Jussi Ekholm

I think it could be 義忠 Yoshitada.

Sorry I can't find the pictures of some of the more rare sageo types anywhere. I have 30+ variety types that I can't find pictures of... I have the kanji for them but Google gives nothing. Here is the Facebook of Nakamurasho (that Thomas suggested earlier) and it has a link to their homepage. https://www.facebook.com/nakamurasho1893 You could also try contacting Hans Koga. I saw some of the sageo he had made on NBTHK meeting some time ago. I can't really remember the weaves but Hans will surely know more than me. I made some basic sageo styles many years ago. It's pretty fun but for me even this basic weave was pretty time consuming as I ain't no craftsman. I always used cheap cotton thread but I got some decent results. Kumihimo skills are very nice, and of course the more complicated weaves are pretty awesome.

Both are stunning.

I think it is 長州須佐住宮内藤原清重作 Choshu Susa ju Miyauchi Fujiwara Kiyoshige saku

Forgive my paint skills as it's 1.45 in here but I am seeing this.

I think I see takanoha yasuri in the lower portion of the tang on the pic (10) of the omote side.

3M Yen in Toko Taikan, TT lists him working at Kanbun. I think he is also listed as Ryo Wazamono in Kokon Kaji Biko. Here is another signature reference: http://www.samuraishokai.jp/sword/08309.html

I can try to look more info for you when I've got more time. I have plenty of reference terms in my nihonto encyclopedias for sageo and tsukaito. It's getting 2.00 in here and I need to get to bed. Look for 竜甲組, I read that this type of sageo was popular in Owari koshirae, not sure if it's the same style you are looking for. You'll also find some styles from Japanese wikipedia to aid your searching: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%8B%E7%B7%92

I think it is 波濤雲龍図鐔 and the theme might be translated as rolling waves and cloud dragon.

Digitalization is an amazing thing sometimes. Thought I'd search some of these titles from National Diet Library database. 解紛記 - Keifun-ki: http://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/2606135 本朝古今銘盡 - Honchō kokon-mei-zukushi: http://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/9892696 Mei-zukushi from 1423 that is listed as important Cultural Property: http://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/1288371

Here are the book titles in that Token Bijutsu article. I'll put in brackets the number in the Wakou museum index. 解紛記 - Keifun-ki (43) 本朝古今銘盡 - Honchō kokon-mei-zukushi (30) 囗伝書 - Kudenshō? , oral transmission writings 倭朝古今銘冶之次第同名乗事 - ??? 銘盡秘伝抄 - Mei-zukushi Hidenshō? (120) 古今銘盡 - Kokon mei-zukushi (115?) 銘図 - Mei-zukushi? (57) 銘尽 - Mei-zukushi? There is lot of interesting information about these books written in the article but unfortunately I can't translate it fully.

Awesome find Randy. There is article on Token Bijutsu 689 about early Edo period sword books. I can't read the article in whole with my very limited Japanese skills but I can at least try to get some titles for you.

Kanetsuna 兼綱 - Tenshō 1573-1592.

It's very fun exercise. I can't really participate as by trying to nail it down I ended up finding this tanto. So I guess I was kinda in right direction but I was still very far actually... In my case it was luck and not skill pinpointing it down.

I agree with Maurice 1. 平長盛 and 2. 肥前国忠吉

Very nice picture Derek. I believe this same exhibition was on display in Tampere about three years ago when I visited it. I'm posting another picture, which in comparison looks like it was taken with a potato... This shows how important the display & lighting are when items are on display. I visited the exhibition with my sister and both of us thought some of the rooms were way too dark as it was hard to get a proper look of some of the items. At least the actual Terracotta warriors that were the main attraction were properly displayed and could be really enjoyed. Not really adding any insight of the sword itself but the displaying of this item seemed to me like day & night, and I thought it would be important to point it out. Seeing this item in Tampere in person and seeing it displayed like that in Chicago, it just makes a huge difference how the item is on display.

I'm not a tsuba guy so my help will be very limited. You could also try asking the question from both AB and EB of NBTHK. I know there are guys with great tsuba knowledge in our EB. Unfortunately I have never been in the US and I haven't met US members but I know there is also great tsuba knowledge there. I agree what was mentioned earlier that seeing various examples and get bit background info and explanations about them would be very fruitful to us newbies. Even though it's not as good as hands on teaching I think a lot can be learned from online conversations too. I tried to track down some Higo tsuba for you from 2014 and 2015 but I didn't exactly find too many of them listed at dealer sites. So I didn't found too many attributions even to plain Higo on this timeframe. I tend to approach it with a collector view as that is only last few years. I understand that dealers will flip things but I think many collectors will not want to sell the item almost directly after getting papers for it. You can find lots of attributions for various Higo schools as well as plain Higo attributions pre 2014. Maybe there very well might be tighter criteria for attributing mumei pieces directly to certain schools in the NBTHK after 2013 I don't personally know this. However I think it's more probable for "unwanted" attributions to end up for sale than the "wanted" ones. Also as I don't know a lot about tsuba I think attributing mumei pieces directly to someone will take immense skill and the work has to be quite stereotypic. Of course it's the same as with swords. I fully understand the "basic" attribution to for example in this case Higo. It's a lot safer to give more broader attribution than very specific one. Of course it would be great to get the most accurate attribution possible but I think sometimes it will be very difficult. Maybe the NBTHK is not currently the best organization for identifying Higo tsuba? If that is the case maybe getting opinions by those in Japan who focus their studies on Higo tsuba would be the correct decision, I think Chris said this already earlier in the thread. Of course the opinion of high level Higo collector might not have the same general commercial value that NBTHK papers tend to have among collectors but I believe for high level Higo collectors the opinion of an expert specialized in Higo tsuba might be much more valuable. Here is one for your list of post 2013 even though it's a den attribution. 伝楽寿 I had to check and his den is to my understanding of Kamiyoshi school. It's fun trying to look up things as it's a learning experience. http://web.archive.org/web/20150218034725/http://www.tsuruginoya.com/mn1_3/b00142.html

I should have been asleep for a good while now but I got hooked on timetravelling on web archive. It's an amazing tool for tracking down things. Of course I ended up surfing and searching many old tachi as I got carried away... As I focus on older swords I haven't searched more modern swords in a while. Here are few more tanto to give you some idea, with more digging I am sure you can find many more examples. I couldn't be too picky about papers as I wanted to give you a small bunch so you have some start. 600,000 Y http://web.archive.org/web/20130915030839/http://www.aoijapan.com/tanto-gassan-sadakazu-kokuin-engraved-mark 800,000 Y http://katananokura.jp/SHOP/1512-T01.html 480,000 Y https://web.archive.org/web/20141110100339/http://www.e-sword.jp/sale/2015/1510_3005syousai.htm 780,000 Y http://www.seiyudo.com/ta-011112.htm 730,000 Y http://www.seiyudo.com/ta-08121.htm

I would go with the upper one as I base most of my terminology to Zusetsu Nihonto Yogo Jiten. Also in that book it is referred being a kozuka for tanto koshirae. Hawleys fittings terms has similar description referring them as small sized kozuka made for either tanto or aikuchi. In the Hawley book it is mentioned that Goto Tokujo would have been the first one making them. Encyclopedia by Markus gives a description of hanzashi/hazuzashi that it is a small knife or kogatana that was used for cutting a notch to arrows. So this term the my understanding means different utily knife. I should have checked the actual description of hazuzashi before posting it as I wrongly assumed that both hanzashi would mean the same thing.

I think I would try to approach this by looking up for what prices Gassan Sadakazu tanto have been for sale & sold in lets say around 5 last years. With this research you might get a good bunch of data, and you could try to compare the tanto in question against this small database.

半差小柄 Kotoken Kajihara and Hawley glossaries use these kanji. 筈刺 This can be found from Encyclopedia by Markus Sesko.

Does someone have a reference mei or few for 3rd gen Kawachi no Kami Kunisuke? This mei does not seem to match in my personal opinion that of the 2nd generation. I have about 10 2nd generation mei in my books and searched about a dozen more papered ones online. There are some differences and I tried to make a comparison where I used few papered ones and this mei. I might understand the current signature in the way that Kawachi no Kami Kunisuke shortened this sword 3rd year of Enpō (1675). And the sword pre-shortening had signature of Kanenaga from Yamato, which would in my guessing point towards Yamato Tegai Kanenaga line. However as I am not sure if the Kawachi no Kami Kunisuke signature is genuine it makes me personally question the mei. 2nd Kawachi no Kami Kunisuke was also very good smith. He is jō-saku in Fujishiro and listed as a wazamono. Now I don't have factual information to back this next bit down but I believe in order to have a very good smith shorten your sword and sign that he shortened this sword it might have been an important sword. I agree with others about the koshirae, it does seem very nice to me. And as the blade is also in quite good condition I think you got a package that you can enjoy. All of the above post is just my personal speculation and I think you have an interesting sword.

My guess would be 佐藤兼住作之 - Satō Kanesumi saku kore. RJT smith so I think there will be good info on him somewhere (I don't have books of modern smiths. ). I'm definately not sure about the 2nd but it would be logical after the first.

Sent you a short PM regarding our local nihonto people. Getting the swords in the hands of knowledgeable collectors would be a good way to advance as they can then guide you on how to advance with them.

Maybe I worded that out bit funny and it came out not as I fully intended. That sometimes happens when English is not your native language. Sometimes it sounds better in your head and when you type it out it ain't exactly as you pictured in your mind. What I really meant that my own collecting mentality has also strong portion of "martial artist type view" mixed in (even though I'm not martial artist) as well as big portion of romantic view. So these skew my view from that who truely judges the blades by certain merits as art sword & historical appreciation. I have my own "things" that I like and my collecting will be very much focused around those. For example someone could focus his collecting on a late Muromachi school which might be considered as "minor & insignificant" but that would not make him any lesser collector. I'm just trying to show the same thing that there are many types of collecting as Jean is saying above me. As I tend to hang with the Chinese replica katana folks quite a bit I think it's important to make people understand that you don't have to jump to Juyo level in order to enjoy sword collecting. There are many misconceptions that new people interested in collecting have and it would be nice to get new blood into our hobby. Sometimes I hear that the barrier to get in seems to be very high and I don't think it should feel that way. There in the last paragraph I said the term myself... Juyo quality. I understand very well your thoughts on creating this topic Paul at least I want to think so. I agree that there has been a lot of talk about price and papers. Then you see terms like Juyo quality thrown around. As has been established in many discussion Juyo quality tends to be fluctuating term but it can be thought as meaning good quality and in more general talk very good quality. As it is a term that explains in short manner that item is of good quality it's quite easy to use. However sometimes I feel that for learning it would be better if bit more explanation would be given. Of course in long posts I understand it would become troublesome as it already takes a long time to write such post. There are times when post will make research a lot of stuff and you come back wiser and thankful that you had to take that time to do the research. This problem of course heightens up when it's on field you know very little about. For me personally tosogu item, especially the high quality ones make this problem for me. They all look awesome to my eye and I lack the understanding to fully grasp the fine nuances that separate them. And I confess as the high end level blades are currently so alien to me that differences and factors on tokuju <-> juyo level are hard to grasp condition-historical significance-other factors et.. Of course they will become clearer with more study and for example Darcy is doing awesome job opening this for us. For example personally I mostly follow the 500,000 Yen to 1,000,000 Yen market (because being realist that is where my next purchase will fall in couple years from now). Of course I always check the sub 500,000 Yen market all the time to find that hidden gem that everyone else misses... I think 500k to 1M Yen is very interesting market as you see somewhat the influence of papers. You'll get those cheaper than norm Tokubetsu Hozon swords that make them seem like a killer deal while they of course have some reason for their price because Japanese dealers know their game very well. In my own personal thinking these would be like "weak" Tokubetsu Hozon swords, not sure if that would be appropriate term to use. As we are thinking about influence of papers then these are bit easier to spot, as they have passed Tokubetsu Hozon shinsa but it's apparent they aren't the best Tokubetsu Hozon swords around. Hozon is much more problematic to judge in my opinion. When blade has Tokubetsu Hozon it has passed the 2nd rank shinsa, and it's much easier to compare it to it's peers. Again this might be confusing to some but I can't put it out in much easier way. Maybe an example could be 2 o-suriage mumei Tegai (as in OP) blades, other is 62 cm and has flaws that are easy to identify and condition is ok in overall while other is 70 cm and in good/very good condition with no apparent flaws. You might say the first one is a "weak" TH as it might have just barely made it while the other one could be a "strong" TH. At the above mentioned market you'll mostly encounter NBTHK Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon + NTHK Kanteisho and of course unpapered swords, and occasional certificates from other issuing bodies. I think one issue for me is throwing in categories as personally for me papers at that category wouldn't matter too much, and I could even buy a sword without certificates if it is something relevant to my collecting intrests. Personally I think bit too little credit is given to NTHK kanteisho. I like the very accurate information it gives and I think it is great for collectors. Also I can't deny the fact that NBTHK papers are a "golden standard" for business purposes. Here is another example. A good friend had in my opinion very nice tanto with NTHK kanteisho. In my novice view that tanto could get Tokubetsu Hozon papers. However as the NTHK attribution is completely valid I can't see a good reason to invest money for sending it from Finland to Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon shinsa. Yes there most likely is a price jump in "value" after/if getting TH papers but adding in all the costs I would think the cons outweigh the pros in a circumstance like this one. Even though certificates raise the sword by an "artificial" level the sword stays the same. There won't be some magical add-on features appering on the blade after getting a higher paper. You can enjoy the same sword as much without papers as it having Juyo papers, of course having it run through Hozon or NTHK would confirm the mei or attribution. Which I see as a huge bonus. So in my view of thinking the basic paper is a huge "upgrade/confirmation" but above that... As for the three blades I provided, my short answer would be, sugata + ubu or close to ubu nakago + signature. I think as I will only have a small collection of few swords I will want to focus on signed Koto tachi. For me being ubu or close to it will be very important as I have the romatical view of getting the feel of a sword as it was intended. Signature being a huge factor for me and having dating is a huge plus. Also the feel of the sword is very important, even though I am not a martial artist. Then I would also like that my small selection of swords would each exhibit different sugata & features. Yasumitsu being 75 cm and 3 cm sori, it would be awesome example of early Muromachi sugata and of course wonderful Oei-Bizen sword in overall. Senjuin has amazing sugata and ubu nakago, even if the mei is unreadable, having it there is huge. This is the romantic side speaking, it can't be explained by reason. Would be lovely to see it in hand how the hamon & hada appear to my eye. I tend to like hadatatsu appearance as it is very bold looking. Mitsunori is also very interesting. Even though I tend to like larger swords these short tachi of this period I see as an evolution to uchigatana and I find it being an important part of historical evolution. Short blade and short nakago make a very nicely handling sword for single hand use. Yoshii wouldn't be my number 1 choice as far as Bizen schools go but the upside of this sword was 1M Yen price and I saw it as a great example of Yoshii school work that is signed and dated and in good condition, and as something that might even be achievable in the future. This ended up being longer than I first inteded as I felt the flow when writing. Hopefully there are even bits of relevant to the topic. Something like the influence of papers would be quite easy to discuss in real life but it's hard to put out your own thoughts in written form (at least in easily understandable form).