Rivkin

Yokoyama Sukenaga?

I am having less and less confidence in eirakudo photos. Now for some reason the photos from the top which used to be very realistic show too much hadori (wrong light angle!), those taken at an angle were always pulled so hard it looks a bit more involved than in hand. This is ayasugi hada, as expected, why its so contrasty - its probably the image itself. The blade is indeed early, with curvature going into nakago. Were it signed this would have been an important piece.

Yes, I forgot about Masahiro, three smith names rather than two.

Sukekuni is quite a different smith compared to other Hokke, his choji are sometimes interpreted later by others, but he carries strong Bizen influence unlike any others. His work can be quite good. Hokke Ichijo is sort of synonymous to Hokke, you seldom find mumei blades attributed to other Hokke names except Sukekuni and Ichijo. Yes, he can be borderline between Nambokucho and Muromachi. I've seen Masaie attribution of Mihara when they wanted to send a message its the founder. Masanobu I think is a common attribution for mumei blades of a specific period. There are some kantei differences between the two, but I am not sure they are actually often observed.

I am a bit surprised someone quotes Masanobu as synonymous with ko Mihara since the two big names are Masaie and Masanobu (80% of signatures), both multi-generations, but Masaie starting earlier and dominating Nambokucho while Masanobu tends to begin during the very end of Nambokucho and has a strong tail into Muromachi (?) though meikan emphasizes Nambokucho specifically and single Masanobu generation at its very end. So ko Mihara is more likely to be Masaie by default among the two. Hokke has darker jigane, utsuri expected, can have a bit large featured/rougher jigane and can be a bit more midare than the pure suguha, while high end ko Mihara will have a very nice tight itame jigane with more greyish hue. Mihara will have longer kaeri and it has very specific, though period-dependent hamon width. Muromachi Mihara jigane will shift towards more standing out mokume, masame etc., wider hamon.

I am very sorry this happened. Unfortunately, my experience forces me to be pessimistic. It is not a "classical" case where the theft occurs at customs - something we saw happening for years, something that exploits the fact that only USPS can investigate mail theft, but the investigation seldom has the motivation to spill into customs as well. Rejected packages go back surface mail and this is always associated with elevated chance of getting lost or in the very least mishandled and beaten up. Some do arrive after two months, and maybe starting a package search on usps.com after three weeks of no tracking updates does help. That's what I always do. However after two months I would basically think of it as "gone". Regarding asking collectors to see if it turns out for sale... I used to bid at government auctions, in person and through agent. Buying stuff that was confiscated, "unclaimed" etc.. Quite a while ago, there was a nasty moment when an Italian family placed newspaper ads promising a reward for the information about a blade I bought. My understanding of the process is that once USPS declares the item lost, it assumes ownership of the package in exchange of validating your potential insurance claim. Similar to the case when the government declares whatever it holds as evidence or other property to be abandoned or confiscated and sells it - you have a potential claim against the government, but not the legal claim for the item itself.

Its Sadamune but I unfortunately don't have the record which one exactly. Either Juyo Bunkazai or Kokuho or Jubi. There is a lot of chikei, unfortunately overcompressed version makes it hard to see, but there are definitely dark areas. I'll try to put the original somewhere and see also if I have better images of the same blade.

Wow, thanks a lot! I might have photographed this one... The archive is getting messy I am afriad.

Second that it does look like late Muromachi Kongobye.

Unfortunately I can't really see much in Sadamune's photographs, either date. Jigane is probably tight, bright and consistent but we see what amounts to a glimpse of that.

You guys are doing some great jobs with databases of signed swords. I would presume Jussi is leading the charge? Two quests I am still at the beginning of is recognizing the northern signatures and understanding the earliest Bizen.

According to one "Mogusa theory", this Jubi is actually gimei. Pro-Mogusa thinking goes like: a. There should be a common school/progenitor which unites all Yamato offshoots, Hoki, Naminohira, Houju, Bizen Tomonari etc. b. Mogusa is well documented in historical sources and there are records suggesting it was his descendants who came to Bizen etc., but there are no signed blades. c. It is because he did not sign with his name! What did he use? One of the possibilities he used a "title". d. "Northern sword" collectors are weird, they keep most signed ones at TH without submitting higher. e. The earliest generations signed (1070-1170) probably do not exist, the earliest one that exists is likely early-mid Kamakura. They are not dated.

Antiques don't have a well defined price, or liquidity. Every auction generates stories how this item was for sale for 50k for a year with not a lot of interest, now it sold for 300k. It found the right buyer. Even if we just consider some abstract "value", people collect for different reasons. For myself its probably 40% interest in solving mysteries, which swords generate a plenty, 20% militarism, and 40% aesthetics. But there is a considerable number of people whose collecting is guided by specific historic or ethnic interest, or (a very considerable portion) because they believe it marks them as part of the elite, or because they believe they'll make money on it. Accordingly to some the fact that this maker was collected by a Daimyo, or that he was generally well regarded - is important. Knowing its Juyo - is important. Its "elite" by definition, in the very least. For me Juyo is like you took a perfectly good blade, added spoilers and now want a lot more money... Hm.... From purely aesthetic prospective many very high ranking smiths are not only associate with great blades. They also have a lot of bad blades. Plus condition. Plus intrinsic ambiguity with attribution. You end up with something that is very attractive to those who want to be the elite (big name), but aesthetically is so-so. Which is one of the reasons I tend to be allergic to any approach where a maker is "scored" by some formula or table, or the emphasis is made on how many Juyo he has. Plenty of high class early Kamakura smiths for whom there are couple of known blades. What's the pass ratio? How many were published-Meibutsu-whatever? Is it even in Fujishiro? By default I would take signed Mogusa over Kanemitsu anytime of the day, but that's just highlights my mystery-historical and aesthetic based preferences. Others will think very differently - and their price strategy will also be different.

By "research" you probably mean reading books or the internet, and the resulting statement above is kind of .... Its something who might own Suketaka would come up with. Because Suketaka did not pioneer or spearheaded much if anything, both he and Masahide at first followed Sukehiro, only Masahide essentially made Sukehiro forging the arch-nemesis of all good and noble in swords, continuing to more Soshu or Bizen inspired works, Suketaka remained where he was...

Nice! I would think fully developed, periodic, profound ayasugi hada is basically post 1490, with o kissaki this one I would say might approach Tensho.