Rivkin

The problem of nihonto is not papers A versus papers B. The problem of nihonto is that a typical collector with either 0 or 50 years of experience is a proud owner of two blades, complimented by command of some Japanese. So the "Study" and "Research" we hear so often about means translating a paper and maybe some portion from some book. Accordingly, any discussion also boils down to what does a paper say, how good is its color, and what some book says about the name in the paper. Kirill R.

Very hard to guess from photographs alone. Just looking at them, the nakago does not look shinshinto, and the default attribution for Dotanuki pieces like that one tends to be something like Tensho or more likely Keicho. Maybe they saw something in the work that was shinshinto-ish. Very great chance submission to NBTHK will not result in absolutely any new information whatsoever here. The papers yes, will be issued - to Dotanuki. Maybe, and I very seriously doubt that, with an addition of say, later generation. With a country school like this one, simple attribution to den is usually sufficient. They will not care that much whether its Edo or Muromachi, frankly there is not much of collectability differential here. Were this a big name and they would feel the work is not by a particularly famous first generation, they would do a courtesy of maybe adding an exact era or generation, or at least saying a later generation. I doubt it will be the case here. If really good photos are made we can try to guess here what was the trigger, but it can be an attribution issued with not much certainty. Otherwise, it is a general-name-Sengaku-smith blade. Can't be judged by name. Can't be judged by attribution. There are Bizen Kiyomitsu that are absolute and irredeemable garbage and there are very few that are very good. Has to be judged on its own legs. Kirill R.

That's what I thought, but the lines of weight versus length clearly diverged at Momoyama. Sharp transition. This being said, when I just used Shinto sword that copied old Soshu, their weight was comparable to the earlier ones. While shinshinto very still generally quite heavy. Kirill R.

Alas, I was away from the internet for a while. Without any personal involvement in the green paper days, I however do have generational experience with art and antique collecting, in part by being responsible for some collections I can't store, sell or even enjoy on a regular basis, but still getting slapped with some related bills. The field unfortunately is corrupt. A business based completely on opinions, and opinions which are unlikely to be prosecuted even if found to be financially motivated, and on top of that - the kind of business where even if attribution is solid, the price can be determined only within an order of magnitude. A painting from the Olympia Fair will cost half at Christies, and another half of that on ebay or local auction. Add to that a maximum of maybe 10-30 serious players, who all know each other, and all developed strong sympathies-antipathies over the decades. 85% of issues are always between "the work of big name" and "the work of big name's circle", which can have easily 3 zeroes difference in value, but sometimes a less obvious quality distance. 13% of issues are between "later copy" and the "original". Both involve a significant chunk of cases which cannot be clearly resolved. Yes, the work is very strong, but the condition is just so much better than anything seen previously from the artist. Or it all matches the expected, but there is this cat in the painting that really sucks and no, it was not painted in. The separation of roles can help with attributions, but only to an extent. First, there is a whole bunch of fields which are so small, the greatest guru is also the greatest collector and thus the greatest buyer/seller. All roles expert. It gets somewhat easier in larger fields, but without clear government investment into Academic positions of junior rank, without clear state guidance the separation will never be of any efficiency. Second, issuing paid opinions always corrupts. Because the important things are never clear cut, and you don't want to err on the side of caution too much because then people will use experts who don't. But then you don't want to be too optimistic all the time, because then you'll make a few obvious mistakes and competitors or those who got bad papers will put it on the internet. During the early 1900s there was this big movement to make museums into fee-based appraisors, and now they are heavily discouraged against anything like that - and there are plenty of biographies detailing exactly why. What worked in Europe is publishing catalogue raisonne, which puts the entire argument and body of work into open, and then the whole issue "what is Masamune" gets at least some clear and visible boundaries. Also - until 1970s you were expected to write serious opinions on art in actual journals, detailing your arguments. And yes, it would be bizarre to be an expert without actually discovering something new and writing a book. You kind of were supposed to see the person's arguments on paper before accepting them. And yes, typical paid expert opinion on a major work is 10-50 pages long. Yes, lost of it is water to crank up the fees, but its still definitely not a single line statement. Nihonto is sort of two thirds along the path from "all roles expert" to something like 1900s European attempts of creating museum commissions to issue papers. So some of nihonto scary stories, like the tanto publication are from "all roles expert" time. And well, there are plenty of fields where "all roles expert" is the way to go, it just tends to end either with great success or resounding failure. Which brings us to the green papers. Or my VERY personal and VERY erroneous take on them. Aside from things so abnormal, the question was whether NBTHK will retain its respectability (papering of fake gendai "copies" of Edo period masterpieces), the major issue was actually of access. There were people who could contact the estimeed members and present to them the item together with the supporting documentation, make their case, and then solicit their advice. Things considered Masamune for the duration of Edo period had a considerably higher chance of being secured as such. Is it wrong to do so? In fact any art commission of today with require you to submit the item's documented history. The chances of attribution to X will increase very significantly if the item was dealt with by galleries known to specialize in X. It is not seen as an issue at all, on the contrary getting "out of the woods" work accepted by today's art critiques is quite difficult. The problems which are specific to nihonto, and which were never resolved, is that first of all not a lot of people have this kind of access. A few can present their case, most can't and are not supposed to. Second, a lot of Edo appraisals were bizarre to the greatest extent possible, with Soshu, Masamune and Sadamune being the most obvious benefactors. So you do see that in many cases green papers give you the answer copied from Edo paperwork personally presented by the owner. Like unsigned, but attributed to Hasebe Kunishige (why not Kanenobu?). The new papers are trying to build a greater distance from Edo appraisals. But they are also sometimes erring very much on the side of caution for items submitted by the general public with no access. Hence a lot of attributions to very general and widely stretchable schools (Uda, Shizu, ), which are becoming even more stretchable as stuff gets piled into them. Kirill R.

Overall photo of the blade is needed, but it somewhat feels like (post 1500) Muromachi and possibly Momoyama Bizen for some reason in later suriage condition. P.S. now reading the document, yes it can theoretically be Nobukuni from say Tensho 10 (1581 or about) to 1600 or so, Momoyama period. Momoyama swords can be weird in the sense that you have that short period when you can see Odawara Soshu doing Rai, Bizen Osafune doing hitatsura Soshu, and Mino smith doing Ichimonji copy for some reason. Atypical typical, guess sometimes you had to do what Daimyo wanted to add to his collection. Kirill R.

Paul, to divert the pressure on me to make concrete accusations and shift the situation into the fun gear, I'll just point towards (a slow and somewhat boring) movie "We make antiques!". The subject of papers, appraisals and the issues surrounding them did make it even to popular culture. Making a concrete statement/accusation will run into a basic problem it being a hearsay. I heard he was the actual owner of this sword... Well he denies it. A Daimyo family sells swords and asks a director to look through them. Its masterpiece is dismissed as Shizu Kaneuji. A decade later they see it offered for sale papered as Masamune and with a proud statement of its family provenance. What's happened in between? Was there collusion or opinion just changed? And why should we believe the family? Maybe they are just bitter they were not paid much in 1950s. If a shinsa member sells a tanto does it make him a dealer? If a professional dealer serves as a clerk with NBTHK shinsa - is it appropriate? Etc. Etc. With some other shinsa teams the personas and stories are just a little bit more public. Honorary invited members for specific sessions, with extensive personal businesses. A publication on a tanto which is cited as important reason for the split. I am sure many will argue - why say anything altogether? If nothing is known, no one is convicted, why feed the gossip. And I would agree. Except one cannot ignore that there are very specific Juyo shinsas, very specific types of papers to specific smiths, and even sayagaki with certain specific dates that somehow carry absolute the lion's portion of Obvious Issues. Maybe there was no commercial underlining behind these abnormalities. They just somehow grouped together. But few believe that. And that's where the rumors regarding "what really happens" come in. Kirill R.

Mailbox is full or so it says. Kirill R.

The answer is very convoluted. First - no dust. Second - Meiji and modern lacquer generally long term requires 50-60% humidity, held at a constant level. Exception can be made for super high quality items, but with the rest its dicy. The old lacquer you have to look at each piece, but generally they are substantially more resilient. Third - swords below 45% is generally safe long term. Leather is problematic and generally requires conservation treatment. If sterling silver does not tarnish with a year or two is a good sign the environment is good. Kirill R.

Well, I am not sure about this one, but it might be that some really bad things are coming to the US side and the free days are basically over. Or it might be just an aberration (hope so), so independent confirmation is very much needed. Or most likely we will just have to learn how to coexist with a problem. To give certain background, I am selling off quite a few items, nothing really major coming from a dumpster diver like me. But I had a few people I know in Europe interested in the items. Everything shipped before Dec. 1st arrived with no issues. Shipped after Dec. 1st - 50% rejection rate by airlines. Maybe there is something as random as a new x-ray employee. But quite possibly new guidelines. The statement I received is that x-ray requirements are now absolute in the sense that if there is any doubt - reject the package. No possibility to appeal as the law shields airline from damages for any rejections. The items in package have to be CLEARLY visible to x-ray (not on top of each other), IDENTIFIABLE (??) and adhere to whatever airline internal requirements are. Result - armor rejected because the package's content was "shielded" and x-ray operator could not discern whether there was something undeneath the steel. A package with a book and tsuka rejected for the same reason - the book "shielded" the tsuka. Package with kozukas - rejected because x-ray operator could not figure out what these pieces were. Yes, non-identifiable contect is an option to be checked on rejection slip. So now I have a neat collection of rejection slips from different airlines. They are different, which I guess makes things even more complicated as some are ok with carrying x, but others are not. Kirill R.

As always in Japan, there are 10 versions of what really happened, and none is official. In fact the official statement in such cases is limited to someone retiring. And yes, unregistered swords were found, but there are different versions regarding what it meant. My very personal take: Don't consider anything from 2x Juyo sessions overly seriously. A lot of ko mihara and strange looking Takagi Sadamune there. If you buy green papered Suishinshi Masahide, Naotane, Kiyomaro, or Kotetsu - you are buying good quality Gendai work with a fake signature. Green paper Muramasa will have tougher times being repapered today. No crookery, just the standards are different. Green paper to Masamune and Sadamune with good sayagaki more likely than not denotes an upper grade early Soshu work, which quite likely will not paper with Masamune name today. The reasons are mainly differences in kantei. That's about it. The notion that green papers to Muromachi Uda and the rest of the stuff available in troves are somehow concealing a major Yakuza operation is basically false. Yes, if you submit them today chances are you will get another Muromachi smiths. If you resubmit modern papered 20 years ago, mumei sword, the chances are you will also get a slightly different name. If different Muromachi attributions more or less give you the same monetary value, it is painful when green papers to major names in Ichimonji today are papered as just Yoshioka Ichimonji. I've also seen plenty of the opposite also - Ichimonji green papering today to Saburo Kanemune. To me its more or less natural oscillation between attributions. The main problem - that in Japan the appraiser, dealer, government and museum advisor is one and the same person, was not and will not be addressed. Kirill R.

Aleksandr, I am hesitant to offer a definitive suggestion since I am not aware of a signed example like this one and thus all the conclusions are speculative. But generally mother of pearl inlay on black lacquer, usually with Chinese scenes, but often mixed with "Islamic" motifs, is a Korean style of lacquer. Yes, there are islandic items that are similar but they are quite rare. Regarding katana stands like this one, there are very many being offered for sale in Japan. For example, https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/b433025713 The prices are modest. They are all relatively identical to one another - maybe two-three variations of the vertical one, and two-three variations of the horizontal one. They cost little and condition wise more often than not show considerable ware, but the type of ware is not consistent with quality, old lacquer. For example, often the black surface has areas where the lacquer is worn out, or delaminates from the surface altogether, small cracks in wood and surface - something one does not get to see even on Momoyama pieces. My personal opinion is that all of them, Bonhams item included, are XXth century works, from about the same general period as when Shibayama style was popular. They are relatively cheaply made but have impressive appearance. Were they made in Korea or Japan is difficult to determine. There are definitely many Taisho to early Showa export pieces that were made with mother of pearl in Korea, and quite a few for Japanese market specifically. But it can be also an enterprise that functioned in Japan itself. Kirill R.

Did not want to make it sound dismissive. Its more - been there, unfortunately, not once not twice. No, I don't work with these people after such experience. Kirill R.

Very personal: As far as I know, almost all non-European countries (Japan being a very rare exception) - China, India, Turkey, Iran, Russia, etc. etc. generally prohibit shipped export of anything antique, in some cases unless there is an extensive paperwork procedure that is being followed. Compared to this the situation in Europe is a great relief. But the problem with Germany is that anytime-anything cultural or historical goes into dispute there, the prism of what happened a century ago immedeately paratroops in. And then the chances of having it reasonably resolved, no matter how little the problem is, are gone. There is instead an immediate need to first prove that what happens now is in no way a semblance of what happened then. Which is done with limited grace.Some of such posts get deleted here, but overall I can't remember the case at least with regards to myself and some German event, where in some form this would not creep in. May be an outside person just gets exposed to this more. Still, if one is on lecture trip from Vienna to Basel through Germany, there is an observable difference. Kirill R.

I am yet to hear a story about something being done on a sword that did not involve at least "and though it took half (or two) years more than intended....", but possibly also cost overruns and often very unexpected results. Kirill R.

Regarding the titles, passport data etc. - never encountered this to be of any help with mail, couple of times I was asked for tax number, gun license etc. of the recipient, but those were unusual cases that were expected to attract scrutiny. Otherwise, these days they do x-ray every single package send through air-mail. The rejection by airline is pretty straightforward - they either can carry swords+, or can't (minority of them). If they see a blade they will always check the customs form. If it says antique folk metalwork, 90% chance any European airline will reject it. However when crossing a border with an item, the titles do help a lot. Sometimes customs suspect this is a business transaction and thus has to make a decision how much paperwork and fees do they want to collect. At this point they actually will directly ask you what do you do, who are you, what titles, and can even ask some more personal questions. If they are satisfied this is not your main business, you just go through. Once though I had to sign a piece of paper which said I am to not resell the item within 2 years. I don't know what would happen if I refused. Regarding Kulturschutzgesetz and similar laws being interpreted in the nature "what is not explicitly allowed is forbidden". It is my policy to stay away from Germany. For one reason or another whether on this forum, on elsewhere in life there is a considerable amount of strange behavior accumulating in the German antiques and militaria scene (Germany and abroad included), I don't know why, but that's my experience. Well, I do know why, but that would be political. My experience was that if the items are expensive and thus were cleared through export permit in Japan, then there is very little potential for problems in Germany (I am not German, might be wrong). Somewhere there is an official paper (with a seal) attesting to export rights, and that's fine. If not - they tend to concentrate more on Asian/Middle East countries (again, its a political thing). Quite a few public entities will not want to deal with your items if there is no government seal somewhere, and customs in deep theory can start asking weird questions as well. Kirill R.

9706 tariff was indicated. Regarding classifying things as Art, or simply antique, used to do that a few times, very high chance of refusal by airline with a statement content does not match the description. I never encountered the item being destroyed in either case, rather just returned to sender. Kirill R.

Antique Japanese dagger dated 1850 with a certificate.

Precisely! Somewhere along the way the item gets in queue to be shipped using airline X which does not allow the shipment, and that's the end of the line. Kirill R.

I think the greatest question is what is being compared. Solid construction to a hallowed arc with no weight consideration - solid material will always be stiffer. With weight given a consideration it will be the other way around, but the question then becomes does it make sense to actually leave the weight savings as is. A while ago I did a large table of weights including swords with and without bohi - and for the same period they were basically on top of each other. So instead of securing the weight savings, the sword would likely be proportionally scaled along some other dimensions - producing stronger weapon for the same given weight. Overall the weight often tends to be rather narrowly fixed to a certain range for each weapon and each length. You don't often see a koto katana with 70cm or so nagasa that goes beyond 800 gram by itself, and they tend to be around 670-750 gram on average. Shinshinto will be somewhat heavier on average. 1.1kg seems to be the absolute maximum weight that a truly mass-adopted blade would take, and for some reason in Asia those were universally popular specifically in the 14th century. Kirill R.

Discovered a very troublesome development. Airlines placing their own restrictions on all luggage and cargo shipments they carry which explicitly prohibit weapons, including all manner of swords and knives. And the shipped item basically travels back to you snail mail because somewhere along the way it was supposed to get on the airline which bans these items - and was rejected. So you get it with airlines label "rejected - sword inside" and the note that it is your responsibility to insure that airlines are allowed to carry the items you shipped. So far I encountered it twice, the last time with Bratislava Airlines. Fedex still flies their own planes, so it should not be an issue - except they don't insure/declare value on antiques above 1000$, and obviously exactly 10 times more expensive than EMS/airmail and such. Kirill R.

Very erroneous and personal take. But I've seen the tanto in hand. I very personally believe its a late Muromachi item. The hada is very rough, and it has typical Muromachi itame-nagare/o-mokume/masame sandwich. Yes you find it in Hasebe, for example, as well, but not in this rough-wide manner. In Rai you would hope for tight itame (or what they correctly call o-mokume). In some Yamato influenced pieces you would have less mokume and more masame, things like nijuba in the hamon. And most Yamashiro schools post Nambokucho are Yamato influenced - Nobukuni, Ryokai etc. This one is neither - to me its just such a typical Muromachi jigane. Regarding the ha, its neither Yamato, nor really Rai, as there are some togari or gunome peaks close to the nakago, kind of what you see on some Mino-Muramasa in suguha. Yet patchy blackish-utsuri jigane and mitsumune to me suggest Uda. Which can be miles away from the correct answer. But I am yet to receive an identical shinsa judgement for a Sengaku jidai mumei piece. So they have big problems sorting them out as well. The signature can be real here, as there period Kunimitsu's. Kirill R.

I would say late Muromachi... At this point the schools mixed up among each other quite a bit, but I would guess Mino... Or even Uda. Actually on second thought, Uda is more likely. Kirill R.

I would throw out something like what are peoples' most favorite swords. My triad I guess is: 1. Probably Fushimi Sadamune. 2. Cetainly Shintogo Kunimitsu TJ tanto. 3. Probably Heshikiri Hasebe. Kirill R.

A very impressive collection, specializing on cutting test items I presume! Much obliged to see them. Kirill R.

Steven, there are probably very many ways to collect these things. At least judging by what kind of blades people prefer. I will hijack the discussion probably, or just troll it a little, but I think the question of what would you want your first sword to be is actually quite deep. Say if I were to go back years and choose for myself the first sword and lets just say limiting myself to what touken komachi sells, that would personally be something like: https://www.toukenkomachi.com/index_en_tachi&katana_A090618.html or https://www.toukenkomachi.com/index_en_tachi&katana_A010519.html and in daito class, let's just put some readers into great distress: https://www.toukenkomachi.com/index_en_tachi&katana_A070718.html yes, crazy signature, but looks like a good Uda to me. but actually the best choice for me would be (salivating! but that's all just a fantasy now) https://www.toukenkomachi.com/index_en_tachi&katana_A030519.html or https://www.toukenkomachi.com/index_en_tachi&katana_A030817.html Each of these swords offers to someone like me a great wealth of "stuff" to study. But since others choose very different swords as their first, I assume they are guided by very different approach in terms of what they want to collect. Kirill R.