Authentication paper without signature?

[Katsujinken]

23 minutes ago, Valric said:

We cannot agree to disagree to misconceptions of this magnitude. 
 

The idea that Tanobe-sensei would lie and fabricate some nonsense to please a gaijin by stating a notion that goes against the surface level understanding is beyond preposterous. 

 

Where to start... 

 

And also the ubu zai ichimonji in suguha being the “majority” is plainly wrong. Early ko-bizen phase work of its founders may be found in suguha. Such works are less than 10% of extant ubu zaimei ichimonji. Mumei they would have gone to Ko-Bizen. 

 

May Hachiman give us the strength. 

 

4 minutes ago, Brian said:

Jacques, you are so far off reality and truth when it comes to Darcy and Tanobe and this whole subject. But I am not in the mood for censorship as it will just look like I am biased.
I have NO ties to any side here, I have no personal relationship with any of these guys. So I'll let others deal with your baseless accusations and hopefully Darcy will address this silliness himself.
 

Thank you both. I tried to be diplomatic. Nothing more for me to say. :-)

[Jacques D.]

2 hours ago, Brian said:

Jacques, you are so far off reality and truth when it comes to Darcy and Tanobe and this whole subject. But I am not in the mood for censorship as it will just look like I am biased.
I have NO ties to any side here, I have no personal relationship with any of these guys. So I'll let others deal with your baseless accusations and hopefully Darcy will address this silliness himself.
 

 

Ok, but you have to prove i'm wrong.  

 

I think many should learn the difference between an enlightened enthusiast and an expert... There is a gulf between them. 

 

If Darcy is the expert you say he never wrote this article on Tadatsuna's mei  which is full of errors.

 

http://www.nihontomessageboard.com/mei_exercise.html 

 

Dunning/Kruger effect is never far away. 

 

 

[Jussi Ekholm]

I do personally think the attribution for a mumei sword is the best option the shinsa panel is able to give at that exact moment. As Barry said earlier the higher you go in level the more time is given to each item. I remember few years ago I wrote a small topic where I praised the expertise of the shinsa panel, as there seemed to be lot of negative opinions about NBTHK shinsa around that time. Here is an example, in 2020 I saw live 0 new swords, while NBTHK shinsa attributed thousands of items, and most likely saw lots and lots of stuff aside from evaluations. Just for Jūyō 66 session 805 swords were sent in (of which 119 passed), add all the Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon submissions and you'll understand the NBTHK shinsa handles very large amount of items every year.

 

I do believe they will judge the item and appoint a plausible attribution to it with their combined knowledge. When you get to Jūyō and Tokubetsu Jūyō NBTHK provides more information about the item, which as described earlier can be fascinating. Lot of the items will have multiple possibilities but in their current format I believe they will choose one and I do think they go for the one they judge most plausible one at that moment. With higher level attributions you have the luxury to be able to read more about the item, where as for Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon you will just have the attribution. I know there are some evaluations that are generally seen as "low level" or "buckets" but I do think sometimes the kantei features point towards making these attributions being plausible ones. There are still some good mumei items within these attributions.

 

Also NBTHK can change their judgement for partial signatures too. I posted this topic on an interesting tanto I did some research on:

I have seen similar thing happen also at Hozon/Tokubetsu Hozon level but it is much harder to track down than at Jūyō. Another shinsa session has judged the same sword to be the work of different smith (relations can vary). For example Mino swords signed 兼□ Kane X, there would be countless possibilities for the smith, hence usually the safe option would be just to put mei: 兼□ and possibly something like (Seki) in brackets etc.

 

I know many seek commercial value with NBTHK attributions. I believe most people would be furious if the paper would come back with just something in the lines of Tachi - Mumei (late Kamakura), I assume people would prefer something like Tachi - Mumei - Enju etc. where the kantei points towards to as a plausible attribution.

[Rivkin]

The latest suguha Ichimonji I ever seen is by Iwato Ichimonji smith, 1320-something.

One of the reasons signed suguha Ichimonji are not too uncommon is that those are often tanto or naginata. Ubu daito Ichimonji are exceptionally small percentage of the existing blades, while obviously tanto are still mostly ubu, so even though tanto form was not favorited by Ichimonji, ubu signed suguha tanto with Ichimonji name is something one does see now and then. One of the reasons its not unusual for them to reside in TH territory.

[Darcy]

On 3/8/2021 at 5:19 PM, Jacques D. said:

 

About Darcy, quoting the Heisenberg's indeterminacy principe is just laughable as we can obtain both of informations but not at the same time.

 

 

For any given time, you can know one or the other but you can't know both. Saying you know the position at time A and the momentum at time B doesn't give you anything about the momentum at A or the position at B. So, the point is that if you ask for both position and momentum simultaneously, you cannot receive an answer to this question. Attacking that by saying yes but you can ask in sequence means you've misunderstood the point.

The reason it's brought up is cited right in the post, because of the philosophical implication that: "it is a fundamental property of reality that some questions have no good answers." That is, there are more questions than there are answers as a rule, and it is just pointing out that we can't always get a satisfactory answer as a result.

The overall goal is simply to guide people to a better understanding of attributions.

> Dunning/Kruger effect is never far away. 

You are linking to a 14 year old post and using that as grist for a personal attack.

You conflate expertise and infallibility as well.

Dunning/Kruger is simply a personal attack. You have been working off of this bitter and angry script for multiple decades. The reason I stopped contributing to this board on a frequent basis is because it is simply mentally draining to deal with the intentional throwing of stones. Engaging with this just burns good minutes off of short lives.

> Tanobe? is a Japanese and Darcy is a "gaijin". He can say what he wants, he knows Darcy will believe him. 

This is racism and a poor judgment of this man's character and shows a lack of imagination toward my own.

[Brian]

Darcy,
Forgive me for not dealing with this myself, but I thought you are more than capable yourself, and I think most here enjoy your logic.
Nobody here has given Jacques even 1% credibility in this regard. Jacques, you do yourself the usual disservice by even going down this path. Stick to facts and swords.
And I don't think we need debate on this further, so consider this done.