Everybody has his own idea about it but most of us are lacking ‘field knowledge’ and opinions are based on what we “have heard or read on the internet”..
So i reached out to a 4 respectable swordsmiths to ask about their opinion & expertise:
It’s a pretty complex thing
Working with steel is not the same as 1+1=2 …. It’s a complex thing and our smiths were asked to keep their answers fairly basic without going too much into the technical details in order to make it more or less clear to all of us.
These were the questions asked:
There are two very separate questions in here!
The steel
As in every object, its material is as equally important as the way it is prepared and transformed.
More importantly, let us first define “quality”. Is a quality blade one that does neither break nor bend and cuts well? Is it one that looks bright, shiny and healthy? Or is it one that gives goosebumps of wonder to some, enough for them to exchange the blade for millions of yen?!
Putting japanese swords back in their historical context, it has to be understood that since the beginning of the Iron Age and until Henry Bessemer’s revolutionary invention in 1855, steel — that is, iron with just the right amounts of carbon and other alloying elements or impurities — was just like gold.
It was a rare and precious metal, and those capable of producing high quality steel were highly valued. In fact, not many traditions were able to master the techniques of steel making throughout the world. Among them, the two most famous were the indian Wootz and the japanese’s steel.
The former was traded through the silk road towards the Middle East were it was used by muslim bladesmiths to make the famous Damascus blades as well as others. The later, well.. that takes us back to the very topic of this article!
The Japanese made very good steel during a time when the material was hard to come by. That is one of the main factors, this author believes, that made the japanese swords so famous, beside being as any other thing japanese a refined, well-designed and thoroughly developed object.
To my eyes, the comparison between traditional and modern steels is pointless. Today’s high performing alloys as far superior in terms of performance (unbreakability, rigidity and cutting power) to any traditional steel. But then again, so is a plank of plywood compared to a board of solid wood.
But then, if plywood is so much better, why do cabinet makers keep using unprocessed, prone-to-cracking-and-bending wood?! If plywood is so good, why do they cover it with veneer?
The quality of good wine can only be demonstrated through its drinking. No logical explanation can convince someone of the quality of wine : one has to taste it. Good quality japanese swords are appreciated through study, kanshō (鑑賞) and performance criteria put in the perspective of the historical context.
In fact, the feats of japanese swordsmiths of ancient times are so impressive that today’s metallurgy engineers don’t seem so bright in comparison!
To answer the question, the choice of a material greatly influences the quality of the object that is made of it, obviously.
The utility
I’m a craftsman. Craftsmanship is the practice of a trade which provides society with utilitarian objects. For a craftsman to make an “art sword” seems so wrong to my eyes that I worry the very essence of craftsmanship is being lost.
The tradition of japanese sword making is very clearly one of utilitarian swords made for fighting. Of course it enjoys a long history, and just as in any other history, it has had better and worse periods.
However, all sword experts will agree that those considered the best swords ever made in Japan, those made during the Golden Age of japanese sword making, were very much utilitarian swords.
If one wishes to make “art swords”, that is fine with me as long as one doesn’t pretend to be a craftsman. One then becomes are artist, and that which he makes isn’t a sword anymore. It’s an art object. It is then up to the buyer to decide wether he wants a fine sword, or an art sword.
Regarding the name of the Japanese Society of the Preservation of Art Swords (日本美術刀剣保存協会), the now famously known NBTHK, the expression “art sword” was then chosen so as to help preserve the swords in a context when war and everything that related to it was deeply resented.
It was an effort to change the perception of sword as mere killing tools, and underline their beauty as crafted objects.
I believe that every object made by the human hand is sacred. The more devotion, discipline and practice put into the making, the more inspiring and beautiful the object will be. So-called utilitarian swords are just the outcome of shortcuts taken to meet economical or logistical obstacles.
As a general rule steel choice is over emphasized by buyers of blades.
A lot of naïve buyers think there’s some kind of supersteel out there that will give them the perfect blade. This is just not the case. Every steel has its trade-offs. From a functional perspective proper heat treatment trumps steel any day.
To me steel choice is more interesting when you’re talking about art blades or blades from particular historical perspectives. But in those cases, you’re talking more about process and appearance than anything functional.
Studying historical traditions and then trying to reproduce, say, koto Japanese steel or the wootz used in Central Asian and Middle Eastern blades is a really interesting subject. But it’s kind of baked into the cookie if your chasing a particular historical tradition that you would pursue that particular kind of steel.
Steel is a large and mysterious ocean for a small man like me to try to swim across but I will do my best within my current understanding to try to at least sail across this one as far as I can.
Steel choice matters from two different perspectives.
One being beauty and the other functionality. If I were to focus on functionality I would want to choose a steel type that when properly heat treated will give both a hard and durable edge and a softer and stronger spine.
The stronger spine is more important when looking at sword-length blades. Many modern steels are quite capable of achieving these goals. I have personally settled on W2 steel because is easier to learn one steel deeply than many types of steel superficially and my mind has a limited capacity.
W2 produces a flamboyant hamon and properly cared for will have small grain and all of the properties that a martial artists looks for in a performing blade. On the other hand, if I pay more attention to beauty, nothing beats the original materials that were used many years ago.
Now we are talking hada and in this regard all of my experimentation with modern steels by mixing different types and folding many times allowed me to reach the conclusion that modern metal simply does not cut it. Pun intended.
Traditional steel, call it tamahagane (and I realize that there are more implications to the name but that would be a whole different topic) or call it home-made steel (by processes such as smelting, carburization, decarburization, refining, etc), this type of steel is capable of producing a beautiful hada that gives character to the steel and separates the smith from others.
The final decision is a personal choice for both the user of the blade and the maker of the blade and as with most choices there is a compromise to be reached. A compromise that hopefully would be satisfactory to both.”
I never understood the term „art sword“.
For me, it is important that the sword is above all functional. I mainly make swords in KOTO style. 11th – 14th century. I suppose that swordsmiths of this era of wars and conflicts were trying to make perfect weapons.
Not beautiful reflections of swords.
That significantly affects the production techniques and processes. In my opinion these are different from techniques of younger eras. Material selection? Definitely traditionally made steel.
Modern steels simplify the work and process of jaki-ire on these allows even beginners to achieve remarkable results. Especially in attractiveness of the hamon line. However, the character of traditional steel is quite different.
Big differences are also in present Tamahagane produced in Japan. The overall quality of the blade is not only a question of the chosen steel. Even the use modern steel can result in perfect and beautiful sword. The most essential is the processing of the steel, hardening and other factors, for which is responsible the maker of the blade.
What defines good wine?
Most will agree — except maybe today’s molecular cooks! — that tasting is the final defining criteria of a wine’s quality.
Just as with sword making, the basic requirements for a good wine must first be met before it can be appreciated as wine : it must be properly transformed grape juice, turned into what can be considered wine rather than just rotten purée or vinegar!
A japanese sword must be sound, have a proper, meaningful silhouette and be well polished and sharpened before it can be considered for appreciation.
The preparation of the raw material changes everything. The japanese swordsmiths of old performed extremely well at preparing what was a rather poor material into a high performing steel.
Everything matters : the ore, its smelting into iron, steel or cast iron, the forge-folding which transforms the raw, rough metal into solid, homogeneous and reliable steel, the ways in which is then forged to shape, the quenching and other heat treatment.
Every little detail plays a defining role.
But if one were to choose the very most important, the two factors would be tanren (鍛錬 – the forge-folding) and yaki-ire (焼入れ – the quenching). Japanese smiths developed impressive skills at this, and still today remain unsurpassed by other traditions, ancient or modern.
The former defines the very quality of the steel, while the later turns the said steel into a useful object, that is a fencing and cutting tool.
As to what other factors contribute to the quality of a blade, I will say many. Everything that you have mentioned is important, steel choice, forging, heat treat, grinding and polishing, etc. but to focus on the one factor which I feel is the most important: it is its soul.
A blade has a soul. When I pick up a sword, I am not looking at an inanimate object.
I am looking at something that is alive.
The smith forges the soul into the blade and gives it this unique quality. This is lacking in any mass-produced sword which to me look like a lifeless and cold piece of steel which is not any different to the next one and the next one that came from the same factory.
I want to believe that when I forge a blade, a little bit of me goes into the blade and makes it feel alive and that whoever that picks up that sword in their hand in the future will somehow be able to experience that feeling and connect back to me.
As to what other factors contribute to the quality of a blade, I will say many. Everything that you have mentioned is important, steel choice, forging, heat treat, grinding and polishing, etc. but to focus on the one factor which I feel is the most important: it is its soul.
A blade has a soul. When I pick up a sword, I am not looking at an inanimate object.
I am looking at something that is alive.
The smith forges the soul into the blade and gives it this unique quality. This is lacking in any mass-produced sword which to me look like a lifeless and cold piece of steel which is not any different to the next one and the next one that came from the same factory.
I want to believe that when I forge a blade, a little bit of me goes into the blade and makes it feel alive and that whoever that picks up that sword in their hand in the future will somehow be able to experience that feeling and connect back to me.
Everything is important.
Preparing the steel, its processing, forging and hardening.
If I use a bar of homogenous modern steel, the work is easier. But I also give up the personal responsibility for the steel. Good hardening is enough. The blade from homogenous modern steel can be a great tool for iaido and tameshigiri.
But it cannot be called a true Nihonto. The term “quality of a blade” itself is misleading. What is it exactly? Old swords had softer hamon.
But that did not mean they we easily breakable. Swords were not made for cutting tatami. A swordsmith must adjust the techniques of forging, hardening etc. to the purpose the sword is being made for.
Depending on how it’s done, lamination definitely has advantages.
It must be understood that the process of forge-folding the raw materials isn’t only aimed at laminating the steel. In fact, some very famous schools perform it in ways that eliminates any lamination effect.
The purpose of forge-folding is the preparation of the raw material with the intention of turning it into a useful one. According to traditions, schools and periods in history, it is done very differently with very different considerations in mind.
It might be to lower the carbon content, push out impurities, homogenize the material or laminate.
When properly laminated, I believe steel can display some impressive rigidity and unbreakability properties. The most important characteristic being that if one layer has a flaw, it is contained to that layer, whereas a flaw in a maru-gitae blade will weaken the entire width of the blade body.
I can’t say that I’ve tested so many blades that I could definitively say yay or nay.
But I can say that I’ve subjected modern monosteel-constructed blades to ridiculous abuse without failure on many, many, many occasions.
So my sense is that lamination is probably over-rated as an important part of blade construction.
But you’d have to destroy a good hundred grand worth of traditionally made blades before you’d be able to make even the most tentative judgments about the desirability of lamination schemes in traditionally made Japanese blades.
The issue of lamination has to be separated in terms of the steel choice. I see no other way to manage traditionally made steel if it is not for lamination.
In this case the lamination is responsible for improving the quality of a metal that has many impurities when it first comes out of the furnace. In modern steel the use of lamination is a cheat to make it look like traditional steel but if not properly done could end up causing flaws and weakening a steel that was perfectly good to begin with.
The biggest problems when laminating modern steel are welding flaws, either inclusions, cold shuts or frank delaminations or incompatible choice of steel types to make the laminated billet leading to a faulty heat treat.
The term “maru” is also for swords made in traditional way. The steel is folded, but the construction of the blade is without shigane. Only folded hagane.
Many swords from Heian and Kamakura periods are made this way.
It is important not to confuse it with blades made of homogenous modern steel. The main purpose of folding steel was making the steel homogenous and also cleaning of the traditionally made steel.
There is also compression of the material, increasing its resilience and changes in the crystal structure of the steel. Laminated structure generally increases the strength of the blade and decreases the risk of its breaking.
However, the fundamental assumption is also a correct hardening and other technological processes used during the production. Laminated structure itself is not a guarantee of a good quality blade. Incorrectly hardened blade from laminated steel is useless.
To the contrary, blade from homogenous modern steel when well processed, can reach great results. Personally I would rather consider the quality of the processing and the purpose the blade is to be used for.
For cutting tatami a good sunobe blade of an appropriate construction is sufficient. In my opinion laminating of the blade does not significantly affect the cutting features of the blade.
The construction of the blade is much more fundamental – correct shape of niku, height of shinogi and so. Laminated blade is of course much more resistible against bending or breaking in case of wrong technique of the person using the blade for cutting.