Rivkin

For the "functionality" argument, there is an observation. Nambokucho to Mid Muromachi Japanese sources are extremely rich in statisticss about how many people where killed-wounded by which weapon - as reports with these details where submitted with great frequency. At the time the greatest masters were nearly all producing tanto as their most valuable specialty. Some exclusively produced tanto and almost no daito. Yet the first soldier killed in battle with tanto is recorded only close to Onin war. Basically the entire Nambokucho not a single person was killed in battle with a tanto (another big surprise - naginata did not fare much better). Quite a few were drowned, stoned, burned, most were shot with arrows or chopped with swords. None killed with a tanto - which nevertheless was the most prized blade. So it must have been artistic from the very beginning. Europeans are practical. They produced grey, cheap, practical weapons. Kirill R.

That unfortunately will depend on the year in which NBTHK papers are issued. One of the issues with green papers is that in 1970s they would give a sword with Oei sugata papers to Masamune provided it was historically known as such and the features/quality where suggestive of such attribution. Justification sometimes was that sugata changes could have been gradual, with some production still done in conservative form, while other swords were already made in Nambokucho style. With so few period blades dated it is something that can be theoretically considered. Today's (post 2005) shinsa is scared of big names and any feature suggesting the blade is post 1345 with great likeness sends it to the lower tier. From Go you go to Tametsugu, or you can even get thrown all the way to Chogi. Which in turn is considered "lower" in part because until recently the best swords with such sugata would still be Masamune or Sadamune. And if it is as late as Oei sugata, then you are really "out of luck", since they simply don't have big Soshu names for the period - so even the first class blade (yes, they are quite rare with this shape) can be assigned "Naoe Shizu". Regarding Honami papers, pre Kachu generations are both seldom found and are a big boost to sword's price, but …. their scholarship is always a big question. Kirill R.

The question on why some smiths signed the blades and some did not is an interesting one, and my personal take is that it has to do with how production and weapon ownership was regulated under ritsuryo versus later systems. Bizen became important enough early on to directly pay taxes in kind to the central government and probably (Heian and Kamakura texts include almost no documents directly regarding the smiths) had some level of autonomy that most government-bonded and estate craftsmen did not. An artist is valued by 10% of his best work. Pre-modern craftsmen including famous painters, save hobbyists like Leonardo, all had to churn up a lot of good to average "school" work to keep them fed, and even Renoir accounts for 4000 paintings, out of which 3500 can be bought for under 200K each and are unoriginal (you see a lot of them in Japan and other post WWII collections), and about 100 will go upwards to 100 million. The problem in Japanese scholarship is that average works are typically taken from the master and given to later generations. In the past it was not unusual also to assign a prestigious name to a better piece with a simple argument that "X was very good and fully capable of copying the work that would normally pass as Y". The counter-problem is that there was a significant sugata change from Kamakura to Nambokucho - and because of that you constantly have clash of "experts", some papering much later pieces to Masamune based on their features and quality, while others insist on sugata-first approach and then in Kamakura Soshu there are simply no "small names" that one would send worse pieces to - the absolutely worst you can do money-wise is Norishige, which is obviously still one of the best names (and the one that is actually signed and dated). Another big issue is that Tenno, Ieyasu's and Toyotomi's items were never really reappraised, unlike weapons and art pieces of Europe which were all skeptically reevaluted between 1900 and 1950. So there are plenty of museum meito which are very strange for the names they carry. Kogarasumaru, Kusanagi, Fudo Masamune to name just a few, but the list is very long. Plus there was also a huge "realignment" of collection descriptions that happened between 1550 and 1650, at the end of which any decent Soshu work had a chance of being Masamune. Still nothing wrong with collecting gendai. Actually quite a few pieces there outshine the better shinshinto and even most Horikawa's work. I really appreciated an event hosted by Chris and Joe that had I feel couple of such tantos that were so good that one would probably have to go all the way to the heights of koto to find better ones - and even then the aesthetic would be so different, it is all debatable. There are books that claim that chokuto was the real pinnacle of Japanese craftsmanship (which I feel is very strange), there are some who really like ko-Bizen hada, others will argue that nothing beats Norishige's hada, which however aesthetically is absolutely the opposite of ko-Bizen, ko Aoe and the rest of the "dense" type. For myself it is all debatable, and not really "expert-enforceable". Kirill R.

Very-very personal and erroneous view. I would start by completely discarding "functionality" argument since it was never proven by anyone at all. Most Shinto blades have substantially less slag and smaller grain size compared to Kamakura masterpieces. It consistently comes up in analysis that compares the two. They also don't have fukure or ware 5 inch long, as some of the masterpieces. The whole argument about technological superiority, differential heat treatment and lamination making Japanese swords uniquely great was first advanced in late 1920s, 1930s - and according to it all swords in Shosoin were at the time re-classified as Japanese, since they all have these features. Regarding Bizen versus Soshu, how many first grade blades in great condition are out there? 200? maybe 100? Hasebe is a great name, but they produced many blades (big factory), including those having basically the crudest hada one can find. Their better works sort of "pull up" bad blades with this name one sees on sale every year. One seeks in Soshu something lying between Masamune/Sadamune and Hasebe/Hiromitsu/Akihiro, but also the best work in this category and in the best condition. It will look absolutely stunning. It will quite possibly have ware and maybe even fukure. There are quite a few who believe fukure to be kantei feature for Masamune (against say attribution to Norishige or Soshu Yukimitsu). And then most likely the blade one finds will be not be for sale for any money. Enjoy it for half an hour and go away. A major ware in Bizen is unusual, the quality is by far more consistent, the aesthetic is more repetative, can be less ambitious, with often not distinct hada, but great utsuri and impressive flame-like hamon. Soden Bizen can have both more ambitious hada and brighter ha, but it sort of style on its own, different from both Ichimonji and Masamune movements. With Yamashiro+ there is Shintogo Kunimitsu who is great, a few comparable other examples, ko Aoe can be impressive, but the rest are very hard to understand by people like me, tired, beaten up, simple, dim stuff that still makes it to Juyo and up. Especially in 1970s there were quire a few Rai, Mihara and the likes securing higher papers. One thing however - for all its supposed greatness, very few historically tried to repeat this style. Nosada was great in it, there is Hizen in Edo period, and almost no one to speak of in shinshinto or gendai. It had a very narrow window of popularity, at which point even Kyoto masters started to look first at Ichimonji and then to Soshu for inspiration. Kirill R.

Unfortunately I am a pontificator rather than hard worker in this aspect, especially with photographs like that. I would first start looking if there is a signature on nakago (looks like maybe there is?), and try to understand what it basically can be. How many characters, maybe deciphering one or two. For hamon+ in English Markus Sesko's koto kantei is a very interesting reference. Kirill R.

In most countries being a curator of Shosoin alone would absolutely forbid one from offering paid appraisals, save possible individual exceptions like being compensated for expert participation in a TV program. Kirill R.

... And the topic lives and lives. I think one of big caveats in answering this question is whether we are buying or selling. If you are selling in Japan, some will refuse to work with NTHK papers. But you can always put it through someone to auction or place it in a store that works with them, and until 10K USD it will sell. Probably with small penalty compared to modern NBTHK papers. Internationally, the penalty will be even smaller. So unless we deal with something expensive it is whatever papers are the cheapest or most likely to yield the attribution you want (which is largely a shamanic matter). If attribution is slam dank (for example, it is signed by average multi-generation smith with no lethal flows) - whatever is cheapest. The whole discussion about who is older, who is more popular, and who includes active dealers as shinsa judges is interesting but not strikingly important here. If we are buying than I see no way to make a definitive advice here. How much risk are you willing to take? What is your goal? Every collector develops over time a very personal system of "tells" which determine whether it is a buy or not. I would not touch anything sayagakied by Honami Koson with no papers. In my experience it all comes out as Shinto imitation. There are certain books, if it is published in one them I would almost certainly bid on it. No papers - good, less money to waste/. I am open to second-guess anything papered within past 2 decades to Uda by NBTHK since in my opinion it can be lazy-default judgement on non-canonical but possibly still high quality Soshu piece. Etc. But then I am not much of a collector. There are people who look at all of this as wasting time and money and playing lottery rather than buying good blades. They tend to collect tokujus. I strongly feel If one can follow this example, he will end up with mostly important blades. Kirill R.

Greg, the answer will differ from person to person. Two people walk into the same sword show come out with opposite experiences. Turns out they looked at different price levels, and then extrapolated differently what they saw. My very personal take is that in American segment when you sell, there is just no price level at which you loose by papering. You will have 1200$ tanto with papers sitting next to a somewhat better 900$ one - and the first one will likely sell faster. Even if its later generation of an average line, so there is no particular revelation in paper's context. One of the reasons is that the guy who buys the 900$ one will start running around the room asking people "how does it look?" and then someone will tell him there is hagire. Which papers are the best, which ones are to be believed - is a different can of worms. Hozon has distinction of currently being accepted at face value by all dealers. But any type of papers help, and in the US until you reach 10k and above the difference between papers' impact is small. There are obviously collecting areas where you will see people pulling out regularly 40k without any papers. But Nihonto world is quite not the same as any other weapon collectible though. A personal speculation - first and foremost it has about 10 times more participants than all other edged-antiques-based commercial markets combined. Second - say in Medieval European swords you have Academics, Curators and Dealers, and they all look at the subject somewhat differently. When these communities don't like each other that much, you sort of have competing points of view checking against each other. Nihonto was always 100% dealer dominated, with academic portion basically anemic, typically just dealers presenting themselves differently. Markus Sesko can be a significant exception and that carries a lot of potential. Good news with that you don't have bearded academians who live by mixing wikipedia with pretty pictures in exhibition catalogues but can't recognize an obvious fake. The level of "practical professionalism" in the community is quite high. Bad news no one gives the slightest damn about why Hojo's gifts where inscribed as such only in the 16th century, or what happened to the Tenno's collection in the 14th century, or how a knife maker in Kamakura can be descendant of Masamune unless the latter's son was Hiromitsu and then you might have a direct lineage through Tsunahiro. Add to this the fact that nihonto is not the passtime of upper classes by a long shot, and youget a range of behaviors. Cult-like "nihonto is the absolute steel", a battalion of titles "director and founder of ...", and well, why study it when you can paper it and then value it based on paper alone. Kirill R.

Not trying to be an expert, but it looks like a decent buy to me. Complete, made as a whole rather than assembled koshirae are never common. The blade is a regular example, but very often pretty Meiji tanto will have something like this. Were it from the last generation master it would be even more interesting for people like me - a sign that someone ordered a nice gift set sometime at the beginning of Meiji, both blade and koshirae (unlikely?). Sometimes there is a far greater difference in quality - Natsuo or Ichijo school mounts and a Meiji period fake. Congrats! Kirill R.

Not a tricky question at all. The blade is glassy looking with no attempt to emulate koto "things". Late production with very little hada-wise even were it in pristine condition. Polish - definite no. Papers - in the current market surprisingly things even of basic level do not sell without papers. Cheapest possible. The value is in koshirae mostly. Which is nice, the only thing I would be careful wiping it with too much water in winter since Meiji wood does not respond well to large changes in humidity or temperature. Kirill R.

Not trying to pass myself for an expert, but it does look Muromachi Bizen. With those the great financial question is simple - is it before or after 1480? If its later, unless we are dealing with Hikobei or Yosozaemon Sukesada it is unlikely to be worth much. And these two names are exceptionally rare and tend to be signed. So you can try to guess whether its their signature etc (unlikely?). If it does not look like typical Osafune signature underneath there, it is likely a post 1480 imitation which could have been done anywhere. You have all kinds of Mino people copying Bizen elements, you have something in Kaga, but it is not the same quality. If its pre 1475-1480, Osafune works from this period actually tend to be quite all right. Almost any name, and either of the two styles they used - suguha or ichimonji - can be very attractive. I would invest some time into looking how these "ichimonji" peaks look in detail (crab claws or not), which period the sugata matches the best etc. If it still looks like say 1410-1440, with me it would be a strong go polish-wise. Kirill R.

Later Edo generation is likely. Regarding the swordsmith. Kirill R.

Could easily be something like Mino Kanefusa sue koto. In general later tanto until bakumatsu-early showa I feel are seldom horribly bad. Kirill R.

The koshirae looks a good quality early Meiji or the very end of Edo work. There is damage, but that could be fixed. The blade appears to be in good condition, probably Shinto or later. Can't be said more without better pictures. An attractive package overall. "Was given" probably refers to a private citizen's gift. It is not state's level. Kirill R.

I am not with my library at the moment, but I own all three books - they are not that great on dragons. 金工美濃彫 and 美濃鐔随感 have couple of examples and that's it. The third one I remember less by heart, but I doubt it had more than couple of images. Sorry can't be more useful. Kirill R.

I think the first book will not be helpful since its mostly Tsuba. But even second and third will not cover this particular subject that well. Not really an expert, but I suspect this might not be Mino (too flat? hard to tell from a single picture) so a general work on kozuka+ can be a better guide. ko Mino texts tend to be more about their "floral" and "arabesque" motifs in my experience. Kirill Rivkin

On ko mino there is a good catalogue 美濃鐔随感 (2006) and it has later Mino as well. Items from there are mostly in private hands so you can buy them in Japan now and then. Kirill Rivkin

Sometimes a humble shimada just ages before your very eyes - and papers as Akihiro. I don't have a good proposal what to do with the "old" papers this being they case, I think most just toss them but a dealer accumulating a hundred of those in a lifetime could try to profit by selling them. For NBTHK "clubs" I thought the sole purpose of having them was promoting nihonto business-side . Sure there is probably some official statute about education, research and values involved, but then "John James, a polisher" is one thing, "John James, board of advisory of NBTHK northern Germany and founding member of NBTHK Bavaria, an honorary judge for all Germany polishing competition of 2018, traditional Master Polisher" is totally different. One does not born a Sensei, but one surely can arrange to be one.

Its interesting that as long as I remember lunch breaks at DTI, the conversation always goes to something like "say you have singed koto jo-jo-saku piece but hamachi is moved by an inch; how many times do you need to submit it to Juyo to get one with 80% probability, and how less money it will sell for in Tokyo market". That was always the thing that other collectors associated with nihonto community. You just never hear discussions about how hard it is to get one with this kind of utsuri or whether Akihiro is more interesting than Masamune - and whether the latter is actually a composite and of how many people that would be. Instead its 100th time repetition of who gets it right with price=function of (papers, signature, -discounts for various issues) and the ingredients that go into converting one color of papers into another. Even in NBTHK journal - I mean what was the last time there was an actual argument published there? One article attacking attributions, another defending? Every second article is reading a 19th century theologian - and some say Simon was actually the same person as the prophet Simon, and he got married at 431 of age and begoth Jacob, who relocated to Mutsu to study under Joshua and likely was a step brother of apostle John. There is sort of similarity with modern art market, where you get to hear never-ending discussions about which provenance is acceptable today, and which was declared passe, and how being in between will affect your Pollack. Kirill R.

Origami can be found offered for sale in Japan basically at all times at about 10$ a piece. Greens, TH, H. Discarded when better papers are obtained. Late Honamis at about 100$ a piece. Late Myochin armor origami about 200$ a piece. Early Honami can easily be in 500-2000 category. Nothing new here. Kirill R.

A personal ignorant and erroneous take: Kiyomaro's work has a lot of variation to it. There is also a very significant "signature premium" to his works which will accordingly depend on the exact signature in question and even more so on its absence. There are plenty of other smiths who have even greater difference between their best and worst works. Shinto period is ripe with examples where average daito from Mishina or even shodai Yasutsugu against some tanto they made as custom order will have little in common. Drastically different quality of hada. But Shizu is 100% a different issue. Enormous number of existing swords, that got grouped together by later dealers and assigned a (related) name so that buyers feel proud they own something made by "Masamune's student". Likely in reality made by at least a dozen different (but related) Masters from roughly the same period and roughly the same time. This is why we have so many "Kaneuji" or "Hasebe school" or "Nobukuni", but so few Zo, o-Kanemitsu, Yasutsuna or Chogi. It's not lazyness or "they were all destroyed by Mongols". Even later, Hankei, Horikawa, Kotetsu, Nosada etc. ad infinitum left us far fewer works than this workaholic "Kaneuji". Because they were individual smiths that each worked with a small team - and not some Kinai area Nambokucho period factories, one of which we choose to prescribe today as a single "Masamune's student". The difference is very pronounced when looking at sales in Japan. Every month very likely there is going to be one pre-Muromachi Kaneuji sold somewhere. About the same number per year as ko-Uda or Yamato Tegai, maybe a little more, maybe a little less - hard to say, but the numbers are comparable to any major school-wide attribution for the period. And then take some popular Osafune Master who actually signed his works - and you'll see his blades maybe once-twice a year. That's basically the same for most individual smiths - 1-2 offers per year is normal for someone who was actually famous and did make a lot of blades. Kirill R.

For blades per se a major exhibit in Japan is probably the best opportunity, but for permanent collections I would strongly vote for Kurokawa Institute of Ancient Cultures (wherever it is exhibited at the moment) as the best hands down for full polish great condition money-can't-buy pieces. Fushimi Sadamune can be of the best blades altogether. O-Mishima is interesting if one looks for even older pieces. Toyama private museum is very good, but basically Juyo-money-can-buy range rather than one of a kind meito things. All three are koto places and not too great when it comes to Edo period. But all other museums are probably either exhibit too little on permanent basis or have other issues. Atsuta shrine for example - bad light, can be Muromachi heavy (rotating exhibit). Nearly all western museum collections are just plain bad when it comes to blades. Great kinko fittings though. Kirill R.

Not bad.

Since the topic seems to have consistently attracked attention for the past weeks, I'll try to throw a very subject, erroneous and ignorant opinion. Yes, there are issues with shinsa experts not living in a bubble and thus accessible and possibly influencible, but that happens in every area with every collectible. There are issues that any opinion even by foremost experts, that is rendered in 10 minutes, will probably have 5% chance of being quite wrong. How many times you have pneumonia xrays showing different things to different radiologists? A much deeper issue is that the existing classification of swords comes with a mirriad of inherited problems. Basically imagine you send a Soshu blade to three Edo period experts... One will look at it and say - great Soshu, must be Masamune. Another will say - yes, but Masamune is the father of Soshu, so his works must be very early, and might not be Soshu at all. Maybe he was Awataguchi before. So I will appraise this early blade with suguha as Masamune, but I will never appraise anything with o-kissaki to him. Another will say - well, it must have the Masamune's boshi. I don't mind it being in nioi, I don't mind it having o-kissaki, but why should I appraise anything as Masamune if the key features I have written down in my secret notebook are simply not there. Who is right? Good news if you are Edo dealer is that eventually you will get your thing papered to Masamune. Bad news if you are in 1960 Japan is that now you have a number of names literally invented from scratch during late Muromachi-Edo period - and they are all fancy names, but they are all of people who supposed to have died more or less exactly in 1345. And then there are other names, less invented, less fancy-pricy, but their lineage is sort of dead by 1395. So you have a first class Soshu blade, no sign of Hitatsura, just great basic example - but sugata is 1355. That's it, no million dollar appraisal for you. If its tanto, most likely you'll get Hasebe. You'll get lengthy paragraph in Juyo book saying it does not have any Hasebe features... Well, its got mitsumune... But what if a blade is tachi and sugata is clearly Oei? Well, in Edo period a good Soshu example from Oei period (they are rare but do exist) would be Masamune. And they simply did not create any fancy Oei names to give distinction to better period blades - because they had Masamune. Today this blade will go Naoe Shizu. Today you have myriad of blades going to Shizu Kaneuji, Yamato Shizu, Naoe Shizu, all the dealers selling them are writing how Kaneuji went one winter night to Kamakura and worked there with Masamune, sleeping next to his brother Kinju and disabled (how else could he made so fewer blades) cousin Kaneyuki.... While the simple fact is - these people are NOT real. Shizu Kaneuji is what you are going to get when you have a Nambokucho period blade placed somewhere between Soshu and Tegai. He is not a real person. Soshu Kaneuji who signed his works was first class Soshu smith who worked in a first class Soshu style. Shizu Kaneuji on the contrary - is a big fat bucket to throw blades in. Naoe Shizu is just a bigger bucket for Oei+ period blades. Many are problem blades. Some are stellar examples that were treasured for centuries. Hada and hamon of two papered Naoe Shizu can be as different as Chogi versus Yamato Senjuin. And at times one or another expert will look at such sword and say - well, especially with o-suriage, Oei sugata can be mistaken for Kamakura. And it is a nice blade. Maybe its Masamune after all. Kirill A.

Depends on school/date. Tembun is realistically associated with much of the cases where one gets three very different judgments. Kamakura-Nambokucho Soshu is another pit of confusion. Anything in bad polish, or badly made, or very high end but very custom pieces (unsigned shinto utsushi of Sadamune) will also be difficult for anyone to appraise and will yield random names. On the opposite side, unsigned Yamato Hosho or Shintogo Kunimitsu, quite a few Bizen works, maybe even shodai Bizen Yukimitsu will always paper sort of the same, no matter when and with whom. Kirill A.