Rivkin

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.

I have to admit this caused me to pause for a little since it is a hard one to dispute - you'll show an example of reattributed Masamune and it can be said to be [3] or [4]. Then I thought - what is the most famous Masamune blade today? Well, it is got to be Fudo Masamune, the only unquestionable singed, published in every single text by every single author. One problem - looks saiha in hand. And was certified as such in the 19th century before it was accepted as the only, unquestionable, canonical, signed Masamune. One of the reasons you don't see much in its photographs, nor would you ever see good photographs of it. Just a highly personal, ignorant and questionable opinion. Dr. Kirill A. Rivkin

I can only speak from my experience - and it is that green papered swords to Masamune or Sadamune are frankly quite uncommon. I don't think there are any on yahoo right now or have been for at least couple of months (my memory banks don't go further). It is extremely seldom that those would come without sayagaki. That was sort of a custom in 1970s - if it is a scary name you should get sayagaki. I see that often sayagaki predates the papers. Anything coming today stand-alone with a very top name and just green papers is strange (but I guess Americans were not getting sayagaki in 1970s, as a rule). I would not call buyers of such things idiots. I don't remember if I ever bought something like this so simply can't speak about the experience. But then again I personally don't see this very often (at all) with really top koto names. Its always green + sayagaki (no, Muramasa is not the top name, no matter what Fujishiro's book says). Or green + other papers. Sayagaki of Dr. Honma I would very personally put higher than the current shinsa - but only if it comes with papers, as I've seen plenty of "standalone" saya with his writing married to utsushi. Sayagaki of Tanobe-sensei will rank above current shinsa. I think its a general feeling among those interested in koto. Sayagaki of Dr. Sato is most common, and there are those reflecting more traditional judgement. But I've never seen Masamune or Sadamune with his writing being "fake-fake", or "bad-bad". You might get Norishige, Uda T., Naotsuna, maybe something weird like Kinju. Sometimes there is a hint in writing the judgement is just copying older register, sometimes writing is passionate and then if its from before 1976 I would take as a strong suggestion there is something important there, irrespective whether the modern shinsa sees it exactly like this or not. Also sometimes he has to be taken very literally. Now with other sayagaki its pretty much hit and miss. There are some that are quite important by themselves, even if the blade is agh, and then there are some that look unreliable but the blade looks ok. In all these cases I strongly prefer to see green papers with sayagaki rather than just sayagaki. Makes a case its not a fake, married saya etc. But the detailed attribution will tend to be in a debatable area, and the judgement of the current shinsa is just the opinion of the current shinsa. If you are not a dealer looking for a resale - and there is nothing wrong with that, but it defines the interest level. Otherwise there is a good chance you'll eventually live with your sword to hear how there were issues with "yellow" papers (top names, obviously) and how you need to repaper them to new, "black papers". Or maybe all Juyo judgements made before 1983 will be downgraded to "older Juyo" that needs to be recertified to be included in a new, groundbreaking register of superior swords. Were not green papers supposed to be final and correct replacement of those questionable judgements issued by NBTHK during the occupation just to save sword from confiscation? And before that, there were Honami generations, each supposedly more final and correct than others.

Thank you very much for your vote of confidence, but both of those are much too long for a forum message. What I would like to add is probably my personal opinion that some dealers who invest personally rather than work with consignments see the problem in a very different light. A good dealer does not "like" swords because when you like something more than others do, you are going to overpay. He looks at a resale point. Which is for him all about papers. So, say there is tanto Sadamune that goes for 2mil with green papers (and with good sayagaki this would be sort of a bottom price in Japan). He thinks - ok Sadamune:Nobukuni:Shimada is a lineup to expect with this particular sugata (say its a somewhat later one), and since it does not sell with modern papers it probably papered to either Nobukuni or Shimada. So its 60% chance I will have unsgined Nambokucho Nobukuni (say 0.9-1.6mil) and 40% - Shimada den (0.6-0.. Basically I am being robbed blind out of 70% of my investment since around the top names the payout scale is very nonlinear and small downgrade can push the price down 10 times or more easily. But you look at this from a collector prospective, it might be "I am buying Sadamune with issues. I still personally think its a great piece, and I am getting it literally at 6% of what it did cost at the peak. It comes with a risk that it was downgraded for some reason. The next generation shinsa might see it differently, or I need to invest in better polish. I might have problems reselling it since people on the forum will say - Sadamune on ebay?? Ha!. Financially it might be not the safest move, but neither is collecting per se". In the end it comes down to how much one likes the sword. If its Sadamune level like - grab, run, hide.

As always I look at the message board and find exactly the opposite stated from what I've seen for many years in real life. Probably saw and see once a year a sword with green papers going for 4 mil yen at dealer's auction. Yes, it would have Dr. Honma's sayagaki, maybe published, maybe daimyo, and maybe even early daimyo provenance. Why it does not have "modern papers"? Well, maybe it got Shizu Kaneuji attribution instead of o-Sa or Naotsuna, which it had per green papers and every other attribution. Maybe the owner did not bother. Maybe he died last week and the dealer was asked to sell them asap. This kind of things unfortunately are very common today in Japan - you suddenly get mass mail that 90 blades are out on sale, and they are basically as is. Yes, sayagaki might play a bigger role for blades with green papers, as per I've never seen any issue (except they might not repaper with the same attribution) witht those signed by Tanobe-sensei. Now green papered sword going for 2mil - this one happens in Japan every month. I wish there would be piles of swords with green papers to Sadamune going for chop change - but alas never seen them ever. If its a big koto name, there is a high chance it will paper to something very close to it. Maybe there will be a downgrade, but you take Masamune Juyo and send it to get Hozon, and well you might get a downgrade as well. There are exceptions like Muramasa, but that's a special troublesome case. And I have to admit to buying quite a few of those unpapered souvenirs, unfortunately not for a chop change (where can I have them at souvenir prices??). Mostly it turns out to be the loss (obviously dozen people looked at this blade before and thought that's not worth taking a chance), but sometimes it comes out an interesting blade which gets good papers (if papers are being the goal).

I lived in Japan for quite a few years and that is not my observation. Some dealers (Ginza Choshuya, Sokendo) will be in Juyo range, they will have plenty of TH, but other papers will be scarce. Some will never touch NTHK etc. Level below in price you'll find whole bunch of varied papers, including greens. Aoi Art, whatever the store name that was just across the corner from him, Kimura san etc. etc. etc. Probably one out of ten, twenty will be unpapered, if you go to a simple antique store, then you'll see basically half are unpapered. Whole bunch of naginata, yari, shinto looking wakizashi, out of polish tanto. For a dealer having "current" NBTHK papers is a definite plus. Is it a real plus in terms of authenticity is a much more involved problem. Dr. Kirill A. Rivkin

Prof. Arnold, you touch all the good points, but just to add a few very personal considerations: a. There were quite a few utsushi of Kiyomaro, Masahide and a few others ordered and then "resigned" by a gentleman in Fukuoka. Some still have green papers, some however come with new papers. In both cases often the papers were issued to the original blade and then "passed on" to copies. Some actually, if you file down the signature, are very high quality examples of by now well known gendai smith. b. "Forged papers" in NBTHK language can be "papers issued by NBTHK personnel without shinsa or official registration". It goes for recent TH issues, it goes for the earlier issues as well. In both [a] and the issue concerns predominantly shinshinto and a few (Kotetsu, Shinkai) shinto artists. c. The main issue with green papers is that judgement standards constantly shift. Not a problem if you collect signed and dated Bizen blades. Much bigger problem if you are in a business of selling early unsigned Soshu but with large "signature premium" due to particular attribution. Such blade getting Hozon in 1999 and getting Hozon today undergoes different judgment with different criteria. Green papers - there is yet another level of divergence, which btw does not mean that older standards were always better or worse. If you collect Masamune you must be ready that the assessment will always be somewhat shaky, as there are really no blades that combine all 3-4 of his main characteristics, usually there are just two. You can get ko-Uda in the worst, slightly better off with Shizu Kaneuji, possibly Norishige, probably Soshu Yukimitsu, but it can be Hasebe or Naotane if the blade is believed to be later, and so on, and so on. d. There is far bigger problem with Juyo blades from late 1970s, which no one wants to get into open since the market depends on unshakable belief in permanence of Juyo attribution. Some late 1970s judgements were "optimistic" in terms of attribution, but often it is just average old blades (ko mihara) in poor condition still having Juyo. And on top of that there is whole bunch of fears - "if this blade were real, if would not just get NTHK papers for it", "I heard it is a troubled Juyo, which was given to a dealer outside of Japan because it failed to get Tanobe-sensei's sayagaki" etc. etc. etc. Dr. Kirill A. Rivkin

I'll have to apologize before the topic starter - instead of a simple answer to his question, he got himself into God knows what. But predictable "God knows" - friendly vulgarities, which evolved into discussion of who is the annointed expert. I have to say it is definitely not me. I was at one time asked to produce a review article "Metallurgy in the Orient in the XVI-XIXth centuries" in two parts, first for steel and armaments, and second for fittings and decorative techniques. I felt inadequate to such monumental undertaking, but did produce a long writeup as a result, to emphasize some points regarding the Middle Eastern weaponry. I have to admit there were still quite a few obvious errors in the resulting work, some of which I tried to correct in consequent books, and the subject of Japan per se was purposely diluted there, since there are very good works specializing on it, and my contribution there is quite negligible. So I am not surprised it did not make into the esteemed private libraries. Apparently, works of my colleagues or papers and books which I consider fundamental to the subject did not make it either. A surprising fact, but again my knowledge of Japanese historical metallurgy is rather rudimental, so there might be other, more fundamental works out there. I can even see that some of my statements made here are kind of hasty - ofcoarse they used gold in late Edo, but also learned to imitate it well, whether in fittings or in makie. In fact it was much more widely available then during the early Edo and Goto supremacy, which is discussed substantially, especially in publications on lacquer. What surprises me still is that the questions being addressed here are not that subjective. If there was a relatively pure copper used in early Edo (obviously it was available in Meiji), not gold or iron, but copper - there should be a publication backing it up with chemical analysis, with just 0.3% of lead I assume? I am not aware of such fact, but as was said, I am not an expert. I can even imagine that a few such items, for whatever reason, could have been produced and denying theoretical possibility of such fact is impssoble; however to say that such production was widespread is something that I think has to be backed with extensive direct confirmation. Again, I am sure that for some communities a sayagaki will suffice instead. It is even harder to dispute away the use of Sado copper, or copper obtained from China by means of trade, or even related circulation and re-processing of Chinese coin in Japan - both China and Japan had decent beaurocracy, the paper trail left regarding these phenomena is substantial, and has been studied extensively. The materials involved were analyzed in the publications I mentioned. And so on, and so on, and so on. But again, I concede my total and utter defeat in the face of the expert credentials of people present and very thankful for the learning.

Ito is sort of modern, as is same, and its not of the highest grade. Late edo lacquered saya, rather nice, but it was not born together with fk and menuki. Fk and menuki are late Edo and below average. Poor condition and not great work to begin with. No, I don't think it will paper if papers are desired.

Well, I've got to say that the manners exhibited at the forum, as is the knowledge, are indeed truly exceptional, with this I have to agree. Thank you very much.

Regarding the import of Chinese copper, much of it was done in terms of coin. There are number of articles, including those referring to sword trade of Japanese in China. For example, the book "Fountain of Fortune: Money and Monetary Policy in China, 1000-1700". While export of copper coin was in general banned by China, a special exemption was given to Japanese; it is hard to ascertain exact magnitude of the export (because various commodities were sometimes counted in equivalent "strings" of copper coin), but we are talking about 100-200 tonns per mission (as per data from 1433, 1477 etc.). Much of Edo coinage and utensils from westernmost Japan has W - which is considered to be absent from Japanese sources and therefore it is often proposed that such items were made from Chinese or Korean copper. Regarding the wide variety of Japanese alloys, I don't think they smelted pure iron with pure copper with pure arsenic. Just like in the rest of the World, they probably smelted different alloys from different sources, producing even larger range of alloys. I never said those were completely random. You have a specific technological process, specific source, you'll get certain alloy. But diversity of sources, and different technologies were driving diversity of copper alloys. None of which was purely random, nor copper with just 0.5% Pb (or the best copper in the World). And only part of it came from copper mines per se. Much was imported; quite a few alloys came as a byproduct of silver and gold production. Sado was the source of substantial percentage of copper in Japan (silver and gold mines were often combined with copper production). It was also a source of much copper coinage in Japan after genroku. There is a world of nihonto collectors and martial artists, and it has its own experts, books, postulates. There is a world of metallurgists, which is separate, and there is a world of historians, yet another one.

Since outside personal collecting, I specialize on Asia more than Japan, so I might be missing something, but... How large a percentage of copper alloys in say genroku Japan came from copper ores per se? How large a percentage was imported? How large a percentage was produced as a byproduct when processing product of silver mines, and most importantly - Sado gold mine? Which one of these should be taken as Japanese copper? My take would be that the only place where I can see more or less substantially refined copper is Sado. Every bit of gold was taken out, leaving a combination of copper with some iron. Since much of coinage was done locally, we can monitor different copper alloys from different sources. With caveats that there was no such thing as "Standard Japanese copper", and in fittings one tends to find wider range of compositions than in late Edo coins. So I took a few random books/preprints and looked at the analysis of Edo period copper items. One of the more common ones: Nagasaki coinage, 23.5% Cu, 3.53 % Pb, 0.75% Fe etc. etc. Kitada "Beauty of Arts". Just for the heck of it, a Korean Haedong Tong-bo coin 6.1% Cu, 1.4% Sn, 0.5% P Very typical medieval alloys.

Kurt, at the risk of causing (again) wast panic, I will have to say - nearly all copper used in Japan is an alloy. Either of gold (0.5-2%) and copper with other elements or of silver (5-10%), copper, arsenic etc. Sometimes one finds other combinations - Copper-Selenium, especially on exports from the Continent etc. It is a typical medieval thing - pure copper was not obtained, nor was there a reason to, instead "naturally occuring" alloys were used. Then depending on patination technique one could get the color gamut ranging from yellow to red to brown and even black, though the latter was complex to say the least. For "complex" colors, the two alloys mentioned above (the second typically coming from silver mines) could be mixed in arbitrary quantities, producing a vast range of copper-based compositions. The specific color would be obtained by emphasizing specific oxides (Cu2O for example), or particles of gold (combined with Cu2O they absorb both blue and red portions of the spectra, giving you black; gold is much easier to control and in general more stable) or silver (similar effect, but silver has oxidation complications; well not everyone is Goto) with specific diameter (up to 10nm?), which one could obtain for very aggressive patination schemes (shakudo). If you were Edo Goto, you did have access to some high quality gold and could enrich such alloys further to 5-10, or even 20% gold if you wanted to. Though chances are 20% gold alloys would not undergo artificial patination and be sold as reddish gold of sorts. This tsuba though is late enough it might not have any gold at all. When they studied the archives of Tokyo Art Institute, where a number of the top Bakumatsu-Meiji tsuba makers resided, they found that by the late Edo they employed much more pure and repeatable compositions, and avoided using gold at all (very expensive). Even black kinko alloys they had were often conventional European-like niello! In some publications it is referred to as "Tokyo Art shakudo" or "Natsuo shakudo". So chances that this tsuba has much gold in it are very slim.

Nice little tsuba, probably early XIXth or late XVIIIth century. Hard to name the exact school at this point... I would guess that the cormorant fishing scene denotes a specific area known for such activity and the poem in grass script alludes to it as well. More often such allusions are a bit more enigmatic... However it is common association in Japanese Art - specific view, specific dish and specific poem(s) all alluding to a particular location. Cormorant fishing is still practiced today both in China and Japan, however it is a touristy business. In Japan there are few places to see it (yes, there is a live fire involved); they are often filmed for documentaries and though accomponied with a typical commentary "for thousands of years residents of .... practiced cormorant fishing; today the tradition still lives...", the "fishermen" are simply locals hired to entertain tourists. Regarding boy's swords, the ones I saw were mounted very simply. Even with somewhat expensive kinko fittings, they were still simplistic enough, and probably disposable.

I think its a complex issue. First, in Meiji there was no need for fittings except for a few new rich and foreigners. These markets produced demand for some strange things that are poorly thought of today, however some of the pieces are among the best Japanese work. Second, dating fittings is much more uncertain than swords. Many were not signed, the vast majority - undated. Oei vs. Momoyama vs. early Edo - is ongoing controversy; there are some examples with established provenance to shrines, but overall the evidence tends to be murky. Metallurgy can help (ko-kinko shakudo is different from Goto school, which is even more different then Natsuo etc.; Iron is also somewhat different), but it is destructive and outside of larger Tokyo Art/Hitachi Metals Co there is not a lot of work done on the subject. Third, there is a large class of iron and kinko fittings attributed to Muromachi or Momoyama. They tend to not carry autograph premium (i.e. aside from first generations of Goto, makers tend to be unknown and never will be known) and can be had for reasonable money. In fact, they can often be found as a steal in a pile of tsuba at a Japanese estate sale/antique dealer at look trade meetup, flea market etc.