Jussi Ekholm

I think there are always compromises that you need to make in sword viewing unless you can hold the actual item in person. I am happy I am not interested in small details so I can easily enjoy displays in museums & shrines even if the lighting for example would not allow viewing finer details. Most often we can only view one side of the item in museum displays. I really like the displays where you can view both sides but then the backside is often not lit well. I am not a photographer but I would think you would need several videos to capture the various details because you would need to film at various angles. As you will often need to perform lot of moving around and shifting positions when looking at items in museums. Sometimes the museums in Tokyo for example can be crowded and in good manners the view time for a sword can be bit limited in one go. That is why I love some of the rural shrines as they have items I love and I can spend the whole day looking at them if I want. One extremely good thing about oshigata is that the published ones are mostly made by experts with an expert eye. They can identify small details that I don't see or grasp and feature them in the oshigata. In ideal world I could see all the things featured in oshigata but in reality I am not at that level.

Maybe Bruce is referring to this 本阿 (花押) - Hona (Kao). I dont know my Honami lineages too well but I believe one doing the kinzōgan was family member 光温 in 1600's.

Video that Brano took of the sword is incredible. I have viewed the sword in its normal residing place and it is a wonderful sword. The video shows the details very nicely. I think sometimes with high quality video I can see more details than with my own eyes. However as for me the size and shape is the driving factor with swords, seeing them in person can create different effect than seeing oshigata, photos or videos.

I feel one big problem on featuring the item in publications is item accessibility. Some items just don't get much exposure to public and for some I think it might be a rare occasion even to sword experts in Japan to see the item. Aizu Shintōgo on the other hand is on the easy viewing side, as it is on display. I've seen it and it is remarkable sword even though I am personally not a huge fan of that very fine workmanship, I prefer rougher items with more "character". Of course hands on viewing of a such an item is probably only possible for very selected few experts.

Thank you for another wonderful article Brett. I have seen the Chōgi at Tokyo National Museum and it is marvellous sword. I wondered how a sword like this did not have a high national designation but as your other article explained that these former Imperial collection pieces are above designating them, it all makes perfect sense.

I believe it should be this Jūyō Bijutsuhin tantō.

This is excellent book as was said above. It offers some "hidden" insight on things that really cannot be found anywhere. There is so much interesting information in the book and it creates an image of how things were in past, I admit I have been scratching my head a lot when trying to understand some of the information provided by the book.

For me personally that sword does not make a huge impact of Nanbokuchō period, as it is small and slender sword. I do of course agree that NBTHK Ōmiya call might most likely be the most plausible one. If I would seek to get one Nanbokuchō period blade I would hope it would be "stereotypical" example. The huge swords were of course only a part of what was made during that time and plenty of normal sized and small swords were made during that period. Here are some reference items of wider swords that got attributed to Ōmiya and were cheaper than the offering in the OP and got sold somewhat recently. https://www.nipponto.co.jp/swords6/NT330431.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20240201012326/https://www.aoijapan.com/katana-mumei-omiya-nbthk-tokubetsu-hozon-token/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220226151328/https://www.aoijapan.com/katanamumei-den-omiya/ I am fixated on shape and size but I understand it is probably a minority thing. However be it size, fine details in blade, complete package in koshirae etc. whatever you are looking for I would try to look into Nanbokuchō Bizen as the big picture and not just limiting the search to Ōmiya. You have a fairly large budget and will find lots of fine offerings for that budget.

Thank you for this amazing research Brett. It cleared some questions I have had about this subject.

Now that is bit hefty topic line and I do not really have a standing theory ready for it, nor perfectly accurate formula for calculations. However I have done some measuring in old school way from books and done my own reasoning and thinking. A recent post by Arnaud made me remember what I had tried to do a while ago for few smiths. As many forum members might know ōdachi are the most interesting thing for me alongside big naginata and when I go to Japan those are pretty much the things I seek to look at shrines, museums etc. They are however unfortunately very rare. Of course many of them were shortened into regular sized blades later on. However that brings me to the second problem, there are just huge amounts of long ō-suriage mumei katana attributed to some of the top smiths (and to other smiths as well). In overall so many of them that it will leave me scratching my head. Some massive ōdachi and massive naginata/nagamaki were definately used, however I would dare to believe they were not ordinary weapons that were common to encounter. This is not in any way really accurate data, so do not take it as the truth. However it will give some insight on what I personally feel. For some old tachi it is relatively easy to try to figure out the original length, for some it is much more difficult. For this data I needed to have relatively specific data in order to do the calculations, and of course I do have pictures or oshigata of each and every sword. Now of course for best results I would take pictures of every sword, then put the picture collage to computer and scale it counting pixel to match real life size. I have done this type of thing for naginata in past and it takes quite a bit of time. Someone or AI might succeed in it much faster but sometimes doing stuff like that is fun. I only could of course use signed tachi for this data (I counted in partially signed though if they filled the other criteria). Then I must have the nakago length measurement for the item (this is because many pictures are not 100% in scale in books so I needed to calculate the actual measurements I took) I did measure the gap from munemachi to start of the signature for each ubu sword to be a reference point. There were of course few outliers but I believe smiths signed relatively often in similar placement, and the data would also correlate with this. I also tried to look the signature in relation to ana but I must confess it was getting bit too complicated for me, so as I was not looking that deeply into this I did not have time for everything. Then tried to use logical applying on suriage swords to determine the possible original length. While not perfectly accurate I did get very similar results with my personal method than is listed for few swords by Japanese experts. I did select Tomomitsu and Kanemitsu basically as I like them so much. Rai Kunimitsu was just something I was curious about as there are so many swords (signed and mumei) for Rai Kunimitsu. First up is Tomomitsu there are the 2 ubu ōdachi, and I had only 5 suriage tachi that fill the criteria. As can be seen in graph they weren't ōdachi sized originally. Then for Kanemitsu the first entry is the famous ōdachi Ō-Kanemitsu. In my eyes it was originally slightly bigger than it currently is, my estimate was pretty much the same I have seen by experts in books, amazing sword that I hope to see it at TNM some year. The second ubu is the magnificent JūBū tachi at Fukuyama Museum of Art, tiny bit short of being an ōdachi. As I have not yet seen Ō-Kanemitsu this is so far my favorite Kanemitsu. For Kanemitsu there were 17 other suriage swords and only 1 of them came close to being an ōdachi but it didn't really pass as it was tiny bit short. Lots of very large amazing tachi though. For Rai Kunimitsu there was actually one suriage tachi that was still very long, and by my calculations and observations would have been originally c. 95 cm ōdachi. This is the National Treasure that is held in Kyushu National Museum, I was around 1 cm of the expert length estimate so while not perfect it gets rather close. Other than that one, all were just long tachi that of course many of them were really awesome. This doesn't really give any definitive answers and for myself it just maybe raises more and more questions. I hope someone finds this interesting.

This is absolutely amazing resource I have used it so much over the years. There is a lot of information on that site I have not easily found anywhere else.

I believe it is still a custom. I have had few friends who have these swords. I believe they are pretty much always ceremonial swords made by WKC Solingen in Germany: https://www.wkc-shop.de/en/ceremonial-swords-sorted-country/finnland/finnish-doctoral-sword-tohtorinmiekka-finnish-university-crest-options I've never been to university so I have no clue about the doctorates that grant you the sword. I know that universities have different emblems that are engraved on the design.

I think the clapping emoji sums it up pretty well. This is an amazing resource. The tracking of dealer pages automatically is just amazing. And that is just one of the features

I am super happy that guys with technical knowledge are putting things together and making amazing stuff happen. It is wonderful to see how just simple rows of text can be changed to a really cool and fine resource. As others said above, the map might be my favorite thing. Starting from it, it's great to advance in few clicks to various smiths and items. Congratulations on the baby Chandler

I think I have written a small bit about various designations on the forum before. I think I have understood this properly but I hope out Japanese members can correct any errors I have written. I think we all are aware of Kokuhō (National Treasures) 国宝. Then another well known designation is Jūyō Bunkazai (Important Cultural Property) 重要文化財. After this it starts to get complicated. Jūyō Bunkazai is a National designation (国). Now there are 47 prefectures in Japan, and prefectures can also designate and item to a Bunkazai status. However that is a Prefecture Bunkazai, prefecture level designation (県). To make it even more complicated Japan has 800+ cities and yes it is easy to guess cities can elevate items to a Bunkazai status. However that level is the lowest of the City Bunkazai, and city level designation (市). I did go through all the prefecture websites and searched for all of the swords that have achieved Prefecture Bunkazai status. It was tedious job going through lots of websites, PDF files etc. with just rows and rows of various things listed. I think I am pretty decent in finding the Prefecture level items and identify swords amongst the thousands of listed items. As there is so much to search for I might have missed few items but this would be the rough general count. Now out of these 695 swords I found 293 that I feature in my database. What is slightly irritating is that there is a huge difference in the amount of information about the item that is featured. At most minimum level it can just be 刀 伝当麻 Katana - den Taima, no picture, no additional text (just an hypothetical example). While others have lots of additional information, sometimes even a good sized picture (mostly the pictures are extremely minimal) is featured and links to other data sites etc. I do item matching as that is the search and research thing I enjoy so much, so I have been able to identify bunch of them. I believe some of them have achieved the Prefecture Bunkazai status so long ago and perhaps current owners of the Jūyō swords might not even know they are also Prefecture Bunkazai. I can share maybe in the end really well documented sword I was able to uncover. It started when I was going through Kanagawa Prefecture Bunkazai list. There was an entry for mumei Chōgi, some prefectures have these clickable links that open a page for the item. For some single row like this is the all info you will get about the item The link opened to Cultural Heritage Database but unfortunately there is no picture of the item either. However the owner of the item is Nitro Plus and the item is in Tokyo. I did not know the company Nitro Plus but with googling I found out that it is the company behind Tōken Ranbu. And with more googling I was able to find a picture of their 2019 exhibition that features the Chōgi. Unfortunately this was only picture I found but I found out NBTHK tweet that said that Nitro Plus Tokubetsu Jūyō Chōgi will be featured in TJ29 2026 exhibition as an extra showpiece, now as I have almost all the Tokubetsu Jūyō items and this was most likely TJ. It was just a matter of matching the correct sword and this one was Tokubetsu Jūyō 8. This particular sword was sold by Iida Koendo in 2019, and most likely Nitro Plus acquired it from there. https://iidakoendo.com/6300/ I was so happy to find out that Iida had also the Prefecture Bunkazai document pictured in the ad. I will attach it here as I think it is extremely rare to see these. Now it is possible to track down at least this much of the modern history of this particular sword. 1956 Kanagawa Prefecture Bunkazai - 1973 Jūyō 21 Nagasaki Prefecture - 1983 Tokubetsu Jūyō 8 ??? Prefecture - 2019 Iida Koendo - 2019-2026 Nitro Plus There is still so much more to uncover in these but unfortunately the information on them is very limited. There are for example Jūyō Bijutsuhin that have been also designated as Prefecture Bunkazai etc. Some super cool items (mostly for me the ōdachi) that I have not been able a single picture while trying to search them from Japanese sites.