Antique Chinese QiJia Saber

benny.lee · 10th October 2016, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ltp95002

Just to add some interests to Chinese saber, here is a nice example of Qi Jia Dao. Starting in Ming, to improve the quality of its sabers, these sabers started to be made modeling after Japanese sword. In the collector's circle they are called Qi Jia Dao, as legend has it were first made for the famous general Qi Ji-guang. This style continued into early Qing.

This sample has an interesting groove, and the iron fittings are unique as well. The fittings has remnant of silver decoration, but hard to show in the pictures.

The DAO is very interesting.

josh stout · 13th October 2016, 05:10 PM

I agree, it is not what I would call a “Qijia dao”.

‘Qijia” is a collectors’ term referring to sabers with a willow leaf shape and no fullers. As Philip points out, the curved blade shape more likely had its origin in the step peoples, and “Qijia” is an after the fact name to explain early willow leaf blades with a faceted diamond shaped cross section. Examples with good age and a faceted cross section may well be Ming, but they lack faceted tips and the upward angled hilts of Japanese blades. Willow leaf blades without faceting and without fullers are also sometimes called “Qijia”, but they seem to come from the mid to late 19th c..

Thank you Philip for your lovely photos of fullers showing outside influences on Chinese sabers.

Here is an example of what I would call a Qijia dao with a heavy faceted blade. The faceting is worn with age, but it is quite obvious in person. There is no sign of faceting at the tip and the hilt continues the blade profile. It was re-hilted at a later date with typical 19th c. village workmanship, but the blade itself was once very fine and could be Ming.

mariusgmioc · 14th October 2016, 10:25 AM

Hello,

Just a few thoughts regarding the Dao of the original posting.

While the condition of the blade makes very difficult to have a positive ID, I am inclined to believe this is an imported Japanese blade.

The fuller, both in shape and position, is also quite typical "bo-hi" of the Japanese blades.

During the late 16th century, Japanese blades (mostly mass produced) were heavily traded with China and Korea and many ended up with in Chinese and Korean mounts. And I think this is one of them.

josh stout · 14th October 2016, 03:31 PM

Not being an expert in Japanese swords and having seen similar swords from China, I would like to know your reasoning. I thought that in Japanese blades the hilt does not turn down (toward the edge) from the blade like in Chinese sabers and the one shown. I also thought that a diamond cross section with a faceted tip were also common. I don't see those characteristics in the example shown. Were Japanese blades made to look just like Chinese blades for export? If so, how can you tell them apart? The pattern of the fuller does not look out of the ordinary for a Chinese blade. My understanding of Japanese swords is that they had a softer core with a hard steel jacket while Chinese blades have a hard edge inserted into a softer back. Which one of these techniques do you see in this blade? Is this an appropriate way to differentiate the two in your opinion?

Timo Nieminen · 15th October 2016, 08:05 AM

I've seen photos of supposedly Japanese-made Ming swords with the tangs exposed, and their tangs look like typical Chinese tangs. So either (a) their identification as Japanese was incorrect, or (b) the Japanese made Chinese-style tangs for export blades, or (c) the tangs were locally modified.

I'd just add that sanmei/three-plate and inserted-edge construction were used in Japan. AFAIK, kobuse (hard skin, soft core) lamination became dominant in the Edo Period, and sanmei/sanmai was the most common before that.

mariusgmioc · 15th October 2016, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by josh stout

Not being an expert in Japanese swords and having seen similar swords from China, I would like to know your reasoning. I thought that in Japanese blades the hilt does not turn down (toward the edge) from the blade like in Chinese sabers and the one shown. I also thought that a diamond cross section with a faceted tip were also common. I don't see those characteristics in the example shown. Were Japanese blades made to look just like Chinese blades for export? If so, how can you tell them apart? The pattern of the fuller does not look out of the ordinary for a Chinese blade. My understanding of Japanese swords is that they had a softer core with a hard steel jacket while Chinese blades have a hard edge inserted into a softer back. Which one of these techniques do you see in this blade? Is this an appropriate way to differentiate the two in your opinion?

Hello Josh,

Yes, you are right with your questions and I will try to answer.

As far as I know, the Japanese blades that were exported, were no different from the standard mass produced Katanas. They were the classic shinogi-zukuri shape with the nakago/tang somehow bent towards the back of the blade.

Regarding this sword, I believe I can recognize the shinogi-zukuri shape but the tip/kissaki could have been reshaped. By carefully examining the blade (see the photo), one can observe that it appears to have a ridge - shinogi - meaning the blade is flat in the area of the fuller, with the surfaces of the blade parallel, and is wedge shaped at the edge (the ridge being the border between the flat and the wedge areas) which would be a good indicator of Japanese origin.

True, the hilt is bent towards the edge but this can be easily done by adapting the mounting of the hilt to be his way. If you look at the hilt of this sword, it seems a little offset towards the back and is not following the line of the blade. This may be the resullt of the necessity to compensate for the differently shaped tang (as the Japanese tangs are slanted towards the back of the blade).

As with regards to the structure of the steel, that cerainly cannot be discerned unless the blade is polished and then metalographically examined.

josh stout · 17th October 2016, 08:00 PM

It can be difficult to interpret pictures. My guess is that the blade is relatively flat until the line identified as the medial ridge, and that the edge slopes from there. Pressing the blade flat against a table, looking to see if the edge is coming up at an angle or alternatively seeing if the edge is parallel with the table, would test this very easily.

The tang follows the curve of the handle to the peened end. It is not unusual for Chinese dao to have a handle offset toward the back of the blade like a kitchen knife.

To me, the fullers look like provincial work that was filed rather than chiseled, leaving two small grooves as evidence at the base of where the fullers come together. This does not seem like Japanese work, or work from a more refined area of sword manufacture in China.

mariusgmioc · 18th October 2016, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by josh stout

It can be difficult to interpret pictures. My guess is that the blade is relatively flat until the line identified as the medial ridge, and that the edge slopes from there. Pressing the blade flat against a table, looking to see if the edge is coming up at an angle or alternatively seeing if the edge is parallel with the table, would test this very easily.

The tang follows the curve of the handle to the peened end. It is not unusual for Chinese dao to have a handle offset toward the back of the blade like a kitchen knife.

To me, the fullers look like provincial work that was filed rather than chiseled, leaving two small grooves as evidence at the base of where the fullers come together. This does not seem like Japanese work, or work from a more refined area of sword manufacture in China.

Quite possible.

But considering that we only have very few average photos available and that the condition of the sword is quite poor, we can only speculate whether it has a Japanese blade or not.

13th October 2016, 05:10 PM	#2
josh stout Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 407	I agree, it is not what I would call a “Qijia dao”. ‘Qijia” is a collectors’ term referring to sabers with a willow leaf shape and no fullers. As Philip points out, the curved blade shape more likely had its origin in the step peoples, and “Qijia” is an after the fact name to explain early willow leaf blades with a faceted diamond shaped cross section. Examples with good age and a faceted cross section may well be Ming, but they lack faceted tips and the upward angled hilts of Japanese blades. Willow leaf blades without faceting and without fullers are also sometimes called “Qijia”, but they seem to come from the mid to late 19th c.. Thank you Philip for your lovely photos of fullers showing outside influences on Chinese sabers. Here is an example of what I would call a Qijia dao with a heavy faceted blade. The faceting is worn with age, but it is quite obvious in person. There is no sign of faceting at the tip and the hilt continues the blade profile. It was re-hilted at a later date with typical 19th c. village workmanship, but the blade itself was once very fine and could be Ming. Attached Images

14th October 2016, 10:25 AM	#3
mariusgmioc Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Austria Posts: 1,911	Hello, Just a few thoughts regarding the Dao of the original posting. While the condition of the blade makes very difficult to have a positive ID, I am inclined to believe this is an imported Japanese blade. The fuller, both in shape and position, is also quite typical "bo-hi" of the Japanese blades. During the late 16th century, Japanese blades (mostly mass produced) were heavily traded with China and Korea and many ended up with in Chinese and Korean mounts. And I think this is one of them.

14th October 2016, 03:31 PM	#4
josh stout Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 407	Not being an expert in Japanese swords and having seen similar swords from China, I would like to know your reasoning. I thought that in Japanese blades the hilt does not turn down (toward the edge) from the blade like in Chinese sabers and the one shown. I also thought that a diamond cross section with a faceted tip were also common. I don't see those characteristics in the example shown. Were Japanese blades made to look just like Chinese blades for export? If so, how can you tell them apart? The pattern of the fuller does not look out of the ordinary for a Chinese blade. My understanding of Japanese swords is that they had a softer core with a hard steel jacket while Chinese blades have a hard edge inserted into a softer back. Which one of these techniques do you see in this blade? Is this an appropriate way to differentiate the two in your opinion?

15th October 2016, 08:05 AM	#5
Timo Nieminen Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 422	I've seen photos of supposedly Japanese-made Ming swords with the tangs exposed, and their tangs look like typical Chinese tangs. So either (a) their identification as Japanese was incorrect, or (b) the Japanese made Chinese-style tangs for export blades, or (c) the tangs were locally modified. I'd just add that sanmei/three-plate and inserted-edge construction were used in Japan. AFAIK, kobuse (hard skin, soft core) lamination became dominant in the Edo Period, and sanmei/sanmai was the most common before that.

17th October 2016, 08:00 PM	#7
josh stout Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 407	It can be difficult to interpret pictures. My guess is that the blade is relatively flat until the line identified as the medial ridge, and that the edge slopes from there. Pressing the blade flat against a table, looking to see if the edge is coming up at an angle or alternatively seeing if the edge is parallel with the table, would test this very easily. The tang follows the curve of the handle to the peened end. It is not unusual for Chinese dao to have a handle offset toward the back of the blade like a kitchen knife. To me, the fullers look like provincial work that was filed rather than chiseled, leaving two small grooves as evidence at the base of where the fullers come together. This does not seem like Japanese work, or work from a more refined area of sword manufacture in China.