Rivkin

I can't say anything about this item, but a lot of Momoya Namban treasures are in actuality results of 19th century trade acquired by older clans and then redated in the 20th century to a famous 16th century Daimyo. A basic knowledge of either Continental Asian or European swords is probably absent from the community.

Conventional way: do you see dots in hamon which sparkle if you apply light from the edge's side. If yes, its nie. Unconventional way: look at the blade straight down while applying light from a side (not from the edge, but from either nakago or kissaki's direction). If you see bright, well distinguished hamon, its in nie. If its sort of hazy, its nioi. This method helps a lot when you buy swords based on scanned photographs. If its hazy, its not bad, its just a nioi blade. There are exceptions but they are rare.

I almost agree with the opinion, but have couple of very personal arguments: Keicho or very close to it. Sugata is a bit atypical for anything typical. Hada is already quite dense, too dense for koto, either shinto or shinshinto is more likely. Hamon has a wide "base", it shows very little vertical variation except in the topmost portion and is very glassy in appearance. Hamon itself is very eclectic. Its a tid bit more nie based than expected from Bizen, odd-groupings of togari, some togari are sharper than typical Bizen choice, some togari are kind of gumone-like standing by themsleves, so it has a Mino feeling to it. At the same time very thin, slanted, sharp angled togari are definitely Bizen like. Such eclectics is more shinto than koto. I would bet its more masame based in shinogi ji, but that could be koto mino as well. I think its sugu boshi. Overall to me looks like very early shinto. Is it gimei? Can be, can be not. Its not outside the realm of possible later generation Kanemoto experimenting with something like that.

Purely personal feelings: That would make sense were this by the shodai Kanemoto. But since it does not appear to be the case - what's the relevance. The style is basically Bizen-based, even if one accounts for convergence of Mino and Bizen around Tembun. I would further argue that the particular execution, selection of elements hints towards later than mid-Muromachi origin. Can non-shinto Bizen style have sugu boshi? Sure, ichimonji boshi can be interpreted as such. Its not ichimonji. There were some exceptions where one finds active Bizen hamon in Muromachi with sugu boshi. That does not look like either of them also. Yes, finding sugu boshi on a hamon like this does hint towards shinto. Not exclusively for sure, I don't think there is any kantei rule that comes without a hundred or so known exceptions, but its a point.

If the implication is that it is similar to the present sword then I don't think its correct. These have well defined togari, well defined groupings of such, each separated and rising above the "valleys", groupings are mostly resembling each other. They are also not slanted left and right, or become thin long lines, crab claws or tobiyaki. They also will look quite differently in hand in terms of nie... If one is to go this way, one can pull Kanetomo, who indeed forged in heavily Bizen skewed fashion and indeed could resemble this blade in oshigata.

Yes, I actually paused with this one as well, trying to decide which side of the yokote the togari is on. It seems to be right on the yokote, which could still be shinto; otherwise I am surprised that with very active hamon one would go for something that close to suguha, though some people in shinshinto did that.

Sugu boshi, so I would argue its shinto. The style itself is not of Kanemoto lineage, there is too much variation between the groups, the center togari is not really larger in size, there are crab claws, nie does not stand out, overall it looks far more Bizen than Kanemoto.

Overall the opinion on the origin of this rapier was made by someone not entirely familiar with a construction of European swords. Its not uncommon, as quite a few objects brought to Japan by foreign trade as late as the 19th century are being described as Japanese works from Kyushu.

Its a different sword, but if this is the actual nakago shape, its nowhere close to Nambokucho. This is indeed Kaga Yukimitsu, but a very late generation, and the blade is in poor condition. Its more like 1,500-2,000 sword. A very rough work, hard to say without seeing the entire sword, but such rough delaminating masame was practiced mostly by the Tembun (1520) generation or about.

This sword actually did come up for sale couple of times already, but the price if I remember correctly was much more significant. I think Kaga Fujishima is relatively straightforward to kantei, and its not the school that comes with a large premium for its name. If the shape is clearly Nambokucho and the style matches I would not worry too much. Not being a Kantei expert, I'll do a bit more: a. "strong toriizori, chu-kamasu kissaki" unfortunately does not sound that typical for 1360s. b. It would be strange if it has much from Kashu Sanekage, usually later Kaga went into different, non-Norishige, direction. If I remember correctly, Tomoshige's typical style is periodic gunome with lots of sunagashi, but one also finds in Kaga Choji Bizen-like hamon with coarser hada and stronger hint on nie. c. If I remember correctly, Yukimitsu was more of a Bizen knock-off guy, as typically all Kaga smith with Bizen like "mitsu" names. d. Existing blades attributed to "Kaga Yukimitsu" are far more often Oei rather than Nambokucho. 3k USD would be just a bit low for suriage Oei Kaga Yukimitsu, but its all depends on condition/issues. Going price in Japan if I remember correctly is around 350-550,000 yen with full polish and great condition.

In general I would and do agree, however after seeing some stunning Taima blades I was buying for a while whatever came up with under Juyo papers. Third blade which turned out to be junk upon arrival did it for me. Just very average Yamato junk with itame instead of masame. I would still take Taima over Tegai or Shikkake, but there are unfortunately average examples out there. Which turns me to thinking - what is Taima in the first place? Realistically, signed examples are nowhere to be found, so its an attribution based on features, and tends to be applied to blades with Yamato-like hamon and stronger hada in itame with some mokume and nagare rather than clear masame features. The problem is, if hamon is really strong it borders a lot of Soshu examples. Yukimitsu, with even higher grade - Sadamune, possibly Hasebe, Echizen period of Tametsugu... I fear that while Taima is still very strong school, the "truly great Taima" might never get to be Taima so there is a cap on quality. Hosho seldom looses its members to anyone. I've seen some weaker blades, even Juyo and such, but most Hosho for me are as strong as it gets. The very best ones can do really dense itame as good as Awataguchi, they have thin hamon in full nie which is very bright, flowing masame with clusters of ji nie which are as large as what one sees in Norishige's ji... I think its an exceptional school, and also it never really meets the style of the rest - Taima, Tegai, Shikkake. I don't think these smiths interacted much with the main Yamato families.

I prefer Hosho. Taima tends to loose better blades to Yukimitsu attribution, and what is left ranges in quality significantly. There are things that did not go Tegai only because they are itame based and nie forms clouds-like formation rather than nijuba per se, but the quality is still somewhat rough. I am all for it as a school being a notch above Tegai or Shikkake, but at the same time some of this fame comes from people owning Taima because they can't afford Yukimitsu and arguing instead "my sword is just as good". Senjuin has some significant early examples and I would not discard those.

Much appreciated, great job!

Japanese as a language has some Siberian characteristics. Poor on adjectives, which are often imported, but very rich on nouns used to describe characteristics. Plenty of examples where definitions overlap and which one to choose is a question. Add to this that many collectors love to show off by pulling out some extremely seldom used term and insisting "that's what it really should be called". I would also go with something as simple as sunagashi here. Here is a picture with some of the related activities where I would say Inazuma, Kinsuji and Sunagashi exist somewhat separately.

Thanks! I've never seen anything attributed to ko Uda as Juyo in real life, no wonder if they are so rare.

Jussi, do you have statistics regarding which shinsa years those would be? I can understand Uda Kunifusa mumei daito making it to Juyo with reasonable frequency, but its not a too common attribution to begin with. Ko Uda going Juyo in a "modern" session is something I, maybe ignorantly so, would be cautious about. I don't feel like anything typical for 20s sessions applies today. But then again I don't have your experience of actually studying the sessions in detail.

Metoo!

I don't think this could be estimated accurately without interrogating the maker himself. However, there are a few things that appear to be consistently discovered with such swords by Sadakatsu. They are in private hands. There is no evidence of them ever being part of the Imperial household. There are quite a few blades being sold in Japan that once were part of the household agency, as couple of princely collections were sold out, and the paperwork attesting to the provenance is highly treasured. BTW, the blades in large are not extremely impressive. Yet with Sadakatsu's creations which are available for purchasing I don't think one ever encounters such documentation. So the question - were these actually ever presented/accepted by the household? I think the answer is with significant probability strictly negative in a sense the Household never owned those. Most likely, Sadakazu and Sadakatsu having Imperial appointments they would demonstrate the fact that they made a blade, maybe it would even displayed at some shrine, but then it was to be sold on the market. Quite a few western museum collections (i.e. western sword afficionados from late Meiji-early Showa) has those. Then what limited him to just a single daisho? If it sells, there is no law prohibiting one from making as many as needed. On the other hand, I knew a collector who has a large number of recent gendaito dedicated to various events. Usually he asks the smiths how many they made and they tell him - its the only one, or one out of only three. So I think one to three is a typical number.

If one looks for a blade with koshirae in this price range, its hard to do better than Aoi Art. If something else (shirasaya only), with American dealers like nihonto.us, nihontocraft you get an extra protection of moneyback guarantee and more detailed service.

Its a known technique among struggling painters - to send president's portrait to the white house, receive back a letter with gratitude, the painting gets hanged somewhere for a week - and then you have a letter "signed" (faximile) by the president himself congratulating you on your painting efforts, which you add to your resume with a cleverly stated phrase how you did portraits of presidents and kings. Not that they asked for it. There are some smiths in Japan even today who make swords commemorating various events and then selling them "this was made for the Emperor's birthday". Gassan Sadakatsu was probably the smart person who started that. He made quite a tremendous number of swords commemorating various events. They are still everywhere. Kirill R.

Obviously there is! The answer to [a] is supposed to be sugata, that's what every book says. I was puzzled by it for a long time, since unless one goes for Shinkai, in shinto 500$ and 50,000$ sword tends to have the same sugata. I feel the reason is actually many real collectors in Japan, just a very personal experience, don't collect anything save Heian and up to mid Kamakura, plus Kotetsu, plus Kiyomaro. Things which indeed have a distinctive sugata. Regarding [c], I can say that I have/had good relationship with traditional seamstresses, paper makers, lacquer makers. It gets a bit more difficult with painters and netsuke carvers. Yet I never managed to have anything as pleasant with any swordsmith or polisher or even sword dealer. With a few exceptions in the last category. The reason is that compared to all other crafts, sword people are horribly arrogant. Add to this that crafts, polishing is a very good example, can be not particularly tasking on the intellect. Polishing requires a more boredom-insulated, meticuluous mind, most people who do it in real life with great difficulty advanced to a junior drill sergeant level. Contrary to what every polisher-written book states, a solid portion of those that are actually not bad in their craft, still can't kantei at the very basic level. Actually, all insane-level kantei I ever heard came from polishers. So I actually have great reservations about what one could have learned about sword history if one were to sit down with say, Sukehiro. Its like there was a smith lineage in the Middle East whose great secret was that they excelled in the technique of storing barely forged billet in excrement. They had a detailed understanding regarding how to select the said substance, which temperature/place/season works the best. And what do we learn from that? Today it produced quite a few "traditional" swordsmiths claiming with such treatment they can produce a nitrogen-alloyed steel, superior to everything ever made etc. etc. etc. The problem is nitrogen steel is a mythical beast - it has miracle properties in first principals calculations, but has a lifetime of a few seconds. Connecting the "secret craft knowledge" to real life metallurgy is actually very difficult. Never use water from this river, never use charcoal from that area can mean a lot of things, and sometimes it just the result of someone simply getting randomly burned when trying to do just that.

Just for the sake of being controversial: 1. Bright hada and nie which gradually varies in size, preferably starting well within hamon. 2. Japanese classifications are very vertical. It is assumed that somebody's distant ancestors have greater sway compared to contemporaries. This creates complex genealogical tables, which are often more confusing than helpful. For example, you don't often read anywhere that early Kamakura works from all schools can be quite alike, with some subtle kantei point deciding which pile a blade gets thrown into. 3. Who were the teachers of Etchu Norishige, Soshu Hiromitsu/Hasebe Kunishige, O-Sa.

Kunikane was actually gimei-ed; today he is not considered anything famous, but back in the days they were quite respected. Naotane's school did quite a few imitations of their work. Even though the signature looks quite different, it has a proud and meticulous execution. I have a bit of issue with how high contrast the masame lines are. I thought that was something associated with shinshinto/lesser/later generations, but don't quote me on this. Great habaki. Kirill R.

Straight stick is by default something like Kambun shinto, especially with such nakago.

I think its different for koto vs. Edo. In Muromachi one can accept a lot of variation when it comes to the signature. If the signature is consistent with the general way the school signed, one generally accepts it as is. I've seen plenty of comments with papered Muromachi blades even without it being stated "signed as" in papers - the signature is unusual and can still be spurious. But no one can prove its spurious. Maybe third or fourth generation Soshu Masahiro did sign it this way occasionally. Just because there are known seven or nine of his signatures that are different does not mean there can't be tenth one which is of its own type. Even with high profile names of the early koto, if its consistent with the school's style and the blade is right for the school, it will more likely be accepted rather than not. There is a large variation in signatures, like Bizen Nagamitsu or Tomonari etc. etc., and no one knows how many generations do these variations correspond to. I would not refuse to purchase something that definitely looks ko-Bizen even if the signature has every single stroke pointing in the wrong direction compared to something in a book. Pity you almost absolutely never see something this old and unpapered but still paperable. For everything from Edo period or even earlier smith known for a consistent, single generation signature, anything unusual is usually no papers.