Rivkin

[?] Yamato except for Senjuin 1300+ Yamashiro - very little in Munechika and Ayanokoji related production. A lot in 1280-1350 group. By comparison ko-Bizen has a lot of swords. Kirill R.

It almost feels like the numbers are Juyo-biased. I can imagine in this case the signature being such a major bump so that it alone propels pre-Muromachi Yamato to Juyo, but I do feel among among wider "all papered blades" segment the percentage of signed Yamato is well below 10. By the same token, very significant portion of Muromachi Mino is signed, but Juyo will be dominated by Shizu attributions, which are basically unsigned daito. Kirill R.

Looks very much as a legitimate signature. Kirill R.

There has been a lot said about Namban tsuba in nihonto world in the recent 2 decades with the purpose "reappraising it". All of it was done without any[!] attempt to consult continental tsuba collections or the body of archaeological finds on the continent. No, you can't find those in the British Museum. It was also done without any attempt to read even the basic [!] literature on continental swords. Well, indeed why do that if you have Torigye and Haynes. Short version - there is no reappraisal needed. There are continental tsuba of similar type, which are found on the continent, and very-very seldom today in Japanese shops - and they are different. These however are typical Japanese works of a type which for some reason was common in early-mid Edo period Japan. They do emulate Chinese style, but do not go beyond that. They are quite nice, but neither particularly rare nor old, and do not represent some unique Vietnamese ninja unit dispatched by the Chinese Emperor from Kanton. Kirill R.

Its hard to judge the blade like this one. The hamon style is Yamato, its no earlier than second part of Muromachi, there is masame in shinogi ji. Can be even Bungo. My bet though would be probably someone like nth generation of Owari Seki Kanenobu... Kirill R.

Not exceptionally uncommon, usually dating to the 19th century, often Persian or Indian, as Indian things were quite in big favor at the time. Kirill R.

Kissaki like this by default can be very late Nambokucho. For the rest the pictures are kind of bad. There is some masame, but that's about it. Kirill R.

It kind of feels like if late Muromachi Bizen style was the inspiration here. The lines are spaced apart, non-uniform in width, not particularly long. The way they interact with hamon is well done, but otherwise it does come out as rough for me. Kirill R.

Highly personal and arrogant-professorial: I feel the signatures become very important for a topical collection. Someone specializing in Kyushu-mono will have to consider having signed and nenki blades, whatever is the cost, or the collection is incomplete. As I am not even a nihonto person per se, justifying 200k price tag for a modestly rare signature is however quite difficult. A one of a kind sword with Gothic signature or signed spangenhelm today runs in 20-30s range, with incomparable historical value, while no particularly great revelation can arise from a non-dated non-provinced nijimei signature. For me 200k price tag that comes with high grade papers has to be contrasted to a very comparable artistry-wise non-ubu sword can be had for 15, and a very nice sword of similar expression, but less liked school (Houju for example) for 5-12. Conversely - I don't really collect pre-1300 blades as they tend to go Juyo in almost all reasonable cases (so you got a "deal" basically only if you pushed it to TJ, which is frankly a bother) and I honestly feel 1300-1350 was artistry-wise a better period. Still over the years it happened that I own a whole bunch of swords which are the only known works of a specific master, or have an extraordinary unusual date for the given name. The reasons however are purely with me being a dumpster diver, as one-of-a-kind signatures (compared to 10-of-a-kind) in the world of nihonto not always but sometimes come at a very steep discount since you don't find them in Fujishiro and Meikan. Similarly, unusual dates, which always raise generation-based questions are shunned. Nihonto community, not trying to be polite, is well known for cowardice. Maybe its the paper culture, so any little something is seen as just an extra risk that at some point the blade will be bumped down the second generation, or worse off, at some point will be send to the Great Gulag known as Muromachi period. Or in the very least receive a dreaded "Den" designation if its mumei to being with. Or maybe the community has too much of a mass-based outreach, so people are just really afraid of loosing on investment (honest warning - you will anyway! antiques are in general not a good investment) if something does not run according to Meikan. All of these monetary fears are understandable, but as a result the explorative spirit is not "in". The names that are so unusual no one would fake them to begin with now require a battalion of papers and are still questioned because, well, NBTHK failed to indicate the exact time period. Kirill R.

They sort of all three ok and about at the same level. The middle one has an issue of too rapid transition from very large nie to bland nioi and the hada is non-descriptive so its probably the least of the three. This is sort of typical JoSaku shinshinto level. The right one has decent hada, there does not seem to be great nioi-guchi control, but it feels to be of good quality. The leftmost has good tight nioi guchi, hada is a bit rough, but its quite ok. Kirill R.

In a very professorial mode: For Akihiro and Hiromitsu the issue is probably more that the daito are generally displaying far less of hitatsura and tend more towards calmer Soshu, in rather drastic contrast to tanto. Dmitry has a great example in his book, for which the alternative attribution is Sadamune. Shintogo Kunimitsu has a few daito, but one can also argue that the quality is weaker and less uniform in long swords. Signed Masamune generally all weak. There are by far not that many problems with Sadamune (or Go for that matter) attributions as with those of Masamune, and whether Kamakura or Nambokucho period's attributions to Masamune are more problematic is still an open question - he simply might have been not that early a smith. That would target the notion of him being this great teacher, but such status seems to be quite problematic at present anyway. But overall, there is often a quality differential in Soshu between tanto and daito, which is very much unlike Bizen. Daito in hitatsura are scarce to begin with; even with generally more uniform in quality smiths like Norishige, daito are much more likely to have quality issues, at least in some part of the blade. With Yasutsuna there is plethora of problems, beginning with him originally supposed to be a contemporary of Amakuni, so the exact dating is unclear, despite whatever is written in books. There is also an issue of him and Amakuni being quite popular temple swords during the Edo period, with many signed examples of both, sometimes of what supposed to be one and the same historical blade. There is probably a contributing factor can be that very few daito are still ubu, and very few schools worked in tanto during the Kamakura period. However, still Bizen, Rai, Awataguchi and a few individual smiths (Norishige, Hasebe, Akihiro, Hiromitsu tdo stand out in Soshu, for example) do seem to be an exception in a sense that their signed works are far from uncommon. Kirill R.

Aside from Bizen and some Yamashiro celebrities, who was signing their blades en masse before Muromachi… Seems to be an exception rather than a rule. Kirill R.

I don't know, 90% of price seems to be in the signature. Otherwise, is that really much different from a more typical Sairen, Jitsua or Kongobye, Naminohira quality-wise. https://www.touken-matsumoto.jp/eng/product_details_e.php?prod_no=KA-0255 Kirill R.

Hm, looks Hosho to me. Kirill R.

I feel like the guesses are converging of sorts... The blade in question is by Soshu Masahiro. Its Muromachi, but on the exact generation there is some difference in opinions. I doubt were it not signed it would have been judged appropriately, though the ara nie does suggest someone Soshu related I guess. Kirill R.

Negative on Etchu, though it is northern. One thing that can be said is that depending on the date (there is none in the signature) this might as well be the only known daito of this person, though the name is quite recognizable. Its a tanto-heavy school. Kirill R.

Shinogi-ji is masame, but it is koto. Kirill R.

Yes, lots of ara nie throughout the shinogiji. Not Naminohira, Houju, Kongohyoe… I would have maybe bet on the last one, but its not it. Kirill R.

Well, I am both a dumpster diver and like the items that are challenging. Since we seem to be on suguha train today, here is a very rare beast. Ubu, signed. As very arrogantly it sounds, I am confident the bets will not even get close to the name or even the school (I guess a lesson in humility is coming). Out of polish being a dumpster find. The blackish area close to the ha is utsuri.

Its kind of striking how thick it is in hands (leftmost) compared to almost any other tanto. I saw quite a few Tosa tanto, starting with nidai - they were not impressive. Never saw anything attributed to shodai before, but supposedly he was quite good, though obviously one would typically hope for the other Awataguchi Yoshimitsu. But the extreme kasane is something quite hard to ignore I guess, as are Yamato features. Kirill R.

I would be more than a little suspicious here. a. Compton's collection is very highly regarded in Japan and there are lots of fake Compton's sayagaki or Compton's record sheets floating around. Overall, there is certain nefarious mystery that surrounds international collections and auctions in the eyes of people there, so a provenance to something like this is well regarded. However, if the sword of this caliber somehow never made to any of Compton's publications, it probably was never in it. b. Looks shinto. Hamon is active only in the uppermost area, featureless hada. c. No papers. Kirill R.

Thick kasane, mixture of masame and ko itame hada was interpreted as attribution to the "infamous" shodai Tosa Yoshimitsu. The alternative was Hosho, but then thick kasane was creating big issues. It either had to point to some weird, probably Muromachi generation, or (as was this tanto interpreted in good old times) something legendary like Hosho Sadamune. Kirill R.

I have to honestly admit it is a very difficult tanto that had many attributions throughout his life. The uncertainty and shennanigans (for example, the photographs from the last seller shot the blade at an angle yet with mune/kasane darkened so it can't be seen at all) at some point even forced it to be essentially tossed aside. But the latest attribution is both interesting and very much believable. I am humbled by so far the guesses going into its direction. Here are some fittings to accompany. It came not with shirasaya, but kurasaya.

You put me to much shame because you are Extremely close. Let me put the uncompressed picture here. Extremely tight itame - but mixed with masame. Actually what really moved me is how straight and bright is nioiguchi yet masame enters it at quite an angle.. Another kantei note - kasane is Thick. Kirill R.

Let me throw in the stuff I really like.