures to even guess at this one. Yes it could be a Sukemune. At least the hamon and what can be seen of the hada has a shimada appearance that is in keeping with Sukemune. The horimono are more recent than the blade as has been observed. This is not definitive as photographs shown do not convey any real indications. The horimono appear too clean and well defined to match the age of the blade and the state of polish. I own four Shimada blades and always have a problem defining them and attributing them with certainty even when they are signed. At the end of the day shinsa is the most help, and this may be the case in this instance because this school contained much variation according to location, but can we see more and better pics please?

David. In reality there are no hard and fast rules concerning where the menuki should be placed. Yes, it is accepted that the menuki should fit into the palm of each hand to enhance the grip, however there are some swordsmen who preferred the menuki to be where the fingers exert pressure on the tsuka. This present tsuka seems to indicate both by its wear characteristics and the menuki placement, that the swordsman preferred to have the menuki where the the fingers exerted pressure and also that he had a long grip that is typical of a trained swordsman. Bear in mind that the 'rules' concerning the placement of menuki originated in the early Edo period. The practicality originated much earlier and was subject to individual preferences. Once the menuki ceased to be the heads of the mekugi which were rigidly fixed and had no alternative placement, they were subject to the preference of the user. hence the sometimes reversed placement we sometimes see as in this case.

Was Masamura the evil twin of Muramasa???????? :D

17th Lancers???? Thanks Paul...... I must be getting old and forgetful. I did get the 7 right though

Cannon to the right of them, cannon to the left of them etc etc.. and into the valley of death rode the six hundred. Sounds deceptively romantic. Just out of curiosity, do either of you guys remember what the regiment of hussars was, that accompanied the 27th lancers at Balaclava? Since we started talking about it, I have been wracking my brains trying to remember, but I'm damned if I can recall. Was it the 11th Hussars?

Cardigan and Lord Lucan were both a bit gung ho in retrospect. It was a foolish call to make light cavalry charge such a distance under withering enfilade fire and directly into the muzzles of cannon firing first cannon balls at medium range then grapeshot at close range. Of course my lords Lucan and Cardigan were not doing any of the dying were they?) Britains mistake was to have the aristocracy leading the army rather than talented field experienced officers promoted for their skill. I just re read that previous statement........ Makes me sound like one of those revolutionary Frenchmen that Napoleon was so fond of. I certainly hope the more English of my ancestors arent reading this. The rest of my ancestors were Welsh and would probably agree with me. :D

Jean. No... Not personally :D A bit before my time. If I remember correctly however, the Russian guns were in fact neutralised by sword wielding heavy cavalry, The Scots Greys if memory serves, supported by Lancers and Hussars of the Light Brigade whose job it was to force a way to the guns. The same sabre wielding cavalry that Napolean Bonapart dreaded so much at Waterloo. He called them "Those terrible grey horsemen" or something like that. I was however actually alluding to a situation where all weaponry was equal and bladed. Only an idiot would face an enemy armed with a gun when he was armed only with a sword. All of which, and the testimony of four out of six empty saddles at Balaclava proves the British to be somewhat foolhardy in war. Courageous and magnificent.... but foolhardy.

Any damned peasant can fire a gun... which is why they gave them mostly to Ashigaru. Killing at a distance is reasonably easy. It takes real skill to use a bladed weapon and a damned sight more courage in a fight. You have to look your enemy straight in the eye. Now THAT provocative little one-eyed statement is bound to draw some fire......

Jean. The blade I trained with had a nagasa of 62inches. Overall it was taller than me, and I stand 6ft 1inch in height. The training was kata and some tameshigiri. It was not an easy blade to handle and cut with correctly. I trust you were joking about the iai.... I cant imagine a more unwieldy weapon to draw . The standard way of drawing these things (at least the longer ones) is for one man to hold the saya whilst the sword is drawn from it by the person who is to use it. Many longer Odachi were carried bare into battle for this reason. Shorter ones can be drawn in a similar fashion to an over shoulder draw, or with a bit of a stretch as a normal katana is drawn (I didnt try) Incidentally, the blade I used was a shinsakuto copy of a much older blade which I believe still exists. It is my understanding (possibly erroneous) that odachi were not generally used by common soldiery. Their use was very limited in any case, but usually by trained samurai on foot. Sadly, there's not a great deal of material available concerning the use of nodachi, and what is available is fairly vague. I take your point about the conditions within a melee. Truly a fearful experience even for a seasoned warrior I am sure. The reality despite what we read about the willingness of the samurai to die for his lord, is that once the fighting started you would have been hard pressed to prevent the other guy from chopping you into dog meat. Saving your own hide becomes something of a priority at that point. :D

Jean. And you are aware of this as a certainty? Some of those warriors were 16 and 17 year old youths, hardly as strong as a veteran warrior. If strength were the deciding factor then all of these youths would have died in combat yet they didnt. You have perhaps some insight into the method and practicality of using such weapons during the Onin wars? Were you there at the time? :D Just for the record I wasn't.(slightly prior to my birth). My point despite the light sarcasm is that this is a supposition, not necessarily a fact. In reality a nodachi was almost impossible to wield from horseback. (And yes I have had the pleasure of training with a nodachi). It is far more devastating when used on foot because it requires a fairly wide stance that cannot be supplied by a horse in motion with a man on its back. The inertia of the blade as it was used would simply pull the man off balance and perhaps out of the saddle, assuming he didnt inflict a mortal wound on his own horse. On the other hand, a tachi used one handed from horseback actually supplies a natural arc that has inherent in it, a draw toward the end of the arc which makes it a cut. A mounted man pivots from an axis formed by the spine. If this is the centre of an arc then the arc will be eliptical as he moves his arm at the shoulder and pivots upon the axis of his spine. The dynamics of a sword in motion particularly from horseback were long appreciated by warriors prior to the Onin wars. Where do you think the later two handed drawn cutting action of a Japanese sword originated, and from which it was developed? I'm not trying to be confrontational here, but we can and do make assumptions that are based rather upon intellectual reasoning than upon knowledge. This could actually be a very informative thread, but we have even in this thread seen assumptions made and subsequently proven amiss. If we are to have an intelligent discussion, then let it at least be an informed one rather than an assumptive one. OK..... lecture over. I'll get back in my box now :D

I have to agree with Franco here. These fittings look fine to me also. I would doubt that they have been cast. Jim. There are a number of ways of making fittings, not just pure casting that give a negative reflection on the inner (reverse) side. One is to punch the surface up from the inner side to provide a raised area that may then be carved. This is particularly so with soft metals. Menuki particularly were first cast as a rough blank and then carved. The tchniques are still used today in making jewellery. Kashira were very seldom made by combining a ring with a plate and then carved. (the joint is too obvious and also too soft and weak to withstand carving work done afterward) Nor were they always punched as a plate into a female former for the basic shape, then carved and/or chased with a relief design I also suggest you visit the 'Following the Iron brush' forum.

An adage of european origin applicable to sabre fighting. From a notable source: Rigorous reasoning from inapplicable assumptions yields the world's most durable nonsense.

Yet the thread lives on...............

Kira. may I ask for the sake of the discussion, why you collect nihonto? If so many other swords are artistically, practically and technologically equal or superior to nihonto as you seem to suggest, then what makes specifically nihonto attractive to you? The answer to this may indicate where you are really coming from as opposed to the position of ignorance that you claim.

the sword at its inception was a weapon, and beauty if it was a consideration, was secondary to its purpose. As man progresses he sees beauty in both form and also the respect he holds for the efficiency of the weapon itself. Great respect seeks out beauty in that which inspires awe and possesses an inate elegance. Thus swords are weapons and swords are also art. Man has ever invested great workmanship in the weapons he wields, both from a purely practical viewpoint and also to rob them of the ugliness, in at least a small measure, of their lethal purpose. It is in the nature of man to admire a weapon for what it is and also to justify and mitigate that admiration in some measure by elevating the object of his admiration to an art form. The nihonto has achieved this to a far greater degree than any other weapon in history. :D

True if we are talking of a straight 'I' section beam. A bohi blade however is firstly not a true 'I' beam but a 'I' section above and firmly affixed to a narrow 'V' section below. It is also curved against the upper and lower sections of the 'I'. The 'I' beam analogy is thus taken too far and does not directly apply when considering torsional characteristics.

Thomas. There is nothing lowly about being a martial artist. Our view of the sword is perhaps less cluttered by other more modern notions of the sword held by many who see themselves exclusively as sword fanciers or collectors. Perhaps we also have a slightly more spiritual approach to and use of the sword, but there is nothing lowly in the way we regard the sword or the traditions associated with it. Constant practice with a sword and a close association with it builds a rather unique relationship. It is a regard and relationship that is difficult to forge with sincerity under any other circumstances. We are not better or worse than the man who admires the sword without ever using one or studying a martial discipline. We are merely a product of that different experience.

Franco. So true.... I dont think Ken and I were trying to make a case for absolute superiority of bohi blades, rather it was an exploration of the practicality of a bohi blade. No real mystery here, there are really no absolutes. The greater prevalence of bohi in later blades may in fact be partially attributable to greater strength or better cutting power or at least the belief that bohi contributed to these qualities, or it may just be the product of blade evolution and the tastes of the times or preference of the individual. Its an interesting topic to ponder however. What we were doing was discussing the nihonto in its practical sense rather than its aesthetic sense. You'll forgive our small digression (and concomitant fall from grace) as we moved away from the purely academic and nebulous 'art sword' view. :D

Ken. Not wishing to hijack this thread, May I ask if there is also a difference in the sori of the two swords? And if so, is the bohi blade the one with greater sori? I have always cut better with a sword that has a more pronounced sori, and according to my old sensei this was because when the hands lead the monouchi through the cut, there is greater control. One reason I dont favour shin shinto katana is the comparative lack of sori, so my own shinken is a koto tachi style blade (with bohi), rather than a later style katana. My apologies to everyone for this slight divergence from the main thread.