|
Post by shadowhowler on Jul 5, 2010 13:51:18 GMT
And america could be considered a historical extension of europe, as a good deal of the populace in north america is european in origin. Especialy when it comes to sabers and the like...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2010 13:52:50 GMT
Well, you are slacking if you can only cut an engine block. Any decent katana can, at the least, cut the whole car in two. And anyway, from what I have read about albion's quality, it seems to me that one of theirs would be something a medieval swordsman would kill for. Quality is quailty. Also while it is true a traditional japanese katana has to be made in japan, a "western" sword can really be made as far east as russia, and as far west as, well, russia and still be "western" in origin.A lot larger region is implied by western than by japanese. And america could be considered a historical extension of europe, as a good deal of the populace in north america is european in origin. Ahh now what would happen if I went to Japan and made a western sword and made it through pattern welding using swedish powder steel to form the billet like Paul Chen does. ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2010 14:22:20 GMT
Ahh now what would happen if I went to Japan and made a western sword and made it through pattern welding using swedish powder steel to form the billet like Paul Chen does. ;D You would obtain the only sword able to defeat a whole family of polar bears in one strike. lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2010 16:50:39 GMT
Nihonto means sword made in japan...so no you couldn't call a shinken made in china a nihonto. Nihonto isn't about historical accuracy. Historically speaking a shobu nihonto made today with the normal 28 inch blade would not be very historically accurate for example. Also a lot of the shobu nihonto I have seen aren't thick enough to be historically accurate. Yeah I like shobu. I have seen more historically accurate shobu out of chinese forges.
As far as albion goes...yes you can get more historically accurate...with a custom smith. Which generally costs more (although with these price hikes, they are getting close to this not being true anymore...).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2010 19:44:31 GMT
The problem with the whole Nihonto thing is that people take it waaaaaaay out of context. They ignore some parts of the reasoning and read in other things that were never intended.
To some Japanese people, Nihonto is Japan. The sword holds a very, very important place in it's cultural history. For how many hundreds of years did bladed weapons and the samurai control the nation? It stands to reason that the nation whose very existence was shaped by the sword (I'll just lump all Japanese edged weapons into there, for now) will take extreme care to maintain the purity of that part as long as they can.
For all the laws dictating what is and what is not Nihonto, regulating what can be made and what enters the country, people don't quite understand what the purpose is. A lot of people think it is because of arrogance or some sense of xenophobic nationalism. It's not that at all. If it was, why would we have Mantetsuto? Why would there be examples of Chinese swords in Japanese mounts?
The reason for all these rules and regulations that have caused the formation of all of these opinions is extremely simple. Japanese citizens cannot own something that's only, primary modern use is that of a weapon.
Traditionally made Nihonto are considered works of cultural art. They are preserved as such and are kept in the same capacity as, say, a Picasso with a sharp edge. There is a very specific set of rules defining what a traditionally made Nihonto is, and today, a smith has to be licensed in Japan, work in Japan and submit each and every sword they make to the Japanese government to be registered as a work of art. Showato are not allowed in the country because the only purpose they serve in modern times is that of a weapon. Chinese made, Japanese style swords are seen the same way. Also, very few are even made in the correct, traditional way.
It's like the pyramids at Giza for Egypt. I seriously doubt that you could get away with building a giant pyramid of poured concrete and steel girders in North Dakota and calling it a Pyramid of Giza with any sort of credulity. It's not just the materials, it's not just the method of construction. It's the fact that it's something COMPLETELY different from the originals.
...
Anyhoo...I went off on a tangent. Historical accuracy is a matter of interpretation. I gave you the reason for the Nihonto thing, but true Nihonto are not the ONLY historically accurate Japanese swords available. Look at Anthony DiCristofano. He's in the US making Japanese styled swords. Very nice ones at that. I'd say that his swords are VERY historically accurate even though they are not Nihonto.
|
|
|
Post by Ronin Katana on Jul 5, 2010 19:45:54 GMT
Which is the superior katana: One made by the greatest Japanese smith to ever live, or one designed and built by the greatest minds of MIT?
In my opinion, historical accuracy is nothing more than a sales gimmick. It is designed to use nostalgia to generate sales. Hard cash for sharp steel. If it looks like the real thing, it must be the real thing. That doesn't mean it is the best thing.
I agree that tradition plays an important part in collecting. That's what high end sword dealing really consists of. It is not about cutting a car in half. It is about bragging rights. Having something you value more than the money paid for it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2010 20:25:46 GMT
Which is the superior katana: One made by the greatest Japanese smith to ever live, or one designed and built by the greatest minds of MIT? Who's to say the greastest Japanese smith to ever live can't also be the greatest mind at MIT? I don't think "nostalgia" is the right word here. Not unless Albion specifically targets people who were actually around during the crusades, anyway. Historical accuracy appeals to people who are very passionate about history. It's really as simple as that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2010 23:32:21 GMT
Thanks guys. It makes a little more sense now. But not by much.
|
|
|
Post by sicheah on Jul 6, 2010 0:39:58 GMT
I will see if I can chip in a little. Even though there is a wide range of quality within a certain type of sword. There are some aspects in the sword construction which is present in most if not all swords. Since I am only familiar with some gladius, the most obvious historical inaccuracy in a modern production gladius is an exposed brass guard. If you have no idea what I meant here is a picture below of KC gladius from KoA: kultofathena.com/images%5CKRSRG_3_l.jpg Contrast this with an inset brass guard from Albion (embedded) , Deepeeka, and VA Actium: kultofathena.com/images%5CANR5_2_l.jpgwww.kultofathena.com/images%5CAH4211N_3_l.jpgi94.photobucket.com/albums/l114/odingaard/Swords/VA%20Base%20Model%20Actium/DSC00076.jpgDoes having an exposed brass guard make the sword inferior? To be honest I don't know if there is a benefit for not having an expose brass guard. It is just that all the gladius excavated has has a recess or embedded brass guard in the wooden hilt. Also the steel used in making gladius are not very homogeneous (the gladius of Tiberius, a well made gladius, has a hardened martensite edge and pearlite body) and some have poor edge retention (hod hill spatha as a pretty soft pearlite body and edge). Compared to most production sword using modern high carbon steel, the 'historically accurate' ones are inferior to modern production gladius. But the good thing about having a soft body is that gladius almost never breaks (and they are shorter anyway). Personally I care a little about history so I am interested in historical accuracy on my weapon... to some point . But others seems to care less about it... nothing wrong with that and it boils down to what you really want. Bottom line is a good sword is a good sword, regardless of whether it is historically inaccurate or fantasy sword.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2010 3:31:06 GMT
If I remember my history correctly, the reason for the Japanese still saying that if a nihonto is not forged by a licensed smith in Japan it's not a "true" nihonto is a combination of how closely tied the nihonto is to their culture to the public eye and events that took place after WWII and the Korean War. After WWII and the Korean War, a widespread problem throughout the military was the Allied soldiers had a habit of taking the nihonto and sending them home as war souvenirs. Due to the renewal of the "samurai spirit" in the Japanese military at the time and the desire to hold onto their heritage, the Japanese government objected and severely limited the amount of "true" nihonto leaving the country and its territories. I believe that those limitations are still in place today. Only a very small amount of "true" nihonto are allowed to leave the country.
"Which is the superior katana: One made by the greatest Japanese smith to ever live, or one designed and built by the greatest minds of MIT?"
The former because he has the actual years of experience to make it whereas mostly likely none of the scientists at MIT don't considering forging isn't exactly taught at MIT schools or the vast majority of schools in general for that matter. It's one thing to draw it on paper and try to plan it out, it's another actually making it. If those MIT scientists actually have the experience to make it, then it will be "anyone's race".
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jul 6, 2010 4:09:16 GMT
I've always seen it as a matter of definition.
Taking the two subjects presently at hand, "historical accuracy" and "nihonto" present two very different notions. The former is an idea. Something is historically accurate if it is representative of historic examples; it looks like one, acts like one, maybe even is made like one which is a true historic artifact. Albion, while their means differ, attains the closest match to historic samples of any manufacturer in the production sword world. Many companies use methods that are arguably more "historically accurate" but the product achieved tends to differ from those seen historically, or the remaining representations by which we are able to compare.
Thus, historical accuracy is an idea, a concept, a notion, that is up for debate.
On the other hand, we have "nihonto." Now, as we all know, and I doubt any would argue, "nihonto" is a word, not an idea. The difference being that it has an established definition. It is what it means and means what it is, and that is, quite literally, a "Japanese sword." A sword originating from, this created within, Japan. Japanese laws have tweaked and adjusted this definition to elaborate upon exactly what kind of swords can be made in Japan and how they can be made. Thus, we simply cannot have a "nihonto" that is anything else, or from anywhere else.
On the other hand, we can use the word "katana" which is arguably justifiable as an idea just as much as a word in that it not so much defines as describes. It is merely a certain style of sword, generally made in a certain way. Variables exist but provided the end result meets the required description, it can be called a "katana" with little argument. I won't get into uchigatana, tachi, et cetera but the notion is the same. They describe more than define.
That said, it is plausibly arguable that to meet the criteria of "historical accuracy" for a "katana," it should be made in the same method and fashion as the originals. However, I think most present here are content to allow for some divergence in this regard.
In my own opinion, historical accuracy is a desirable trait in that it lends itself to...well...accuracy. It is accurate...it is...right. It is how it is supposed to be. Granted, as I said earlier, what exactly "historically accurate" actually means, or represents, is debatable, and we'd be here forever trying to nail down a definition that we could all agree on.
There are still others who are content, even prefer, a wholly different idea: historical plausibility. This diverges from the notion of accuracy in that it does not require a resemblance to a single, specific example, so much as it allows for some divergence as it "plausibly" may have occurred in a historic context. Grandpa's sword in the latest hilt furniture may fall in here, where it would surely receive scrutiny from other crowds for diverging from accepted, pre-established "norms" as such.
All that to say...there seems to be more than one or two thoughts up for discussion here, more like we aren't even sure what we're discussing. If Master would clarify his initial statements I'm sure we'd have more to go on.
Apologies for the initial partial post, wrong button on phone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2010 23:59:54 GMT
I could try to clarify my original post, but it would just end up being a big jumbled mess. I am not good at getting the ideas/words in my head down on the computer. All of you have contributed greatly in my findings. Thank you; all of you. And another personal "thank you" just for random, aside from putting down some very good info, he was also nice about it.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jul 7, 2010 0:23:19 GMT
If I'm understanding it properly, it seems like a matter of whether or not a sword not made by historic methods can be considered "historically accurate" as opposed to a blade that matches, exactly, every criteria required to be labeled a certain way, except for one, which is as seemingly-trivial (to some) as where it was made, how it was made, or who made it. For instance, a sword forged in Japan by traditional means in traditional fashion by a licensed Japanese smith, versus the finest tamahagane blade, forged in exactly the same fashion, by the best non-Japanese smith (no names will be used here, it's just an idea) elsewhere from Japan, where only one is allowed to be called "Japanese sword," as opposed to, say, Albion, where blocks or sheets or what-have-you of steel are machine-milled and shaped, in a computer-controlled environment, in a nation that is not "technically" a part of Europe, being classified as "historically accurate European swords." Somebody else brought up an excellent point regarding this with the use of the word "replica." A replica is a copy, that's simple enough. Most modern swords nowadays are simply that, replicas. Copies. Not necessarily directly copied from specific pre-existing swords, but more so a representation of an average or "norm" in the style of sword. Albions are "replicas." They are "historically accurate replicas." They are "historically accurate European sword replicas." In this case, the "historically accurate" portion refers to the shape and form of the final product, in that they look exactly like a pre-existing original, weigh exactly the same as a pre-existing original, handle exactly the same as a pre-existing original...and so on. Sure, "exactly" isn't exactly exact...since the blades may all be cut from the same steel by the same machine through the same computer, heat-treated in the same oven at the same temperature for the same time, and all other things being exactly equal...they are still finished by human hands. The final polish, the mounting of furniture, all done by people, in a fashion very similar to historic methods. Because they are so very much like the originals, we call them the most accurate replicas available. Of course, a lot of people leave out "replica" when referring to them, which I think is part of the problem you are addressing. These swords are by no means European. That is fact. They are American-made. BUT, they are replicas of European swords. Thus, it is not incorrect to refer to them as European-style swords, or European sword replicas. Arguably, in modern times simply calling something a "European sword" in itself conveys, especially in the production world, that the object is, in fact, a replica of a European sword. After all, most are made in India or China, some in the Philippines. Some arguably European...I forget the word so let's go with "properties" for now, in that a European nation (generally England) has had control over these areas for some time, if not presently then in the past...but these countries are certainly not part of Europe proper. On another hand, the gentleman whose videos were being tossed around here not long ago, the ones comparing a German longsword to a katana made by the same fellow...what was his name? Anyway, would it be correct to call his German longsword a legitimate European, even German sword? Or would it still fall to the realm of replica? Well, that's another debate. Tis a confusing world, swords. A lot of that which is said is not as it is meant, a lot of what is meant is not as it is said... A certain level of understanding of this key point is necessary to not have one's head explode...but one's head must certainly suffer some swelling to understand it all. As we all know, swelling is painful; and we all know what happens when one's head gets too big for their own good. Am I close?
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jul 7, 2010 3:41:12 GMT
Glad it made sense to someone. I was getting a bit lost, myself, toward the end.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2010 23:50:49 GMT
Thanks random. I get it now. European (Styled) swords can be "historically" accurate, but a nihonto doesn't need to be historically accurate. Because Japan never stopped the production of their swords and are still being made today.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2010 0:36:40 GMT
A rigidly regimented society tend to be anal about things.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Jul 8, 2010 1:27:42 GMT
Thanks random. I get it now. European (Styled) swords can be "historically" accurate, but a nihonto doesn't need to be historically accurate. Because Japan never stopped the production of their swords and are still being made today. Well, in a sense, they do...in that the original materials and methods must still be used, and we won't be seeing anything now that we wouldn't have seen "back when." The same geometries etc. are pretty much the rule, I don't think we can count on any Japanese smiths banging out a flamberge or any such thing...but who knows? The rest is pretty much dead-on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2010 2:03:13 GMT
one of the most interesting threads I have read on here in quite a while
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Jul 8, 2010 13:42:53 GMT
Kudos to Random for stating what I have always had kicking around in my head, but not the time or clear writing style to put into writing. Have a rarely awarded karma from me.
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Jul 8, 2010 13:54:13 GMT
Yup... Random pretty well sumed up how I see it as well.
|
|