Rivkin

Maybe a bit better. It matters a lot if its a prime level smith or very old sword, otherwise plus-minus. Yes, mumei ubu can be made and attributed.

NBTHK generally does not put "suriage", "o-suriage" etc. on papers. It is probably written "mumei (Takada)" and the rest is seller's narrative.

Its either o-suriage since it has one hole (meaning the original nakago is fully gone) or its ubu. Not with the best nakago finish, maybe moved hamachi and refinished, but mostly ubu. Hamon ending wide is not a reliable indicator of suriage unless its a very old sword or a smith who forged always with hamon ending sharp at hamachi. Sugata might help understanding whether its ubu or not, size-wise it is quite possibly near-ubu since at the time very long blades were uncommon.

I would be interested in buying, however can't offer much - and in the interest of fairness will state publicly why. The signature is near gone and I can't say anything about it, except it does not have strong Tsunahiro (is it even Tsunahiro? my kanji understanding is lacking) characteristics. The sugata is not typical for Tsunahiro lineage, which generally worked within the space defined by 1350-1380 Soshu tanto as defined by Hasebe/Hiromitsu/Masahiro. This is not even Sagami shape per se. Its tired as evident in horimono losses. Out of polish with fingerprints. Such papers are interesting for historic reasons but unfortunately when someone sells a tanto with them few assume it was inherited this way, and many - its a gimei that has been failed by modern shinsa. However it is an interesting old tanto which would be fun to hold in hand and try to kantei what it is. Can it be real Tsunahiro? I personally doubt it, but maybe it is, an unusual one. On a personal note - I like it. There is something about it which is appealing.

Thank you very much! I don't think I see modern NBTHK papers being generous with the name Kanezane assigned to mumei swords. I found online a few NTHK examples, but otherwise it feels like Kaneyoshi, Kanekiyo, even Kanetoshi are the names of choice.

I think it illustrates the point how subjective the "knowledge" can be, especially in a short term. My father once wrote that the only "science" which relies heavily on deduction and formal proof is mathematics, and maybe because of that mathematics might not be a "science" per se - instead of generating knowledge it converts it between equivalent representations. Some of which are arguably more useful than others. Other fields remind me of famous economics paper by a conservative Nobel prize winner which demonstrated strong correlation between nation's debt and GDP growth... except the growth part was dominated by zero debt countries like Somalia. To this point, I would address the issue of "chikei" in a bit different manner. Why use yet another term related to a nie formation? The reason might be is that very high contrast hada with wide black lines can be formed in multiple ways. It can be that the steel has different amount of carbon (high tends to be dark grey) or slag (in polished steel aluminum oxide produces black and phosphorus - deep black color). It can be that its due to martensite formation with a specific size, which does create characteristic black lines, i.e. "chikei". Therefore Houju hada while also black-striped is not seen as per se an advantage since many believe it has considerable "slag content" (though it was never tested afaik), but while in some poor images Norishige might look similar, more often than not it considered a superior steel since the black colored lines are formed by chikei. Overall, chikei is a telltale sign of upper end work, often present in Soshu and some other schools. In a related manner, Inazuma when you just look at it, something "similar" can be produced by folding lines, but if it comes with nie concentration it becomes a sign of upper-upper grade Soshu work.

On the one hand: yes, show it to people and you can probably submit it for papers as is. I have some doubts its a proper Enju signature. Not nearly enough to call it gimei, but enough to scratch my head. Especially since there were other Kuniyoshi smiths (including as strange as it sounds non-meikan ones) and it needs to be investigated a bit more. Sugata-wise its either early Muromachi or mid-late Kamakura. In any case it looks like a solid piece. Seeing boshi in detail + maybe some work if hamon/hada are visible would be helpful.

That is a rare certificate from an early year! Unfortunately, its appraisal is not too trusted nowadays, however it does not come out as crazy. It is a Muromachi tanto; being mumei it can different attributions. I don't think Kanezane is a common attribution today - assuming it does have Yamato traits, maybe it will be attributed to Tegai Kane... (i.e. Kaneyoshi), with a thick kasane and sugata like this Tosa Yoshimitsu is a possibility. Unfortunately, the polish state is not great so its all guesses. Nevertheless out of polish, Muromachi Yamato or related ubu blade is a strong possibility. I can't see how large are condition issues re mounts, but definitely it is the mounts that will impact the valuation considerably. Its an honest late work.

If you can't see a hamon but you can somewhat see hada when looking at an angle its a bad sign. It was probably a magnificent sword but how much of it can be brought back by fresh polish is a big gamble. It can come out well, it can be that what it is right now is the best it will ever be.

Its a rare writing of Yasutsugu (康次) for Sagami lineage, so there is only one entry in Meikan which ends around Tembun (1500-1520)... I am a bit surprised how the blade looks like and don't quite recognize this kind of papers.

Masamune is probably Muromachi Masahiro or the likes (they usually are), this one is probably sue Bizen, but both are wild guesses.

Congrats - the boshi I think is typical for Bizen circa 1510-1550, and nothing else contradicts the conclusion, quite a few things are consistent. Unfortunately its not signed but the attribution is likely to be along the lines of Sukesada, Katsumitsu or Kiyomitsu smiths.

Not being very knowledgeable on Korean weapons but: Its a complex question since there is a variety of blades and koshirae styles. If its blade-wise, first thing I personally look at is nakago. Continental swords in Japanese style are more likely to have either completely flat or at least very low shinogi profile in this area. Contiental tsuba has a rectangular opening, which underlines the difference in nakago profile. Yokote is often shaped differently on continental even if it mimics the Japanese style well, and kossaki proportions are generally expected to be different. Polishing is significantly different and generally jigane is not well accented, but this is often not obvious since there can be no polish remaining. Etc. Etc. Etc. In regards to tsuba - often similar to Hizen Nanban, some examples are very large tosho/katchushi-like pieces, but there was a huge variety of styles throughout the many centuries. Late 16th, early 17th century examples often do have kogai/kozuka ana but they are not functional (very narrow or curved), related to period fashion and appear more often on soft metal (uncommon) examples.

Different people. Long lineage of Soshu Hirotsugu with a typical Sagami Hiro name, and a short lineage of Hizen Hirotsugu which is related to it but Kambun+. Entirely possible a student of Hizen Hirotsugu - unrecorded Hizen Hirofusa. Seen dozens of unrecorded smiths, currently own a few. Somewhat more common with periods like 1700 when many smiths were forced to abandon trade and not much information exists about them.

Here Hozon does unusual thing - identifies the period and the province and the name. This suggests to me its not a Meikan smith, but they felt he is important enough to identify correctly rather than just say "worthy of preservation, shinto Hirofusa". When did he work - is a good question, boshi and sugata can help. It could be that one can see Tegai elements here - nijuba etc, but first its done in itame blade, second its structured a bit differently - as a large, well defined gap within the hamon, something which became really popular with Inoue Shinkai, its possible this blade is 1660-1700. Also I think one can consider options its a style of Hizen rather than Hizen province proper.

Looks like serious stuff.

I would put 1c in trust in any Japanese seller's stock. Their culture in 99% its on you to understand what happens. On the one hand - its seems to be a minor enough name to wonder why would someone fake it. On the other - the signature is poorly written. Can be that it reflects the smith's skill, but generally short, condensed signature with strikes from different kanji literally piling on top of each other - is a very bad calligraphy. It gives an expression the person could not place "tenten" appropriately for the life of it.

Yes, I had a story just like that with them. It was tax coded as antique (no customs duty) which I confirmed over the phone. People in the actual office refused to release the item unless I pay customs duty. Month later I am getting a bill in the mail for a completely different sum with the notice nothing was paid. I simply threw out the bill.

The problem is that sugata is "classic", which can by anything and not too specific to any period. Wide hamon and it looks like its a heavy blade suggest Edo (possibly late Edo) or later. But its a speculation.

Without seeing the nakago or boshi its a lottery.

Very low resolution. No boshi picture etc. But its Japanese of some age.

My words should not be seen as a real judgement, but the writing to me looks subpar, pressure is uneven and curved lines have pauses/changes in direction which are characteristic of someone guessing what the hell is he writing. Otherwise this is a custom shaped end of shinto or quite possibly shinshinto waki.

This guy broke two main rules of a museum curator: a. When taking an item replace it with a copy. In this case its almost impossible to prove something happened and you can always claim what was sold outside is a poor man's copy. b. Never sell the stuff yourself on ebay. Have a wife drop it off at the local antique store, sell it to collectors you know, put it in auction as a property of a deceased gentleman, but just don't place it out there for years in sight of people who know more than you do. Stealing at western museums is phenomenal in scale. One of many reasons the institutions don't hire from the "outside" crowd and have an iron code of corporate loyalty. Money-wise the greatest offenders are weird purchases at auctions - those are considered a "fair market", and as long as the board preapproved the purchase funds there is no questioning in regards of why its so expensive. In modern art its a nightmare since a piece of dirty cloth can easily cost 100mil dollars, but even in arms and armor there are purchases which raise eyebrows... 400k for a pretty but run of the mill Edo period's armor suit... Next, in large museums there is also always weird deaccesioning where an item is sold from storage funds as "19th century copy" and a year layer it becomes a star lot at Christies. Replacing with copies or simply carving out individual diamonds, unless the catalogue has a very detailed picture of how the item looks like - it does not even register on the internal rumors radar. The culprits next to never face the actual prosecution: if rumors are getting into press the curator in question simply retires. By comparison, a system practiced in Krakow and other similar places while looking medieval does yield some results. You are not just supposed to be from the "inside crowd", but a proper noble from a family connected to a museum for multiple generations. It gets a bit funny, like directors of the two major museums are husband and wife, and the husband is not a noble so everyone jokes about it, but at least they feel the pressure not to bring shame to the family and end in a nasty manner a guaranteed, respected, though poorly funded multi-generational profession. You would think the system to be anti-meritous; in actuality its complicated. For example, nobility controlled museums can easily hire a Jew for a second-line curatorial position, though he'll never become a chief curator. Compare this to western museums which remain notoriously resistant to this brand of people, unless a particular candidate has every single i crossed. Ideally, reserving main positions for nobility means the nobility is not inclined to consider lesser staff as competition, and instead is interested in the actual talent so the works produced by the department could add to the family's prestige and reputation. I've seen however also the reverse situation - nobility staffed museum sound asleep, producing the required quote of publications just like a typical "western" museum crowd - such and such sword, this long and wide, plus six paragraphs lifted from the wikipedia and finished with some complexly worded and utterly irrelevant summary. Its hard to say what's the best system - I think in the end the issue is that no social construct can regulate itself long term and needs an external evaluation... Generally, I would consider putting a nobleman with some evidence of brain and ambition in charge as a plus rather than minus. In my personal experience aside from a Russian "court" which can be quite insufferable, I had it significantly better with counts and ritters compared to a riffraff whose brain got fried from a mere fact they are a Curator sitting in what used to be a duke's chair.

If hotel is the main issue, one can arrange to borrow a museum's space though it will be much further to the east - there can be couple of good options in Krakow, smaller spaces in Warsaw etc. There is an issue things move slowly here - we were talking about running a high quality exhibit, but the results are so far disproportionate to the amount of alcohol I've consumed.

I don't know why its got into this topic, but it looks like modern-ish steel which is tempered roughly in sue-koto Bizen or Mino style, roughly but brightly polished, with a weirdly shaped nakago which looks like koto, possibly sue-koto, but is artificially patinated and has fresh sharp edges, with a writing which has many issues. I am bad at kanji, but this has vibes of Chinese calligraphy - thin, lots of strictly parallel lines, giving it a bit angled/squarish look. So my diagnosis is at best its sue-koto blade which was roughly-brightly restored and enhanced or its a modern product, though relatively well made. Yes, photographs can be deceiving and in real life it might look differently.