Jussi Ekholm

Unfortunately to me the one with red background seems to be signed 備州長船清光 (Bishū Osafune Kiyomitsu). Kiyomitsu smiths were very prominent during late Muromachi. One thing that might be taken into consideration is that it is common for us to call a gimei for a big name smith, while there could have been other smiths signing the same way. Like for example for Kanemitsu we will easily not pay too much focus on Kanemitsu signed katana like the one in this thread as it does not be a work of Nanbokuchō Kanemitsu. Well that does not maybe make a huge difference to most if it would be by unknown Muromachi Bizen Kanemitsu or a gimei. I just think the Japanese sword appreciation is extremely top heavy as they are the ones featured in almost every reference.

I would agree with the view that Jacques has on this. I would think it would most likely be late Muromachi Bizen sword, wheter actually someone named Kanemitsu that I cannot say. However I would think the sword is in original state. I tried to do quick sketch with paint how I would expect it to look originally in fittings if it would have been machi okuri at your line, of course it is just a rough sketch to give an idea that I have in my mind. To me the hole placement looks perfectly normal now in current state, if it would have been machiokuri then the original hole would have been unusually close to the machi. . I do have some amazing resources on Bizen swords, however I have not been able to find a reference signature of any late Muromachi Kanemitsu. I am extremely grateful for this thread as I tried to search them and ended up discovering absolutely massive Nanbokuchō naginata by Kanemitsu that I was not aware of before. Finding items like that in Japan makes me very happy. One "cursed" thing about smith lineages where there are extremely famous ones is that then many later generations can fall into obscurity.

Here is a tachi by Bizen smith that is dated 1435 Here are some Muromachi ones that I found online. Bungo katana: https://www.e-sword.jp/sale/2013/1310_1045syousai.htm Bungo tantō: https://www.toukenkomachi.com/index_en_tachi&katana_A021018.html Very little info on this: https://n-kosen.com/item/3647/ Out of polish: https://buyee.jp/item/jdirectitems/auction/q1206573915

There is as Morimitsu (守光) lineage in Bizen Kozori group that extends into Muromachi. I have just few examples of Nanbokuchō/Early Muromachi items by them, as I don't record older, however I believe the lineage continued into later Muromachi. Morimitsu (守光) is actually pretty rare name, when you look at Meikan or Sesko, there are only very few smiths that used the signature in general.

I think for this sword NBTHK and Aoi Art have a differing viewpoint, pretty much the polar opposite views. NBTHK specifies in the paper that sword is ō-suriage and Aoi states that they see the sword as almost ubu. Unfortunately I cannot say which one is correct, and I could see both as plausible opinions by just seeing few pictures. Unfortunately I just have seen this in Jūyō book and now at Aoi website so I don't have it in any other sources. NBTHK can also judge suriage mumei blades as tachi but for that to happen I would assume a certain amount of original nakago must be present for that to happen.

In my opinion the tang was most likely signed as, Bishū Osafune (Insert smith here) 備州長船□□. It does not feature the common Gorōzaemon signature, 備前国住長船五郎左衛門尉清光.

It seems like an interesting sword. Gassan signatures are usually located around the original hole on the tang. So I would think the lowermost hole is the original one, or it has been very slightly cut completely off. Now as the current length seems to be c. 73,5 cm and to me I would assume the sword has been cut down something in between 10-15 cm or so, so in original form it could have been c. 85 cm blade. The sword seems to have a large kissaki, which is throwing me off a bit, as almost all of the old Gassan tachi and katana in my references have small/smallish kissaki. I think I could only find 1 reference with a large kissaki: https://www.nipponto.co.jp/swords2/KT218912.htm To me the sword is a plausible Muromachi period Gassan sword. The long length and large kissaki are few things that are throwing me off a bit as I cannot find similar reference item.

While maybe not as sexy as Jūyō submission I would re-try the Tokubetsu Hozon first even if intending to send the sword in for Jūyō. Mumei swords can always get different attributions depending on the shinsa, so I would think that is always worth a try. I know if I would be living in Japan I would definately try to buy and resend some mumei swords in hopes of scoring big attribution. Unfortunately for us outside Japan it is way more complicated to send the sword in. Of course there is always the human bias mixed in, as I probably wouldn't re-send a very good mumei attribution because the new one might be a lot worse.

Just a personal thing but I would focus only on the one with brown handle, and in that only for the blade (perhaps the guard [tsuba] might be mildly interesting too, depending on several factors). That is the only sword that seems interesting to me but to be said I am extremely narrow focused person and my view is not the normal view. I feel as a more general view the lot can be bit interesting with a lot of variety, of course lots of things will depend on the asking price.

My guess is 山本武蔵守 Yamamoto Musashi no Kami and rest of the signature is cut off.

Here are 4 Jūyō swords by Gorōzaemon Kiyomitsu that are currently for sale or have been in the past. Jūyō 15 - item 148: https://buyee.jp/item/jdirectitems/auction/r1205155585 Jūyō 15 - item 149: https://asahitoken.jp/contents/01_token/details/token-A/A_sd406.html Jūyō 45 - item 91: https://www.touken-sato.com/event/katana/2015/10/K-kiyomitsu_gorozaemon-01.html Jūyō 13 - item 121: https://www.token-net.com/juyotoken/juyo-20230501.html

The original shop is asking 3,600,000 yen for the Hosokawa Masayoshi At shop: https://bizenya-katana.com/?thoken=作陽幕下士細川正義造（刻印）-2 At Yahoo: https://buyee.jp/item/jdirectitems/auction/w1123570814 Just to be noted that some Japanese dealers do not deal internationally.

I believe it is authentic and among the longest Yasutsuna tachi in existence today. It was featured as a reference item in 2019 Kasuga Taisha Yasutsuna & Ko-Hōki exhibition book. In the brief text for the book it is mentioned to have been shortened c. 10 cm making the original length of c. 90 cm. It was also in Japan in 2022 as part of The Heroes exhibition: https://shizubi.jp/exhibition/20220702_theheroes/220702_01_eng.php However I believe it was not among the swords that NBTHK authenticated for Boston Museum in 1976:

I must say your Sukesada looks like a wonderful sword, I am personally liking it more that the Kiyomitsu. However the Gorōzaemon Kiyomitsu must be a wonderful sword in overall. I admit I do have a very soft spot for these late Muromachi "named" Sue-Bizen smiths. They made wonderful items, and I personally value them very high in appreciation. I think the quality in my eyes is often better than some of the cherished Kamakura smiths for example. Some items by Yosōzaemon Sukesada that I have seen in museums have been just stunning. I think Jūyō submission might always be a very complicated process, and to be honest I don't really have a clue what they are searching for. As was discussed in one other thread there are pretty much always "the usual suspects" that will pass regardless of the session. I was looking that Gorōzaemon Kiyomitsu has currently 16 Jūyō swords passed. The last one passed in session 65, unfortunately I haven't yet got that book. However the one before that one passed in session 45. So 20 year gap between passes, and I am sure some nice swords by the smiths must have been submitted within the 20 years. A rough guideline drawn from the last c. 15 years of results is that unless it is a "named" Sukesada (and among them most notably Yosōzaemon), your late Muromachi Bizen might have hard time passing through. Here are the total numbers of the 1500's Bizen smiths passed in last 16 sessions Jūyō 55 to 70. There are 5 Yosōzaemon Sukesada, 8 other named Sukesada, 7 non-Sukesada Bizen smiths from 1500's. So 20 1500's Sue-Bizen blades passed in total in 16 years. Now just for fun comparison in the same 16 years 39 unsigned Rai Kunimitsu blades have passed...

These are the ones I have info so far 96,1 cm - Jūyō 27 76,1 cm - Tokubetsu Jūyō 2 (Mutsu Shintōgo 陸奥新藤五) 74,2 cm - Jūyō Bunkazai - Seikadō Bunko 73,6 cm - Ise Jingū - Dedicated by Tokugawa Ieharu in 1769 73,4 cm - Tokubetsu Jūyō 7 70,5 cm - Tokubetsu Jūyō 12 68,8 cm - Private collection - Was featured in 2002 Masamune: A Genius Swordsmith and his lineage (4 Museum combination exhibition) 65,4 cm - Jūyō 20 For the Ise Jingū item it is explained in the book that mei is good but the upper portion of the sword is in rough condition. Text also states that this particular item is noted as Bizen Kunimitsu in Tokugawa Jikki. However it is now seen as work of Shintōgo Kunimitsu. Unfortunately I have never seen a Shintōgo Kunimitsu tachi in person.