Blade restoration

Why polish a Japanese sword?

In order to see all of the activity in the sword's hamon and hada (temper and grain), the sword has to be in polish. Unlike most collectibles, it isn't wrong to polish a Japanese sword and restore it properly. In this respect, they are more like fine old oil paintings which get cleaned and repaired, than they are like fine old furniture on which the original surface is valued. Age patina on a Japanese sword is only valued on the tang (nakago) and this is the part that is never cleaned.
This is also where a good togishi will correct the lines, shape and features of the blade, and bring it close to what the original smith intended. Polishing a Japanese sword involves an incredibly complex routine which doesn't open up the surface grain, but allows the texture to be seen, and at the same time brings out all of the incredible activities in the steel. This is way to ultimately appreciate a Nihonto, and can only be seen properly when polishing has been done.
However, every time a sword is polished some of the sword is lost to the polishing stones. Eventually the skin steel will be gone, the less refined and coarser core steel will show through, and the sword's artistic, historic, and monetary value will suffer. For this reason, only a properly trained polisher should ever polish a sword. Proper training takes years of study, almost always in Japan; no one can learn to polish Japanese swords by reading books and watching videos. Amateur polishers remove too much of the skin and leave the sword with an improper polish, which will need to be redone properly, which will remove even more of the sword.
Japanese swords don't have to be polished to survive; there is nothing about the polish that protects the blade from corrosion. If you own a sword in reasonably OK old polish, there is nothing wrong in enjoying it as it is and preserving it. These is still a lot that can be enjoyed. Seek the correct advice before doing anything, and try and see a few swords in full polish so that you will know what is expected and what to look for.

I'm new to Japanese swords and I want to get my 1st sword polished and/or have koshirae made for it.

Slow down Grasshopper. Pretty much every new collector wants to do this. But it is not always a good idea. A polish isn't necessary to preserve your sword; as long as any active red rust is stabilized, your sword will be just fine in its old polish with proper maintenance. Sharpening = polishing and polishing removes steel from the blade and too many polishes remove enough steel that the blade's core steel starts to show through, a serious and ugly defect. Beginners often don't know how to properly care for a blade in polish. A new polish is easily scratched or even rust spotted and before you know it, the blade needs a polish again. Old scabbards can contain grit that can scratch a newly polished sword, or talking over a blade can lead to tiny droplets of moisture on the blade which turn into rust spots very fast.
Beginners often make the mistake of having their sword polished by an improperly trained polisher, which can irreparably damage the sword. Also,remember that not all swords are worthy of a polish: retempered, tired (core steel showing), and badly defected swords will not be worth the cost of polish. Low to mediocre grade swords are often worth less than the cost of polish. There are many periods in Japanese history where swords were produced as fast as possible, with less care about aesthetics and more thought about producing functional weapons. It is a fact that age doesn't necessarily mean value. In these cases your money would be better spent on a more worthy sword (or books). Learning to distinguish between mass produced utilitarian blades and those worthy of polishing is a huge part of your studies, and this is where the advice of knowledgeable collectors is invaluable. Spending $2500 on a polish for a sword that will be worth $1500 afterwards only makes sense if the sword has sentimental value. Otherwise, the money is better spent on upgrading. Having koshirae (mounts) made for a sword is also a common desire of new collectors. While this will do no damage to the sword if done by a professional, it can put a serious dent in your wallet. When the time comes to sell (and it will, unless you plan to be buried with your sword) you will be lucky to recoup half of what you invest in koshirae. Other collectors want original "Samurai" koshirae, not something you put together. Rather than jumping in with polish and/or koshirae, you would be smart to take your time to study and learn. With experience you will be able to make informed decisions and spend your money more wisely. Also, your tastes will change. A few years from now you'll be glad you don't have way too much invested in something you want to sell.
•Who should I have polish my sword and how much can I expect to spend? In the west, especially in the United States, there are many polishers to choose from. I can count on one hand the number of polishers outside of Japan who have proper training. A poorly done polish can do significant damage to a sword, both artistically and monetarily. Put another way, the most expensive polish is often the one that costs the least. We can not over stress this point: Don't give your sword to an amateur polisher.
•How do you know if a polisher has proper training? Ask experienced collectors (here on NMB, for example) who they'd recommend. If the polisher lives outside of Japan and he advertises his services on ebay or someplace similar, you don't necessarily want him to touch your sword; the true polishers have more than enough work without advertising.
•What will this cost? Prices vary with the condition of the sword to be polished but a good rue of thumb is $100-120 per inch of cutting edge. You will also need shira-saya (plain wooden mounts) and possibly a new habaki. You won't be putting a newly polished blade back in its old mounts because the polish can be scratched by any grit that found its way inside the saya over the centuries. Shira-saya can cost a few hundred dollars and habaki, if necessary, at least $200 more. This isn't inexpensive, which is why you need to make sure your sword is worth the expense. A properly trained polisher will be glad to look at your sword and give you good advice.
•How do I know if my sword is worthy of a polish? If you have been advised by knowledgeable collectors or other experts that your sword might possibly be worth restoring, one way to find out for sure that doesn't cost an arm and a leg is to have a professional polisher open a "window" on your blade. This is a small area of the sword that is polished to see the actual workmanship, hada, hamon and hataraki and see if the blade exhibits quality workmanship. Most polishers will do a window or at least look at your blade and give you advice. The other way is to find a sword study group or sword show near you and get the advice of as many advanced collectors as possible. Online opinions are at the bottom of the reliability scale, as there is only a limited amount that can be determined from pictures, but if from advanced collectors, is better than no advice at all. The key is to ask, ask, ask...before doing. Then take some more time and think it over before you make up your mind.

How much does it cost to restore a Japanese sword?

Polishing a Japanese sword is a major undertaking. There are only a handful of fully trained and competent togishi outside of Japan, and links to them can be found in the links section.
There are many others inside Japan, but please note that for any polisher, the waiting period can be from 6 months up to several years.
Within Japan, the laws for importing a sword make it easier to go through a broker. This is someone who will handle the import paperwork and deal directly with the polisher. This comes at a fee which can be a few hundred dollars, but is well worth it to be able to successfully complete the transaction with a minimum of hassle.
Outside of Japan, expect a similar waiting period. The better the polisher, the longer the waiting period usually.
Polishing comes at a significant price. The rate is usually between $50 and $150 per inch of blade cutting length. This means that an average katana of 25" blade length can cost on average $2500 for a decent polish. Then you have to understand that a newly polished blade usually requires a new habaki and shirasaya. Old scabbards usually have built up dirt and grime inside them that can scratch a newly polished blade, and therefore a new resting scabbard is recommended. The change in blade dimensions after a polish also require a newly fitted blade collar (habaki) afterwards. This can be as simple or as intricate as the customer desires. Expect a basic habaki to be in the region of $300 and a shirasaya to be around $400-600. These prices are estimates, and will vary depending on who is doing the work.

Should I have my sword polished or not?

This is a question that is often asked, and yet is almost impossible for anyone else to tell you. As can be seen above, polishing and restoring a Japanese sword is a major and costly undertaking. Spending $3000 restoring a sword that might be only worth $2500 after restoration doesn't make financial sense. On the other hand, for a good sword, the ability to be able to study it, learn from it, and appreciate it afterwards is reward enough for many people.
The first thing to decide is whether you have a decent sword or not. This cannot usually be seen merely from online photos or if it is badly out of polish. Fatal flaws can be hidden under rust, and the blade could be tired (worn down from repeated polishes)
The best thing to do is get it to a professional togishi who can open a window in the blade and see what the hada and hamon look like. This involves polishing a small part of the blade, and will allow the polisher to tell you if the steel is good and if the hamon looks good. With his advice, you can usually decide whether to proceeed or not.
The other way is to take it to a sword show or meeting near you. Although there isn't always access to these everywhere, in many countries there are sword appreciation groups and shows. Questions posted on a sword forum will usually tell you if there is a group, meeting or advanced collector near you.
It is usually not financially viable to have a sword polished merely to sell it. Adding the cost of the polish to the cost of the sword makes the end result fairly expensive. Unless you turn up a sword by a good smith for little money, you might ultimately lose money on the deal. In this case, it is best to sell the sword out of polish and let the future owner decide how to proceeed.
If the sword has been identified by experts to be by a big name smith or a very good piece, then it is recommended to have it restored, as the end result will be a sword that shows the smith's work as it was intended, and the blade should increase it's value accordingly. But this involves positive identification of the sword and its maker, preferably through a shinsa.
In some cases though, collectors will spend the money on a polish so that they can enjoy the piece and learn from it. There is no doubt that there is no better way to study Nihonto than to look at good swords, in polish. Little can be learned from a rusted and stained lump of steel. In some cases it is sufficient to just care for the sword and enjoy it for what it is, and leave the restoration up to future generations.
In the end...the question of "should I have it polished" comes down to your own finances and how dedicated you are to preserving the blade. Cheap polishes by amateur togishi remove metal and shorten the life of the sword. They should be avoided at all costs.
Self-study will assist you in judging the shape and style of a blade, and perhaps allow you to see something under the rust and grime that indicates the blade has potential. Feel free to ask for opinions on the internet forums, but take the replies as a guide only, and try and have the blade evaluated in hand by someone qualified.
Accept the fact that during the polishing process, fatal flaws or blisters or open grain can become visible that were otherwise invisible. This is one of the risks that come with this hobby. On the other hand, there is nothing as satisfying as seeing a blade that has come back from the polisher in all its glory, showing wonderful grain and a temperline that shows everything as the original smith intended. This is what collecting is all about.
So in conclusion, there is no fast and easy answer to the question of whether you should have a sword polished or not. If money is no object, then yes. If you are like the rest of us, you will want to take your time, get other opinions and weigh the financial outlay vs what you will gain afterwards before you decide.

How and Why....

Gimei (false signatures)

Gimei refers to a false signature. It does not mean that the sword bearing a gimei is fake, but rather that the signature is fake, added later, or by someone without the knowledge of the original smith. Some swordsmiths or dealers, in order to increase the saleability and value of a sword, would have the signature of a well respected (famous maker) swordsmith inscribed on the tang. This has been going on for a few hundred years. The known original signatures of the smiths are recorded in books, and a comparison of how a given smith signed his name is compared to authenticate. Other factor also enter play here, such as: is the sword of the correct time period of the signed smith, is the style of work the same as is known for the smith and is the work representative of the period/style? Detecting gimei is an art in itself. Some are easy to spot, others take a lifetime to identify. You have to have a decent library of original and verified signatures to even begin the identification process. This is a job for the experts, as even slight subtleties such as stroke length, pressure and direction can be give-aways. An understanding of how mei are chiselled is important, and recognising that a mei is essentially a signature, and therefore should be fluent and confident. Of course mei did change over the lifetime of a smith too, and old age could change the style of the mei. Therefore even more reason to seek the advice of a professional.
Gimei does not make a sword worthless. There are many fine swords with gimei on them. Each sword has to be appreciated on its own merits. However gimei does affect value, and a sword will not paper unless a gimei is removed. Gimei can be done hundreds of years ago, or yesterday. Note the stokes, and especially the age patina inside them. Does it match the rest of the nakago? Do the strokes look fluent, or very hesitant? All things to consider. And remember that when buying a big name sword without papers, regard it as gimei until proven otherwise.

How are we certain if a mei is fake, besides it looking newer compared to the age of the nakago?

1. Work is inferior and signature is high level.
2. Signature is in the wrong place (examples: sword is suriage, and has a nice signature up at the machi, -or- sword comes from a tachi era with a smith who would sign tachi mei, and signature is on the katana side, etc.)
3. Signature is too far outside the known styles of the smith (like mismatched handwriting)
4. Unfailing chiseling habits of the smith were not reproduced (like atari that always go in one direction being absent or going in the wrong direction)
5. Work is much newer than the signature would claim it to be, or wrong type for the maker (example: ubu Shinto katana with signature of Rai Kunitoshi on it)
6. Signature breaks a pattern, such as the Sue-Bizen habit of "Ju Osafune"
7. Faker used the wrong character for a smith, not having access to good information... I saw a gimei Soshu ju Akihiro for instance that had the wrong Aki character (since multiple characters exist that are pronounced the same way).

Why did some swordsmiths not sign their swords and why are there so many mumei (unsigned) swords?

There were many reasons why someswordsmiths did not sign their work. Perhaps not all of these were valid at the time, however they do indicate that there are many reasons why a smith might not have signed a sword, and lack of a mei does not necessarily indicate an inferior product. Among a few of the possibilities are the following:

1) The finished blade did not meet his standards, but was not scrapped as sometimes done.
2) He did not want the blade traced to him for personal reasons.
3) The blade has been cut down and the signature was lost (o-suriage)
4) The smith was not completely happy with the end result, but the situation dictated that the sword had to be released.
5) The smith regarded his work as superior work, and standing on its own merits without needing a signature to identify him.
6) A student made it without the teachers knowledge, but duplicated the style.
7) He needed to keep his identity hidden, perhaps making blades for an opposing clan.
8) He considered his works to be unique and identifiable enough without a signature.
9) Humbleness. he did not want to seem arrogant.
10) Request by the person ordering the sword.
11) A smith signing a sword would suggest that the sword belonged to him, where in fact he was probably a subject of a lord or monastery so him not signing the bladed was respectful.
12) Often, when a swordsmith got a chumon uchi (custom order) from a high ranking offical, he usually produced two or three blades and presented them to his client. The client picked one, and the swordsmith would engrave his signature while the remaining production were sold off without a signature.
13) The practice was not "en-vogue" at the time. It could be seen as a little arrogant and boastful to sign one's work.
14) The smith was apprenticed to another smith, and wasn't yet allowed to sign with his own name.
15) The smith was not yet fully qualified, but had produced work for sale.

How and Why did some swordsmiths get their titles

Japan was divided into 54 kuni ?, or provinces, at the time of the Taika reform. Some of those kuni were divided later, and some were added, so that in 823 AD the number was 68, which didn't change until the Meiji ?? restoration in 1868. The kuni were ranked, according to their size, as taikoku ??, jokoku ??, chukoku ?? and gekoku ??.

Originally governed by officials with the kabane ? (a court title) "Kuni no Miyatsuko" and "Inagi", of which emperor Jimmu ???? had appointed 144, they were replaced during the reign of emperor Kotoku ???? in the early Nara period ???? by the kokushi ??. The kokushi, gubernatorial officials, were headed by a kokushu ??, governor, and the titles they held are called zuryo ??.

The zuryo were (in descending order):

no Kami ? (governor, title of the kokushu)
no Suke ? (vice governor)
no Jo ?
no Sakan ?
no Shijo ??

Depending on the size of the province, the titles below "no Kami" were further differentiated, using either the prefixes dai ? or sho ? (in these cases the possessive predicate "no" is omitted): Daisuke ??, Shosuke ??, Daijo ??, Shojo ??, Daisakan ??, Shosakan ??, Daishijo ???, Shoshijo ???.
Domains with which the emperor rewarded princes or high officials were called shoen ??, the possessors thereof shoji ??. The shoji had only the produce of those lands, the land itself remained imperial property. The government of the land became more difficult as the number of shoen increased; some territorial lords started calling their domains shoen, too, and in the eleventh century, half of the country was thus converted into shoen. Some emperors tried to enact laws against this practice, but to no avail.
Minamoto no Yoritomo ???, the first shogun, started reforming this system with the goal of gaining stronger control over the lands. In 1185 AD, he entrusted the administration of the provinces to his vassals, who were called jito ?? in the imperial domains of the shoji, and shugo ?? (or shugoshoku ???) when appointed to "assist" a kokushi. The Kanto ?? provinces, which were directly under his jurisdiction, were governed by kuni-bugyo ???.
The shugo, who at first were called sotsuibushi ????, collected taxes, dispensed justice, and levied troops in case of war, gradually extended their power over the shoen, too, reducing the jito to secondary positions. Yoritomo himself was known by the title of Nihon-Sotsuibushi ?????? or Rokujuhakkakoku (68 provinces) no Sotsuibushi ?????????.
Another change came with Ashikaga ?? shogunate. The shugo became more powerful, and some governed several provinces. After the Onin war ???, they began to replace the kokushi, gradually forming the class of daimyo ??, and the jito were replaced by gokenin ???, house vassals. In the Edo period zuryo became in most cases merely honorific, awarded for merits in battle etc., and the holders had no jurisdiction over the respective provinces. There were, for instance, several Bizen no Kami ??? and Shinano no Kami ??? at the same time. Some exceptions applied, like the Shimazu ??, daimyo of Kagoshima ???, who bore the hereditary title of Satsuma no Kami ???.
Daimyo could appoint zuryo themselves, but the title had to be approved by the Imperial Court – which it usually did, for a fee, of course. The higher the title, the higher the fee. Not only samurai, but also sword smiths became eligible to apply for and receive such a honorary title.
Kinmichi (Kanemichi) ??, who founded the Mishina ?? school, received the title Iga no Kami on the 19'th day of the 2'nd month Bunroku 3 (1594), and worked also for the Imperial Court from that time onwards. Shortly before the Battle of Sekigahara, Tokugawa Ieyasu ordered 1,000 tachi from him, and due to the skillful management of all the workers, he was granted with the honorary title nihon kaji sosho ??????, lit. "master swordsmith of Japan". With that title, he had a certain influence at court on the granting of honorary titles for other swordsmiths. The title and the advisory function at the Imperial Court were hereditary, and held by successive Kinmichi generations until the bakumatsu era. It is said that they earned more money by acting as intermediaries for titles than by selling swords.

- Guido Schiller -

Why can't I buy and use an old habaki on my blade?

It is almost impossible to find a habaki that fits perfectly, since each is hand made and hand fitted to a blade, and everything depends on how many polishes your blade has had and the individual dimensions of your blade. Your best bet is to have one made by a professional. Having a new habaki made is fine as long as one is aware that if there is an existing saya involved, the new habaki may not necessarily fit the old saya correctly. Sometimes an adjustment can be made and sometimes a new saya will have to be made. Another point to keep in mind is that having a new habaki made on any sword eventually headed for polish is not a good idea, that is...not until after the new foundation has been established by the polisher, otherwise the habaki may no longer fit the sword properly. There is an order to the restoration process: foundation polish---> habaki---> shirasaya---> finish polish. This has to do with getting correct fits and exposing the blade/polish to as little opportunity for damage as possible.

Related Topics

Taking apart a Tanegashima

The following steps will make life easier for anyone contemplating separating the barrel and stock of their Tanegashima matchlock, in order to read the Mei. Illustrations below, Pics 1~5.

PART ONE......OPENING

1. Remove the Karuka (ramrod). This allows the stock to relax its grip on the barrel.

2. Don't touch any pins connected with the mechanism, the pan lid or any to the rear of the mechanism. Remove the two (sometimes one, or three or four) horizontal Mekugi pins from the Mekugi-ana in the wooden stock, forward of the mechanism, pushing from left to right with the gun muzzle pointing away from you. (Pic 1) You can use your Nihonto Mekugi-nuki punch to get them started from the left side. They should be made of bamboo, (preferably smoked) but some Mekugi pins may be brass. You may encounter difficulty if the pins have been inserted incorrectly after their arrival in the West. Adjust accordingly.
Note 1: Note they will be of slightly differing sizes. Lay them out in order to help you remember correct replacement.
Note 2: When replacing you will know the barrel is sitting in the correct position if the pins slip back miraculously into their original positions.
Note 3: Some guns have an extra brass band holding the stock and barrel muzzle together. Slip this off, noting whether it has an inherent 'correct' direction to it.

3. You are now nearly ready to separate the barrel from the stock. WAIT. Place the butt of the gun onto a soft object like a slipper and hold the gun upright.

4. Pull back the serpentine into locked open position. It's delicate, and may fall, but be patient and try again.

5. Hold the gun stock near the muzzle, between the straightened fingers and thumb of your left hand, barrel towards your left palm, (Pic 2 and Pic 3) ) and push the top of the barrel out with the heel of your right hand against the muzzle itself, until the barrel releases from where it is normally seated, with increasing strength if necessary. Some stocks have shrunk over the years, so you may need to bang the barrel out with hits from the palm/heel of your hand.
Note: A rubber mallet may be necessary, but in that case you may want to save yourself trouble next time by candle-waxing the inside of the stock to decrease stickiness. (Or whatever your preferred method of gentle lubrication might be.)

6. The barrel should still be seated at the breech end, split out at an angle of about 10~20 degrees. Lift the whole barrel out gently so as not to damage the lock or stock sides.

7. On the underside of the barrel, (Pic 4) you may find the Mei, which is often the location and the gunsmith's name, (as in Nihonto), an indication as to the method of manufacture, and in very rare cases may give a date. You may also find some numbers indicating manufacturing process or related parts for castle guns or guns made in pairs or in quantity.
Note: There is a high possibility that it will be badly rusted and almost illegible. Be careful not to attack the rust with any approach that you may regret later. How to deal with that is a separate subject, and is treated the same as the nakago of a Japanese sword.

8. Look for any lettering (possibly in brush and ink) inside the stock itself which may tell you something about the carpenter.

9. If you are lucky, the large, usually square-headed, Bi-sen ('bee sen') plug-screw will twizzle out of the barrel breech (Pic 5) ) and make cleaning it 100 times easier. Don't damage the Bisen with a heavy wrench. It will always carry the scars, not good; in the worst scenario the screw will split and shear in half, drastically devaluing your antique Tanegashima. There are methods of removing stuck Bisen screws, but that too is another specialized subject. (Initially you can insert penetrating oil from both ends and tap in all directions with a rubber mallet, and repeat over several days or weeks as necessary)

PART TWO .......... REPLACING

1. Having cleaned the inside of the barrel and having lightly oiled everything, replace the Bisen. Note: Close too tightly, and a square-headed one may not fit into the receiving square hole in the mechanism area of the stock. Make sure the serpentine is cocked open. Line the screw head with the stock hole, even if you have to back off 1/8 of a turn. Holding the gun upright as before, lower the breech end of the barrel into place and swing the barrel shut. At this point, as with a Nihonto, a light tap will help it fall into the exact place. You may want to drop the whole gun an inch butt-first onto the slipper, but be very careful not to damage the end of the butt. A carpeted floor will be better than stone, for example.
Note: You may find a few squeezes will help the barrel sit down deeply and firmly into the whole length of the stock.

2. The Mekugi pins should fit back into their respective holes. Remember, replacing, so start Right, through to Left. They should be fairly tight as they lock down through the loops on the underside of the barrel. Tap them home and see if they feel comfortable on both sides when you hold and aim the gun.
Note: The pins may vary in size, depending on their position and the relative thickness of the stock. Don't mix them up!

3. Lower the serpentine gently, as always. Never allow the serpentine to fall directly onto the pan lid without a matchcord. Bad for both the lid and the serpentine. Insert a finger to catch and cushion it if you don't have a length of cord handy.

4. Replace the Karuka, (narrow end first), twist to find the tight spot

Gendaito, Showato and Arsenal Stamps

There are many different stamps seen on WWII era military issue blades. They have different meanings, uses, and histories. It would take a book to address the full story so what follows is the abridged version. The showa stamp was used to indicate a non-traditionally made blade. When you see a blade with this stamp, it means it is not a traditionally made blade. The government ordered that this stamp be used because some non-traditionally made blades were becoming difficult to tell apart from those made the traditional way. Seki stamps were placed to identify the blade as manufactured in Seki and may have also served as a local acceptance stamp. The bulk of the gunto made in WWII came from Seki. There was a veritable gunto cooperative where this business was conducted. 99% of all gunto made were not traditionally made in Seki. There may be the odd ball seki stamped blade that is traditionally made but it would be extremely rare. Some people in Japan say that the Seki stamp was the same as the Showa stamp, others say it is not certain. The Star stamp was used by the military as an acceptance stamp on blades made by the Rikugun Jumei Tosho for the military. These smiths had to pass a rigorous test to be accepted into the contract program. They received tamahagane from the military (which, as a strategic resource, was controlled by the military) and charcoal from the prefectural governor. This is documented fact. Therefore, in theory, all star stamped blades were made traditionally with tamahagane. In practice, who is to say that some smith(s) weren't hording it and passing off western steel blades??? Well, there are two good reasons why this was probably very rare: first, the blades, as mentioned, were inspected. Yoshihara Kuniie, a prominent smith of the time, worked as an inspector. You aren't going to fool him and risk being tossed out of the program. Second, people were patriotic. They were making the best blades they could for their soldiers. It may have happened, but it was most likely rare....Safe bet to say that star stamped blades are traditionally made. I have never seen a showa or Seki stamped blade pass an NBTHK shinsa. I have seen Star stamped blades pass and have owned at least one that I recall submitting and which indeed passed. Why is there so much confusion about stamps? Because nearly all Japanese collectors have shunned WWII era blades, records were destroyed, many Japanese don't much like to talk about WWII related topics, and the experts have never bothered to really research these blades because...see above. I have spent many pleasurable hours talking with several WWII era Rikugun Jumei Tosho about their experiences, spent many hours at the Diet Library digging up old records and period literature (which is difficult to get into-being a university professor made it easy), and sought out many books and papers that most people would never bother to hunt down even if they had heard of them. I also have handled hundreds, if not thousands, of WWII era blades in the past 35 years. As I result, I feel very comfortable with the above statements. As a result, my recommendation to any budding collector is to consider star stamped blades. I have never seen a bad one. They are, on average, pretty decent. Some are better than others, but you can hardly go wrong with them. Conversely, they are not on the same level as the smith's custom or private work and as such are not the best you will find, but they are honest, traditional swords that a new collector can buy with some confidence. - Edited from an article by Chris Bowen

*It is important to remember that the word Showato means a sword made during the Showa era (1926-1989) and Gendaito refers to a sword made between 1876 and 1945. However collectors do not use the literal meanings nowdays, and for convenience, the following is the currently used meanings of the 2 terms:
Showato - A sword made from non-traditional methods, meaning not made from tamahagane. Sometimes they can still be forged and folded from other steel, and sometimes they can come close to being true Nihonto, but are not regarded as such. Most Showato refer to swords that are mass produced with little value to Nihonto collectors. The majority of wartime blades fall under this category. They are usually (buit not always) marked with an arsenal stamp such as the Sho- or Seki stamp. They are often oil quenched as this was safer and didn't lead to failure in quenching as much as traditional water quenching. They usually lack activity in the steel, and a decent hada. Note that some are made from good steel and can be remarkably difficult to identify as Showato. However these swords are illegal and may not be imported into Japan.
Gendaito - This term is nowdays used to indicate a traditionally made sword, made from tamahagane and water quenched. They are considered Nihonto and may be imported into Japan. Some smiths made both types of swords, and each must be judged on its own merits.

Shinsa Procedures and Practices

Shinsa Judgement Examples and Explanations

There's ranking when it comes to papers that many are not aware of. As I am a collector of fittings and know little about Nihonto I will use a fittings ranking as an example, highest to lowest. There are analagous ranks in sword attributions. I will use the Kyoto Shirobei Goto (aka mainline Goto) as the example:
Yujo ?? (Shodai ?? -- first generation of Shirobei Goto School -- could be the name of any of the first four/five generations in this time frame) In other words: the shinsa team is confident the piece is by a specific maker, pre-Edo.
Den Yujo ??? (Qualified judgement to the first generation but lacking some attributes to be specific). In other words: the piece is most likely by the named individual but there is something anomalous which is preventing the shinsa team from being totally specific.
Ko Goto Muromachi ??? ?? (School attribution with use of specific time - Jidai - could be Momoyama, or if Edo, Shoki (earliest) Edo ????, etc. for later generations) In other words: the shinsa team knows it is from a specific school and time period but are not certain of exactly who made it.
Ko Goto ??? (More generalized - School attribution only but pre-Edo) In other words: the shinsa team knows it belongs to a specific school but cannot place any specific maker or time period, just prior to Edo.
Goto ?? (Even more generalized - School only - shinsa cannot tell anything specific enough to place it into a specific time period) In other words: Very generalized term - the shinsa team recognizes it as a school piece but it lacks attributes to elevate it to a higher rank. The attribution of "Goto" means that the piece is of mainline characteristics, but not enough evidence to pick which generation with confidence, and most likely NOT Ko-Goto.
Waki (Kyo) Goto ?(?)?? (Work of a side school of the Goto tradition - schools founded by family members who were not first sons of the Shirobei master). In other words: these are works by separate lines, not of the mainline school and not identifiable to a specific maker or branch school.
Kyo Kinko ??? (Quality does not reach into specific school level but still good level) In other words: good quality work from Kyoto but not good enough to put it into the Goto School rank.
Kyo Kanagushi ???? (Made by lower level artisans - OK and worthy of preservation but not to be considered for any higher rank) In other words: It's OK. (lol) When the shinsa team addresses anything they have to rule out many criteria, such as if it's modern, gimei, repaired, damaged, fatal flaw, etc. and must know all of the kantei points for the school AND ALL of the school's members.
- The above would be for a mumei piece. (A piece with a mei is a bit easier as you must determine if the mei is correct and if the work conforms to the mei). They work from low to high, just as we do in medicine with a differential diagnosis. Start with the generalized and rule out until you come up with a final decision. Sometimes you can nail it, sometimes not. I have a kozuka which is published in the 1995 NBTHK Kozuka book to Goto Tokujo but papered to 'Goto Edo Shoki' (Goto School, mainline, earliest Edo). Most likely they couldn't find anything specific enough to attribute it to a specific maker, as the work looks like it could be either Goto Kojo (Shirobei fourth) or his son, Goto Tokujo (Shirobei fifth). Therefore, papered to the next lower level. The quality is not in question, they simply will not get more specific without more evidence.
Please also note that the above has nothing to do with the level of paper, Hozon, Tokubetsu Hozon, Juyo, or Tokubetsu Juyo. That is a totally different set of criteria having to do with quality, rarity, provenance, etc. What one hopefully comes to understand from the above is that it takes an immense ammount of research along with an encyclopedic knowledge of a field and it's history to be a qualified member of a shinsa team. It also shows that to be a serious collector takes no less effort, even more so as a non-Japanese language student.
PS: I included the Waki Goto to address the side schools but please understand that it has it's own flow chart as you can get specific makers within it's ranks and it's placement in the above chart really should be with a lateral extension.
- Written and submitted by Pete Klein -