Gakusee

The reason is that they have business limits (in particular bottom thresholds) which they must meet if they are to register certain items and also to run certain auctions. So, often they tend to group items to meet these internal thresholds. Also there are thresholds which apply to the overall value / expectation for the auction as a whole (and there is a minimum there too). Finally, they make a judgement on what is a more desirable item and what is a less desirable item. If these two belong to the same collector, they might recommend to the seller to group the least desirable items with 1-2 more attractive items so that they are not left with unsold stock, relying on exactly what the original poster is complaining about - having to buy the whole lot.

I would add Chappelear’s intro and overview book - to me it is still a great reference about schools and mei. The Stibert Museum catalogue is both a catalogue of 100 or so great items but also overview of the main schools and the items are grouped according to these schools - for me (a katchu beginner), this is also a helpful book. Albeit more visual, there are nice descriptions. I wish Markus did an English version of his German publication but he is too busy…

Have you consulted Markus Sesko’s book on swordsmiths? Best to go on his website and purchase the electronic copy if you have not got it. I personally prefer Markus’s anthology to Hawley but people often refer to Hawley too.

Thanks Piers. I have seen it occasionally in machine translations but did not expect it would make it to the official poster. Anyway, it sounds like a great event to attend locally.

I am sure it will be a very good event and good luck to the exhibitors for a fruitful outcome. Wish I could attend. Bob, just one question: what is “orthosis” in this context? Sounds like machine translation.

The Crying Fox Awataguchi Kuniyoshi uchigatana (epitome of that term) is a beautiful sword. I would say, even mesmerising. Note that it is much earlier than the typical 50-65cm single-use Muromachi swords.

…. And additionally: also specifically competition within the blades forged by the very smith whose blade has been submitted to Juyo and above. But I think you are capturing that element by referring to the “grand scheme” of Nihonto.

Yes, it has. And in one case, the subsequent new owner (back in Japan) of the JuBi was not too happy that the JuBi paper had been invalidated. There are also various JuBi that pop up in the US and elsewhere which had been illegally removed by mainly American WWII soldiers. As these were not exported legally, theoretically their JuBi paper is not invalidated through the legal channels. So if you found such a JuBi, it would still have a JuBi status (which in itself is an expired but respected and desired designation).

I agree with Ray. in fact, the Juyo evaluation criteria mention that a blade needs to be of JuBi quality to deserve Juyo. In the case of TokuJu it needs to be of JuBu quality. in the cases of JuBi, JuBi, Kokuho on top of great preservation and quality you also have the historic provenance and importance factor. That is to be borne in mind. Sometimes people get confused and think a JuBi is superior to a Juyo blade. Well, probably in 50-60% of the cases it might be. But there are plenty of JuBi where their quality is inferior to a top grade Juyo or where the JuBi mei today will probably not be confirmed as authentic by any of the authorities (Bunkacho or NBTHK). To point to the heart of the matter: if you have enough money (to buy JuBi) and appropriate contacts, your acquired JuBi can indeed be removed from the JuBi register, thus losing any status. Then it can be exported. However, one needs to be prepared to “lose monetary value” if one wants to sell it again or sell it back into Japan. That is because people pay a premium for JuBi status (not JuBi quality, as discussed above).

Alex 20-25 years ago when I started looking into swords and started going to Token GB meetings, seeing Juyo was like seeing a Yeti. Ultra rare and perhaps once every few years when one popped at an auction. Now it is very different….

Alex, that is strange. I have the opposite impression - standards are tightening, especially at Juyo and Tokuju levels. Even for ToHo, sometimes items need to be submitted twice. It is logical that if Juyo standards are tightening, so should the level below, ToHo. I personally think that it is a misperception about how the criteria are being applied by the shinsa panel and how we, outside of the NBTHK, interpret the criteria that causes the biggest issue. As collectors we tend to have a bias towards the blades we own, since we own them because we like them. Sometimes that subjectivity clouds our objectivity.

It of course ultimately depends on how good it is (general quality, workmanship, state of preservation) and whether it comes with bells & whistles such as provenance, shumei, etc. The Senjuin Mitsumasa that passed is over 80cm, the other Senjuin 75cm and the last one was 64cm (ie short). I am personally surprised that they passed so many examples of one group (3 Senjuin, 3 Aoe etc - these are not rare groups like some others….). This last shinsa was a bit bewildering for a number of reasons.

May he rest in peace. His website started me off

Please excuse the crude translations below as they are machine translations which I have minimally redacted. 1. Nowhere in the NBTHK rules or purpose etc does it say they should certify or opine on gimei swords. They are focused on art swords and in general the Hozon rule below stipulates “correct”, ie legitimate/ genuine/acceptable, mei for those swords that should be signed in order to pass a certain level. So any and all expectations beyond their rules are not justified. Now, informally one could probably receive some guidance from them, if one knew the right people and right processes. In fact, I was in such a session where one of the shinsa panel explained in Japanese to my accompanying friend what he thought about my sword and why it had not passed ToHo shinsa and stayed at Hozon. That paragraph below is also informative: “Signed works that are challenging to authenticate based on inscriptions and style or unsigned works with indeterminable authenticity may be labeled as "pending." “ So they adhere to their rules and in fact lately the criteria are being enforced tightly (many submissions, few passes) and limits on the numbers of swords to be submitted at Ho/ToHo level are being implemented. 2. Paz: no, Masamune would not sign as one of his students. The master or teacher would sign with his name but will not “lower” their status by signing with a student name. At best, you have a master signing jointly with a student (this being the topmost recognition of the quality of the student work and most lavish praise a master could confer). So going back to point 1 above, the NBTHK concern themselves not only with quality but also authenticity (to the extent they can establish it), importance, historic significance, merit etc. It is a composite and multifaceted approach. —————————————— Purpose of the organisation (machine translation): The purpose of the association is to preserve and release valuable swords as arts and crafts, and to contribute to the preservation and improvement of technologies such as the production and polishing of Japanese swords as intangible cultural properties, as well as swords and equipment, and to secure materials necessary for sword making. We will conduct research and appreciation guidance on this and contribute to the spread of Japanese culture and the protection of cultural properties. Criteria for various levels of certificates: Hozon Swords from various eras and schools, not limited to the Edo period, with correct inscriptions (mei), or even unsigned ones that can be identified by era, country, and lineage. Swords falling under the previous criteria, allowing for minor wear or scratches on the cutting edge while still being suitable for appreciation. In the case of repairs on the cutting edge, they should not significantly compromise the aesthetic appearance. Works by swordsmiths from the Meiji era onwards must be signed and of excellent craftsmanship. Blades that have undergone re-forging are deemed unacceptable, except for renowned swordsmiths' signed works from the Nanbokucho period. In such cases, re-forging (yaki-naoshi) may be accepted if noted, and if the blade has high historical and minimal wear characteristics on the cutting edge or tang. Signed works that are challenging to authenticate based on inscriptions and style or unsigned works with indeterminable authenticity may be labeled as "pending." Tokubetsu Hozon Exceptionally well-made and well-preserved swords among those already Hozon. Among the aforementioned, certain types are not eligible for approval: (1) Re-forged blades, unless noted for historically significant works from the Nanbokucho period. (2) Unsigned works from the Muromachi and Edo periods, except those recognized as superior in preservation. Juyo Subcategories of Tokubetsu Hozon swords, meeting the following criteria: (1) Exceptional craftsmanship and preservation, comparable to nationally certified important art objects (JuBi). (2) For works from all eras, including those from the Nanboku-cho period, unsigned works are eligible, and for works from the Muromachi era onwards, a tang with a signature is generally required. Tokubetsu Juyo Exceptional swords within the Juyo important swords category, distinguished by outstanding craftsmanship, excellent preservation, and extremely high historical and artistic value.

Yes, well done for discovering and taking a chance once it and the great outcome of a top smith and signed on that!

I have promptly received a set from Ray. These are extremely impressive: well-made, extensive and pertinent (ie, the kanji combinations are relevant to the cards, be it nengo or mei, in the most frequently encountered combinations). Very well done Ray for collating this set.

Dear Bob Thank you for your generosity and kind posting, patience and perseverance with these two wonderful threads. It has been a magnificent journey into tosugu. Best wishes, Michael

Used to be but not any more really …. Darcy explained well why…. One needs to be very knowledgeable, the blade and paper cannot have left the U.K. for 45 years (ie not resubmitted); the owner must have lived in oblivion for the last 45 years; the paper was not issued by a regional branch, etc etc = quite a few conditions for the Kicho etc paper to have the slightest chance. Small, obscure smith and not a high-end item that never left back to Japan or never had been resubmitted to the peregrinations NTHK shinsa coming to the US or U.K…..There is some small possibility but that has diminished so much over the last few decades.

No, not yet. Also waiting.

Excellent initiative, dear Yurie, and it should be a beautiful month to visit. If I could, I would like join, work engagements permitting.

What I find bewildering is that NY and London have competing auctions within a few days of each other. In this way Bonhams is cannibalising its own outcome and should have spaced them further apart.

Acid enhanced in a very unpleasant way.

Another excellent post, Jussi! As we know, dealers sometimes deliberately obfuscate their descriptions. Such ambiguity as to the precise generation or period usually raises hopes in the potential buyer. It makes reading the original / NBTHK documentation so much more important.

Well done, Okan

Good sword as others have said but the kitae and style are not Muramasa and the sayagaki also does not follow the usual format of a Kunzan sayagaki and also the kao looks odd.