Jussi Ekholm

I tried looking the smith in Bungo book, unfortunately no oshigata for the smith and just 1 very short line of info on him, period etc. same that Markus has on his index. I would think it as genuine as the signature style & nakago to me would seem plausible compared to other Fujiwara Takada smiths around this period. Looking at the pictures it seems like you got a good sword there even though the maker is quite unknown.

Motoshige is the Jūyō Bunkazai in the collection of Tokyo National Museum it was owned by Yūki Hideyasu. Rai Kunimitsu tachi is Jūyō Bijutsuhin in private collection (last ownership I have on record) it was owned by Tokugawa Ieyasu. Both of these items are in Uchigatana koshirae book by Tokyo National Museum.

I am sorry if my message came out bit puzzling, I just didn't want to ruin the fun for others as I looked at the sayagaki and I admit it altered my view. I admit I am having difficulties in judging if the sword is shortened or like Jacques said above in original length. At first I admit I was thinking Muromachi for the sword. I am not very good at judging the sword by just qualities and activities in the blade, however strong masame if often (in the best scenario) pointing to Hoshō attribution if the sword is seen being appropriate age. However as the sword is 68 cm in the current form and there are no holes near bottom of the tang, if it is shortened then it would have been long tachi in original form. It is bit difficult but trying to imagine how the sword would be with extra 15 - 20 cm in length, and it is quite narrow blade in width. Judging from the pictures your sword seems to have good amount of masame. I know there are masame hada fans that know lot about it, unfortunately I am not among them. However as Kirill pointed out there is a huge financial difference depending on what attribution the sword gets as it is mumei. I think Kirill gave good examples, you get Hoshō attribution you would be very happy, you get something like Sendai Kunikane for mumei blade, that is large financial gap even though the sword itself remains the same. It is good thing you have the old "blue" papers as they were at the time marking good quality. Interesting sword and thanks for posting.

There is dedication sword made by Miyairi Norihiro and members of his school to Futarasan-jinja in Nikkō. Also at Yasukuni-jinja there is one made by Nobuhide, and a modern made Shichiseiken too. I think there might have been other shrines/museums that might have had those but I didn't unfortunately wrote down modern made chokutō.

I think it seems to be quite nice piece, in polish, signed & dated with koshirae. One thing would be checking the shipping costs, depending on where the item is vs. you. Sometimes shipping of oversized items can be difficult.

I would think for the latest item it would be Kyodai Originals: https://kyodaioriginals.nl/ who have made the description as they are sellers of the item.

I would feel the same way as Thomas on this

Unfortunately the PP was around 30MB I think, so I just took screenshots and posted them one by one. That is the presentation as it was I didn't have notes (other than in my head) for it. I would like to gather up info for a large free e-book with info on naginata but the major issue in that I feel would be the copyrights for pictures. I do have access on wonderful items in books but I don't think sharing them publically would be allowed. I think the above Powerpoint would still be ok as it was supposed to be educational. Would be super fun project to do though. Here is one picture from the book I mentioned above. Usually you'll see stereotypical timelines like these only for swords, this is first one I have seen for naginata. And here is one modern very large naginata in koshirae: https://www.higotora.com/works/肥後虎本鍛刀・三尺大薙刀・青貝螺鈿・実戦型拵/ I would love to own one of those someday but I see antiques as more viable options for me personally.

It seems to be a nice sword. I took a look on sayagaki and I think with the features seen it might be a good call to make. If you have attribution by modern NBTHK that is a match, then congrats as the school seems to be highly desired by collectors. Unfortunately in the market modern NBTHK papers are mostly setting the pricing standard.

And part 2

Here is the Powerpoint from Utrecht in picture form, slide by slide.

@Moritsuchi That is wonderful to hear Florian. Your Japanese level is far above mine, and I think you can enjoy so many books. Love for naginata is very rare, they are not appreciated a lot which is a shame. Even in Japan they are often seen as lot below Japanese swords in appreciation. I held a presentation of Kamakura & Nanbokuchō period naginata at Japan Art Expo in Utrecht this June. Unfortunately the timeline of my summer didn't match as I headed to Japan after that and learned and saw a lot in there. So it would have been even better to hold a presentation afterwards but I will add few screenshots from that presentation in here as the Powerpoint is too large to upload. Of course as I learned more during the summer some info in presentation might need bit of tweaking. I have added more items to my database during the summer but these will give some info on remaining items from Kamakura - Early Muromachi period. For the koshirae it is extremely rare to find surviving koshirae from Kamakura or Nanbokuchō periods. I have found few in my books but I believe even Muromachi period koshirae for naginata are very rare. So I needed to add some late Muromachi period koshirae to the presentation to get some koshirae info too, and I saw some more now during the summer in Japan. As items are so rare it is difficult to say anything definitive but I think the overall length of the weapon would have often been around 200 cm. There are some as short as 150 cm and some 250+cm but I think around 2 meters would be common size. So fun that we can discuss naginata Here is one "Holy Grail" for collectors, unfortunately it will be most likely forever unachievable for me. https://www.nipponto.../swords/JT988980.htm

I would think Kaga Kagemitsu lineage would be logical to follow as Ray pointed out. I would have gone to that direction as well, as it continues to later Muromachi. However as both expert organizations have disliked the signature I do think it can be false signature.

I cannot say anything for certain but to me your sword could be Muromachi Bizen work by a smith named Sukehide. For the Yoshioka Ichimonji Sukehide I have been able to so far find only a single blade remaining, that has been featured in many references, you can see it linked here: https://web.archive.....nihonto.com/1-2-17/ Then there was also Ko-Bizen Sukehide, you can see reference here: https://iidakoendo.com/4583/ And I have identified 2 tachi by Fukuoka Ichimonji Sukehide in references. I think your sword looks to me to be genuine but I would guess it dating from Muromachi period rather than before that. I cant really say anything for certain by just from 2 pictures.

Can you post a picture of your sword and the signature?

For 1st gen Kaga Kagemitsu the date would be around 100 years later than in your OP. I believe he was working during late Nanbokuchō - Early Muromachi.

I have the Japanese Spears by Knutsen and I think it might be best source in English, however it has only about 11 short pages about Naginata + reference images at back. I think for real serious study you will need a combination of a lot of Japanese sources as the problem is that even in Japanese information is quite scattered. I got this great Japanese book about Yari in Japan this summer (published 2021). Even though it focuses on spears it does have interesting reference examples of naginata. Perhaps we could have a discussion in here about things that you have in mind? I think more open discussion would be much more fun than forwarding towards books. My own research specialization is about naginata of Kamakura up until Early Muromachi period but I do know a bit about late Muromachi stuff too, however when it comes to Edo period my interest on those items fades out.

Here are measurements for the sword (there can be few mm differences between sources on some dimensions of swords in general) Nagasa: 93,0 cm Sori: 3,0 cm Motohaba: 3,5 cm Sakihaba: 2,6 cm Kissaki: 5,5 cm Nakago: 26,3 cm I don't keep records of kasane but the book I checked had them Motokasane: 8,5 mm Sakikasane: 6,4 mm

Here are some pictures that I was able to find fast, I should have a good bunch of various pictures spread throughout my books.

It is good to hear that I was wrong in my assumption, thanks for clearing it up Brian

Thanks for amazing reports from the show and pictures guys. I am very happy Brian had a great trip Only thing that I dislike in US shows from what I've seen are sword bundles on the tables. I understand that dealers want to maximize the amount of items they have available but for me personally it gives an impression that those items are not thought highly of. For me it is important to treat item as valuable even if it is a cheaper item of less value.

I do think it is very worn down and the hamon has been partially disconnected from original form. See a different example explained here by Usagiya. 4) Grinding iai master's blade. http://www.ksky.ne.j...isodes.html#grinding

Thank you for the wonderful write up of the event.

I think it is bit complicated subject and varying views can be objective. For me the question is how much value you think it would add to you personally to have a Tokubetsu Hozon for the sword? Uda Kunifusa is a premier attribution as far as Uda smiths go, as he is seen among the top of the school. Whole another subject would be the quite common Ko-Uda attribution vs. the actual small number of known Ko-Uda smiths in comparison. However I think we have discussed about how to approach some common attributions, I know Darcy wrote some good posts on that subject. Based on the few pictures I would think your sword looks quite nice and should pass Tokubetsu Hozon. I personally thought it as suriage mumei sword. I would not send it for higher paper due to relatively high cost on sending an item from Europe to Japan for shinsa (Just to note I have never sent an item to a shinsa so I might not be the best source of advice in that). I know my views on some things might be slightly radical but I see the value of the sword being about the same Hozon vs. Tokubetsu Hozon. I wouldn't stress too much on paper level, unless aiming for Jūyō as then Tokubetsu Hozon is mandatory. I briefly discussed papers with Japanese dealer this summer, and the gap from Hozon to Tokubetsu Hozon is actually quite small, and then the jump to Jūyō is actually very large. There have also been several blades at dealer sites in Japan that dealers have upgraded from Hozon to Tokubetsu Hozon with 0 change in asking price. I think valuation is very tricky process... I bought a Jūyō 67 book this summer and mumei Uda Kunifusa katana passed in that session that I didn't think too highly when it was for sale online with Tokubetsu Hozon for relatively ok price. Now at Jūyō it's value would be drastically higher even though most likely nothing changed with the sword... I do think Uda Kunifusa makes fine work, this summer I saw the Jūyō Bijutsuhin (dated 1405 )tanto by him at museum in Japan, and previously I have seen in hand a very nice signed tanto in Europe. I think his style is finer and more refined than what is "common" Uda style. There is one signed Uda Kunifusa katana that is from Jūyō 22, it is 67,1 cm with ubu nakago that is machi-okuri. However as I read the text I believe that katana would be possibly Muromachi work. For tachi by Uda Kunifusa that are from Nanbokuchō to early Muromachi, I have so far recorded 11 tachi, 9 of which are signed. The 2 mumei tachi are ubu and 78,6 cm and 79,4 cm in length. Out of the signed tachi only 70,5 cm Jūbi and 88,3 cm one are ubu.

Do you have specfic smith, school or period in mind? I have so far gathered data on 13,000+ swords of c. pre 1450, and while it is helpful in some ways it actually can be more puzzling than giving out answers. There can be a lot of variety in the surviving pieces by the same smith. I think majority of swords would fall in to having quite similar dimensions but personally I love the few original monster swords that are surviving.