Rivkin

Its an old discussion which has no clear solution. For myself, I will take the top 1% of Sue Bizen over average and below Ichimonji anytime of the day. However, unless this 1% has Juyo papers I objectively cannot resell Sue Bizen for anything comparable to Ichimonji. It is just not happening in real life. Paper level+attribution+nagasa+condition dictate the market, except for 1% of buyers who don't care about the market and 5% of dealers who have brand recognition sufficient to overcome the bias. One can also lament the arguments "Its only Hozon/NTHK/TH/Juyo and not TJ", but they are also market reality. Believing that's not how it should be does not make it so... Until Russian collectors came to market everyone accepted as a sign of professionalism quoting painters in dollars per square cm. There is a related concept "attribution is quality assessment", which I believe works for some names but not others. There is a hard ceiling for things like Taima above which it becomes Yukimitsu. There is no hard ceiling for Senjuin since its usually strictly feature based attribution, but alas again the market accounts for many people believing Yamato as a whole is a quality assessment and not the best one. And unfortunately for a beginner the belief "they called it Shimada but its a prize blade better than Sadamune" is just a good sign he is enthusiastic about the field, but probably lacks maturity in it. And personally I like rarity. I am always found by blades like unusual chokuto, unlisted smiths, custom works and weird utsushi. They are interesting, they are puzzling and that's another pleasure of collecting.

In every collecting field there are two choices. You can make it about the objects. Beauty, rarity, historical importance - whatever is more attractive to you. Or you can make it about you being the elite connoisseur who knows "how to collect" and has a unique (no doubt inherited from deep aristocracy on the mother's side) level of cultural perception unavailable to others. Yes, 99.9% of nihonto is probably of little interest to a serious collector, but one has to arrive to this feeling through experience and exploration. Its a long, beautiful and unfortunately extremely expensive path that should not be undertaken in search of "elitism". Enjoy your level, enjoy your purchases, enjoy your discoveries. Everything else is mostly irrelevant.

I would say unconventional thing, but East Asian laws should not be interpreted in a western sense as a permanent list of rules enforced by courts. More often than not those were rescripts issued to address a specific situation in a specific place; some managed to create a tradition, in other cases an existing unwritten tradition had as much or greater impact than any written law. I would believe images and surviving koshirae more so than a literal reading, and there are plenty of examples from makie world where the laws were very specific and restrictive, and its related to swords in a way: black lacquer with gold mon was allowed only for major (above 100,000 koku) daimyo clans, and anything beyond that in full gold was basically comparable to Shogun's level. Yet in 19th century nobody cared and even before it mostly affected "official" events and related items. In the same way you would expect plenty of daisho tsuba if wearing a two set would be typical for samurai's everyday function, yet they are typically late and not exceptionally common. You would expect plenty of Inoue Shinkai daisho blades simply because it would make sense to order two at the same time if you have the funds, but that's not the case. You look at images, and there are plenty of formal functions where people are dressed for duty yet have one katana and nothing else. If such was a custom at a given time, whatever was commanded 50 years ago did not matter as much. Just a personal opinion and maybe I am missing something.

Yes, daisho were actually somewhat popular for a very short time - in early-mid 1800s and possibly also in the beginning of Edo. The problem arguing about definitions is its pointless. You can call anything you want a daisho, but what's the point. There is an accepted understanding of what daisho is. The statement that it was an enduring "symbol" of samurai is false; it was a short lived fashion which possibly occurred a few times in Japanese history. The only exclusive right of a samurai was to wear daito in everyday life. Everything else was up to discretion, situation and custom. There were some classes/families that wore instead a waki or a waki and a tanto, there were many who wore a single daito, very large daito, very short daito, there were some who wore two waki or two daito. Now can one assemble two unrelated swords and call it a daisho - I have not heard this being a crime. Is this a collectible daisho - no. Its what Russians call "arguments of the poor". For a collector or proper dandy samurai it has to be a proper pair.

Diasho is basically... a koshirae. Daisho koshirae is a purposefully made katana and waki set. Daisho tsuba is a purposefully made katana and waki tsuba set. The blades can be unrelated, but in some very uncommon (and almost always shinshinto) cases you also have a purposefully custom order daisho set of katana and waki. Yes you can try to change the definition to attach it to a set of any long and short objects, but why?

Collecting per se in every field in the past 30 years has democratized a lot. The knowledge was scarce, the scene was very cliqy and dominated by a few people who (supposedly) knew what they were doing. 30 years ago you bid on non-existent pictures in auction catalogues because James told you that "John saw it". And then you meet John and he tells you he saw it, and it was crap. On the good side of it, if you were part of the club and knew what you were doing you did very well - "supposedly" because I was obviously young and had no clue, but I've seen impressive collections from that era. Today you have many more tools to get the info, but so does everyone else. People in a remote village do have the internet and they do some rudimentary checks on what they are selling. Its 100 times more likely to find junk being offered at exorbitant valuation because they found "something similar" on christies website than to find something severely undervalued. So its a great time to be a beginner collector. Its harder to hunt for super-deals at a higher level, but its easier to buy if you have a lot of money. If you have Money you can get near anything at near any level. To the point that I've seen great collections assembled by people with zero understanding, though its uncommon. Most western collectors are staying in a comfortable 5000$ range. For some reason the perceived lack of semi-decent Sadamune on the market is of great concern at this level. But then you look at supposedly great collections assembled in 1930s... and the only thing you can say is "why?". I personally like the internet/digital photo explosion of knowledge because it allows one to ponder some drastic new things.

It exists in all collecting communities. Let discuss a blade? No participants. Which frankly can be a good thing knowing what kind of contribution is expected. Lets discuss a school, a name? Total babkes. Lets discuss "how one has to collect to be a true elite scholar". 200 posts.

90-95% are suguha with some variations (ko choji, "ashi" etc.). The variations are usually quite periodic, repetative, often small scale midare or small choji, or simply "ashi". Here its quite irregular, with large amplitude between ups and downs - its unusual for him/them (there are many generations, but there is a certain "Kiyomitsu" look). He did some "unusual" work though. His jigane has excellent itame component - very regular, very bright. I can't see it. Bad polish, tired, photograph - can be many reasons. Often there is also wide mokume, which is seen here. If its tanto jigane will tend more towards very fine itame, but that's a different story.

200,000 yen. But everything with torokusho needs permit irrespective of value.

Feels ok. Its probably an average shinto, but everything seems to be observable, so its not too bad of a polish.

The way one usually learns is you take NBTHK journal, look for kantei entries for Kiyomitsu and look at the explanations. I can see now that one of Kiyomitsu's signatures can be a decent match for these kanji, which maybe the reason for the attribution - the writing style is not too common in Bizen. This being said, Kiyomitsu's distinctive style is wide suguha with ko ashi, possibly ko choji. Most importantly he is a very high level master or Muromachi Bizen jigane, based on fine, bright itame. The jigane in your blade I think is poor by comparison. He did some custom work which can be in Ichimonji style, can be similar to Oei Bizen, in which case his jigane is still fine but can be more subdued.

No, its just common you take a sword and think why on earth does it have such papers, and then you find a blade just like that which is signed and signed well. Used to occur all the time, recently does not happen (much) anymore.

Well, Kiyomitsu is a very precise and relatively "good" attribution for a Muromachi blade, so I would take it over any guesses which are made based on not the most informative photographs and barely surviving signature. Maybe its an impressive work in hand. Would I personally consider it Kiyomitsu? From what is seen - more likely no than yes. Maybe I simply don't know his/their work that well and its a book worthy typical example of one of the styles - and I obviously experienced such shaming many times in the past.

Hard to say, they can have a distinctive boshi but I can't see which one it is here... In any case the work is "sort of" Bizen, but not really. Its a bit rough and choji are a bit not too clearly defined (are they really choji?), while on late Bizen work we tend to have them grouped, crab clawed etc., which is not clear here. Jigane is typical Muromachi, of lower quality - rough, probably blakish. can be Kaga or Fyuyhiro.... The signature is ... uncommon for Bizen. The strokes are wide, with a clearly uneven depth... Its not typical. Their signatures generally all strokes are about the same, same depth, relatively narrow width., very fine, comfortable yet simple writing. Also this signature is a bit condensed, which is even with very long Bizen writing you don't get a feeling kanji are unevenly crowd into each other. I don't like it. Which taking in mind how little of it remains is not nesserily means anything. Late Bizen can go in different directions...

Judging by the shade of yellow on this item its Taisho or early Showa and not the first grade product, which is often dangerous because the wood quality is a bit random and there can be issues. Otherwise, they are neat items. Usually black lacquer with something like a mon in gold or other simple decoration. I prefer sword boxes because they are often older, have descriptions, some are high class lacquer.

As long as its special strength superglue and the number is doubled by chiseling across the plate - everything is fine.

Its an interesting point. As far as I aware there were no strict restrictions on sword length for samurai aside specific duties, though there were consistent practices and wearing a much longer blade could be uncomfortable. Yes, wearing a sword was the act which was being regulated, to the point it has been for a time a legal question whether it can also be done by an aristocrat and whether this implies a strictly inheritable "blood right" or one can be bestowed on a personal basis with the right to wear swords in regular life. Which was the highest honor since wearing one to a procession can be done by anyone who was by nature of position held was part of the procession of sword-wielders. Obviously shops (polishers, but most importantly pawn brokers) could own blades and armor despite being of lower class. However, their ownership had to be on a temporary basis - and this has been specifically noted at times, as holding onto blades and armor long term deprived the realm from protection. Generally with a few notable exceptions a non-samurai should not have permanently owned a daito. Naginata, yari and wakizashi were indeed appropriate. In regards who owned good swords of today - these are ex-Daimyo blades with little doubt to that. Tradition dictates that when a family sells a blade it is a deeply shameful act (never mind even such horror as potentially going to a foreigner) and any possible connection allowing it to be traced back is severed. Sayagaki sanded, the name is scratched off the storage boxes, even early NBTHK papers which had submitter's name would have it covered with ink. Its not unique to Japan, in fact such behavior is common. Edo society on paper was exceptionally stratified and formal. It was also very moralistic in a sense that everything was addressed not through the letter of the law, but in a sense "does it satisfy the moral requirements?". Owning something above your station was either outright prohibited or very much socially questionable. For example, selling swords abroad was generally illegal, but even selling items of iron was seen as inappropriate - since iron is a manly, warlike material and for a foreigner soft metal objects are more appropriate. I often state the idea that European, Middle Eastern (Judeo-Islamic) and East Asian legal basis are actually completely different in nature. European explicitly implies a contest between individuals that needs to be resolved; Judaic implies a clear, divine postulate from which lesser laws are derived in a very formal fashion, while East Asian societies are generally based on status-quo (i.e. proving that something was always done is the best court argument) and morality (i.e. proving that something is "good" is also a court-worthy argument); East Asian formal laws are by comparison sparsely covering all possible situations, seldom form proper codex, and they are often interpreted "in spirit" rather than "as letter".

What's quite possibly happened is someone recently used a gunto blade (likely a showato) to create a "samurai" package featuring "civilian" mounts. Now how much of the mounts are modern can be concluded with images, the tsuba is modern, but maybe some other elements are old.

The tsuba is most likely modern. "Fortunately", its of the type which is made after a real tsuba design and is popular on yahoo Japan and in some martial arts circles, so there is some chance it was just added to the package. We need nakago, overall shape, activity. If you want an opinion, got to put in the work.

The collection is actually quite good, but as typical with museums its not well understood. Part of it is hidden and unstudied, i.e. tosogu trophies from Berlin which people don't want to discuss openly. There is a Nobuhide on display; generally I am not as appreciative of his work as others, but this blade is a top level masterpiece with prominent utsuri, ichimonji styled choji in ko nie, still in excellent most likely original (!) polish since it was received as it is now in 1891. The polish is absolutely top level, I wonder who did it. The mounts are early generation Komai work. P.S. The attachment overcompresses here is somewhat larger image: https://historyswords.com/a.jpg

Oh come on, blah-blah-blah, "but can I use a historic sword...". Just behead whoever you wanted to and be done with it.

Its really bad. Recent (past 150 years) signature with substandard execution. Tremendous damage. Modern tsuka of low quality.

The signature looks sort of acceptable, the right calligraphy, the right condition. The issue is there is not much to see in the blade. Hazy suguha, hazy hada. Saiha? Can be, though sugata looks original. Very cheap dealer's polish? Another possibility. So yes, its plausible, but it does not appear to be in a collectible condition as is. One interesting thing to check on Sukesada's especially is how the shinogi is. If its very low, a good chance its original.

Sorry, no idea... I am not that familiar with cast iron tsuba. I would cast soft metal before doing iron in any case.

Ok, writing in a "popular style" without any actual quotes because I am lazy, generally 10% though appearing in English language literature has been corrected downwards in the past 50 years. Its a typical number for Tozama daimyo (the greatest offenders would be Uesugi with like >30%, Satsuma >20%, Mori >15% - going purely by memory) due to land confiscation but the percentage drops significantly with daimyo like Maeda (special case) and all Tokugawa retainers like lesser Mitsudaira families. The overall was closer to 5% around Genroku (it was higher at the end of Muromachi, possibly towards 15%). Out of those we subtract women and small children. Daisho is a weird thing in a sense it does appears in documents and early paintings, but then it quickly disappears from sources coming back around 1800s... So did samurai wear daisho in mid Edo is not clear to most likely negative. The samurai right per se was not wearing daisho but wearing the long sword. There are however later sources specifying daisho most likely for the reason that a "semi-samurai" like Goto family was usually given a personal right to wear a daito in court processions but were not given a right to wear it at ordinary times as a daisho would have been worn after 1800s. How many swords did an ordinary samurai had? Its a very good question and general answer is that sub-100 koku samurai (i.e. 90% of the class) from a few families studied would have literally a few blades in a household - two-four waki, two-four daito. Generally the ratio of 1.5 daito per adult samurai appears plausible. Upper ranks would either be "mini-Daimyo" which is hatamoto in case of Tokugawa or similar class for Tozama with 1500-5000 koku, but they would have a large samurai retinue of their own. The "working samurai" ceiling is closer to either 150-200 koku level or the maximum of 500 koku which would be the top executive for a major Daimyo family. They would however have subservient families to pay as well... Overall "collections" of hundreds of blades start at Daimyo level and everything at and above Rai Kunimitsu cutdown waki is priced outside working bushi... Which we also see in gifts since even such "lesser" blade per modern higher end collector would in fact be a typical level of a Shogun's gift to a hakamoto in charge of a major project. Going back to numbers... Tokugawa parade in Kyoto had a roaster of more than 450,000 samurai participants which should be close to every single adult samurai who could be mustered. the total number was probably closer to 600,000. Funny enough procession required new gear but obviously we see no evidence of hundreds of thousands koshirae ordered in one year... So we have a total of about 1,000,000 daito, and possibly lesser number of wakizashi (there is no setting requiring one to wear wakizashi and not say tanto so in case of need wakizashi was not needed at all)... which is however compensated by wealthier peasants having considerable supplies of yari and naginata and merchants/wealthier peasants having wakizashi as well. So much wording and different method of calculation still arrives at the same number of about 2,500,000 swords...