Rivkin

... 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.

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