Rivkin

There are questions about collecting that come up (or worse do not come up but are present) which are, unfortunately, not covered in any of the books. So I wrote a guide which answers at least some of them: papers, polish, etc.. It is a directly phrased document which I am planning to put it in my signature since unfortunately I don't have time anymore to manage my website. cert.pdf

For an experienced collector - none.

Should not be an issue... except for the ware, but its in shinogi ji so maybe ok. But why?

I feel this is "last ditch" item where a shirasaya is re-interpreted as koshirae with extra canvas (?) protector. The nakago looks Edo period and more shinto than shinshinto. Sugata is not very common with o kissaki. There is some sori and uniform width, which likely excludes kambun. I would vote this is early shinto piece. Unfortunately it is very uncommon for a top quality period waki to be unsigned so I would not expect a treasure.

In the Soviet realm there is/was a law that museums have absolute right to all images of everything they have (in the west there is a similar law but covering artists) and a third party cannot first publish any museum item - it has to first appear in a museum's own publication and after that everyone has to copy the museum description one to one. How it defacto came down: someone in Kremlin museum decided sophistique means years in descriptions should always stick to Roman numerals. You would think L or D might confuse some... except the fun already began at VI and IX. By C the only appropriate reaction was wtf.

The problem is that she(?) is a great photographer. Her angled photos have such well positioned light source that any faint nioi hamon and utsuri pop up. But... what you see in hands will be more like her "view from the top" image, unless one really puts an effort into finding just the right angle. Its tired. There is one blob (though wide one) on one side in the center where the original utsuri and hamon are fully seen. The rest are mostly gone. Jigane is mostly gone. Otherwise this would be TJ.

Ballast is how more or less officially Indian and related steel was imported by western merchants during late Muromachi to Edo. It is a well known and confirmed case. I am not aware of any pre-1500 record talking about this. Sulfur, wood, copper, silk, silver are common commodities, not a word about iron. My gut feeling: there was some big change between late Muromachi and Edo, which for some reason no one can track in detail (why??). I would vote for Japanese origin of koto steel. It has region-specific look which is retained over centuries.

It can, but then afaik Kimura would use related argument (Ti presence) to say koto steel is Japanese in contrast to Kofun steel and he also states that from his analysis you can find identical composition in shinto and Muromachi and the difference he argues is purely due to different forging and the resultant grain size. For trade the first issue is that the nature of trade goods was generally recorded. There are also shipwrecks and items described as Chinese when sold in Japan. There is no evidence of iron imported until late Muromachi. Second issue there was a number of pauses which either collapsed the trade or shifted it to high price/low volume items: Mongol prohibition, Ming prohibition, pause in tributary missions and high tariffs during early Heian, etc. etc.. As a supply of iron international trade until late Muromachi should have been a fickle enterprise. For utsuri study the issue is that it introduces a fully modern method to obtain utsuri instead of researching old blades. It might be very relevant, but it also might not be. As parallel, there were dozens of studies "reproducing" wootz and it turned out nearly all were just producing some manner of dark pattern, not related to historical steel.

More or less same method as Kimura, different to opposite results. Not enough blades destroyed for testing, especially Kamakura-Nanbokucho ones. There were periods when Japan had near zero international trade and it would exceptionally strange it would continue somehow to receive tons of iron without anyone noticing.

Original question before editing was - is certificate believable? My personal opinion - no, and NBTHK is unlikely to repaper it. BTW, I think with NTHK there is better chance. They use different standards and what I see as a problem for NBTHK will be less of an issue for others. A guess, but its after all a split issue. Then was a question - what is it then? I should have said more generally "late Muromachi" because objectively the seller's photographs are not the best. Also, assuming such questions are asked pre-purchase I am trying to emphasize the blade's quality - which is far from outstanding, at least in terms of nihonto aesthetic. Why? Its a long story which I am not motivated to explain given the manner of inquiry. Good luck on your first blade and have fun studying it and researching other similar examples. Its a nice weapon and I am sure it will lead to many discoveries.

Yes, nakago does look Showa.

Personal opinion: There are a few people in the US who can offer an advice on the blade itself (if its in good polish) at the level of NBTHK judges and probably will be at the show. Brian Czernega often offers a more detailed review, Mike Yamasaki will be more conservative/concise. I am not sure if anyone in the US specializes on cutting test signatures, so this judgement is best done by NBTHK in Japan.

The worst case scenario is probably Dewa Daijo Fujiwara Kunimichi. He loved the shape like this one. Which is still ok, just not a ton of money. If its real Nanbokucho its really valuable. This is the kind of blade that needs to be send to NBTHK unless someone simply does not have 1000$ for the service. In light of tariffs I would seriously consider someone like Benson who can hand carry it if needed. If you can take more photos, it would be helpful when photographing activities (not the overall shape or nakago), to put light source on a side and turn off all other lights in the room. This is the easiest way to produce good images. No oil on the blade when photographing.

Bob Benson is one of the pillars of American nihonto and if he takes it on its great.

Usually I feel this answer does not add anything except shifting the responsibility, but... eventually this blade will end up with shinsa anyway. In this sense its all the same what is said here. It has potential. I am not even close to be competent to be judging tester's signatures, especially with such photos. Submit it.

Precisely - if only hadori is seen, it means either that hadori is very heavy or the hamon does not have any nie. The problem is that some of the photographs are from above, some taken at an angle. Both cases look nearly the same, but if you put the contrast to the max, there is some nie. Which suggests its very hadori heavy and most likely its ko nie without any large nie crystals. Otherwise you would see significant difference at different angles.

Treating it as gimei: Around Tembun(?), weak hada, poor polish, hamon suffocated by hadori.

To keep matters fast and simple - its not, the chance of repapering today is 10%.

I don't know how true it is, but I've seen those sold in Japan as Ezo (Hokkaido) style, sometimes with red lacquer in horimono.

Large, uneven sori, hada devoid of activity except a few large laminations, dull suguha or notare based hamon - 95% of saiha looks this way.

Saiha, polished to the end or born ultra-deficient. Signatures were done relatively not long ago and the objects chosen for "improvement" were of near zero value.

2 are dead Muromachi blades and possibly saiha with crazy signatures. One is interesting ("ko-Bizen"), however utsuri possibly was acid accented. Certainly was submitted for modern papers, got something lesser as appraisal. The question is how much lesser? Still can be an interesting blade, but commercially is not viable.

Particular shape is a bit hard for me to judge - can be the end of Muromachi, can be shinshinto, I don't think though its koto. But the general rule is that unsigned tanto with very few exceptions (early Soshu) are very seldom top tier work, though I've seen couple of decent or even good shinto examples, to my surprise. But there plenty of non-descript late Edo work which is not impressive. Unless there is a strong statement suggestive otherwise (and I don't see it here), I would not expect much.

The nakago is Edo but for the rest would prefer to see images with light from a side. If light is from above, even if its just room fixture, it flattens hada and whitens hamon. There is only one very specific position above which is ok for taking pictures.

Tsuda Sukehiro is a famous name, and there is nothing in Meikan about his student Masahiro signing Sesshu so I would doubt the source. Jigane is not Osaka. Work tries to be a bit Soshu.