Mushin

Thought this was worth including as it illustrates what I was saying. https://web.archive.org/web/20230607163725/http://touken-matsumoto.jp/en/product/shousai/WA-0582

The short answer to your question is yes. But that assumes there was only one smith using that name at the time, and that we absolutely know that as a fact, which often we don’t. For example, we now know of blades signed by a very young Jirozaemon Katsumitsu in 1489 which is much earlier than his stated work period listed in Fujishiro and other sources. So, if you have a blade signed simply Bishu no Kuni Ju Osafune Katsumitsu and dated 1489, you would probably think it was the work of the main master of the time, Jirozaemon’s father, Ukyo no Suke Katsumitsu, but you might be wrong. There are periods, especially in the later Muromachi, when smithing families ran large studios with slews of smiths using the same “generic” signature. In this, the Sukesadas and Kiyomitsus had some of the largest and most prolific production houses of their day to meet the demand for both mass produced and special order pieces. And lots of their work includes these inferior pieces, leading many to dismiss Sue Bizen as junk. This is why hardcore Sue Bizen collectors focus on and pay more for blades with Zokumyo Mei, which I will roughly translate as “full signatures” using their common art names, like Ukyo no Suke Katsumitsu, or Gorozaemon no Jo Kiyomitsu. These tend to be a key determining factor separating their top-of-the-line special order blades from early export pieces to China at the turn of the 16th century and later mass production “bundle swords” for rank and file troops during the height of the Sengoku Jidai. They are also a key factor in determining price. Fully signed and dated pieces are fewer in number, of higher quality, and thus the premium. (If I recall correctly, I remember reading somewhere that the Kiyomitsu line were not prodigious users of Zokuyomei but you should double check that.) So, if Markus has only one smith working at the time, chances are you are probably right that that’s the smith who made your blade, but not necessarily so. That is why it is so important to study the working periods and nuances of these smiths so you might be able to recognize the hand behind the generic work. To do that you must study Zokumyo Mei pieces carefully where you can find them. In Honma sensei’s Kanto Hibi Sho, (translations are available from Markus) you will see him parse the work of these smiths carefully, explaining why thinks a generic Sue Bizen blade might be the work of a particular smith in a studio. Like everything thing else in this crazy hobby, it takes time, book study and exposure to as many blades as you can find.

First, you’re absolutely right—prices for Sue Bizen blades, as well as high-quality late Mino works, are rising across the board at Japanese dealers. A big part of this is that older, historically desirable blades from the Kamakura and Nanbokucho periods are becoming increasingly scarce. As we’ve seen in recent auction sales, the prices for these top-tier swords are skyrocketing. Naturally, collectors and dealers are now turning their attention to what’s out there and looking for the next big "thing." Late Muromachi-period blades, long overlooked and often dismissed, are beginning to get the recognition they deserve. I’ve always found it curious that while scholars have traditionally celebrated Oei and early Muromachi Bizen blades, all of the Saijō-saku (highest-rated) Bizen smiths listed by Fujishiro actually come from the early Sengoku period: Hikobei and Yosozaemon Sukesada, as well as Ukyo no Suke and Jirozaemon Katsumitsu. In fact, every Saijō-saku smith from the Muromachi period—Muramasa, NoSada, Magoroku Kanemoto—belongs to this same era. (Full disclosure, I've long collected Katsumitsu family swords in addition to Soshu blades.) With high-end Sōshū and related works nearly gone from the market, and top-quality Ko-Bizen and Nanbokuchō Bizen works increasingly difficult to find, attention is now shifting to top quality Muromachi and Sue Bizen blades—especially those that are fully signed. NoSada and Magoroku Kanemoto are getting serious interest, too. Just 10 years ago, you could pick up a moroha tanto by Sukesada or Katsumitsu for $6,000–$10,000. Now? Try finding one for under $20,000. And if you’re looking for a Sue Bizen blade that is signed, dated, ubu, in good condition, not machi-okure, with a single mekugi-ana and a horimono—you’ll probably need a note from your bank manager to be able to buy it. Many myths have circulated about Sue Bizen blades over the years—most of them unfounded. If you still doubt their value as premier works of the era, I recommend reading the account of Katsumitsu-Munemitsu and the warlord Akamatsu Masanori. Personally, I’m glad these blades are finally being seen through fresh eyes. Fully-inscribed works with complete names and dates by these smiths have always been exceptional. I expect their prices will continue to climb—until, like the great swords before them, they’re locked away in private collections or viewable only in display cases at places like Touken World. Daito by Murmasa have long vanished from the scene after the market was cornered by rich Japanese collectors. Now, good luck finding long swords by Sukesada, Katsumitsu and NoSada. That's partly because they didn't make many because of the katateuchi craze, but they did make them, you just can't find them. Happy hunting!

Stunning, Ray!

To understand what the machine used to compare smiths to painters, the bot gave very interesting explanations for its choices. I think the query I used was something like: "If Japanese sword smiths were compared to famous European painters, which painter would XXXXXXX compare to and why?" The explanations were as interesting as the choices the machine made. For example. with Akihiro it said: "Sōshū Akihiro was a significant figure in the middle Sōshū period, innovating and refining the techniques pioneered by his teacher, Masamune. Similarly, Rubens worked within the Baroque tradition but added his own dramatic flair and dynamic compositions. Both Akihiro and Rubens are recognized as masters who balanced tradition with their individual innovative contributions, leaving a lasting impact on their respective fields. "Akihiro's swords are noted for their boldness and vitality, combining functionality with beauty. His works often feature vibrant hitatsura hamon (full temper) and striking jigane (steel grain), qualities that reflect confidence and dynamism. Rubens’s paintings, like The Descent from the Cross, are similarly bold, with dynamic figures, dramatic movement, and vivid contrasts that draw the viewer's attention." To my mind there was a real effort to explain its choice. And these are only language models. When General AI comes along it will be a whole new ballgame, which is both extremely interesting and concerning all at the same time. Try it out on your own with the maker(s) of your choice. Like I said, it was meant to be just an exercise in fun.

Just for laughs (and to gauge the burgeoning power of Artificial Intelligence language models) I asked ChatGPT to liken several Japanese swordsmiths to famous European painters. Given my Sōshū prejudices, it is limited but IMHO extremely interesting. The list is by no means comprehensive and is in no way intended to be the final word or anything more than it is, an exercise in curiosity. It’s interesting both from the perspective of machine learning as well as program’s cultivation of facts and opinions. The logic ChatGPT gave for each comparison was particularly insightful and well-reasoned, really, though it was all a bit too lengthy to include here. In some ways, I think these comparisons can be especially useful for newbies trying to understand the importance of certain smiths, offering some relatable comparisons. I encourage others to see where this goes just for fun. In the meantime, here is what the bot came up with: Shintōgo Kunimitsu would be likened to Giotto di Bondone Sōshū Yukimitsu would be likened to Claude Monet Saeki Norishige would be likened to Rembrandt van Rijn Gorō Nyūdō Masamune would be likened to Leonardo Da Vinci Hikoshiro Sadamune would be likened to Raphael Chikuzen Samonji would be likened to El Greco Sōshū Hiromitsu would be likened to Titian Sōshū Akihiro would be likened to Peter Paul Rubens Go Yoshihiro would be likened to Michelangleo Awataguchi Yoshimitsu would be likened to Johan van Eyk Bizen Masatsune would be likened to Albrecht Dürer Shizu Saburo Kaneuji would be likened to Michelangelo Buonarroti Sengo Muramasa would be likened to Michelangelo Mersi da Caravaggio Horikawa Kunihiro would be likened to Peter Paul Rubens

Love Jacques, or hate him, you must admit that his statements, assertions and perspectives produce long, and often very interesting threads. Yes, Jacques' bedside manner leaves much to be desired, but the fact is that difficult, smart people often make great teachers, but not for obvious reasons. Just the fact that they force you to reexamine your own beliefs can be a good thing, if not an exhausting exercise.

Lovely work by a wonderful smith. I swear you could make a world class collection of the rejects from the Juyo Shinsa sessions of the last few years. Many excellent pieces have been left on the sidelines, so you are in excellent company.

Member NBTHK-AB

Also for reference: Late Nanbokucho Sue Sa naginata naioshi with rare gakumei of Chikushu ju Yukiyoshi (son of Sa Hiroyuki) with TokuHo papers.

Bradley, feel free to DM me for details about meetups we have in various places around Florida and occasionally near Atlanta.

As I am a huge history buff, I thought some historical background that might help at least with how the school came about. Chikuzen Province, the home of Chikuzen Samonji, a.k.a. O-Sa, or the great Sa, was located on the northern coast of Kyushu. It was the primary landing point for the Mongol forces during their failed invasion attempts, and afterwards became the focus of Japan’s defensive preparations against future Mongol incursions. To this end, the military government in Kamakura established the Chinzei Tandai to oversee and manage military preparations and defenses in Kyushu. The Chinzei Tandai quickly became the central authority for organizing local samurai forces, maintaining fortifications, and ensuring readiness across Kyushu and nearby islands. Walls were built and reinforced. Forces drilled. The area was bristling with warriors ready for the next wave of foreign invaders. This might explain why Sa left Sagami Province where he was supposedly studying with Masamune to set up shop in Ikihama in Chikuzen, and why he had so many students, not least his son and most talented disciple, Sano Yasuyoshi. After Kamakura fell in 1333, and the Nanbokucho started three years later, pitting two rival imperial courts against each other, fears of new invasions slowly began to fade. New internal conflicts brought promises of awards of new lands and titles. The Mongol threat became a memory. At the same time, the realignment of forces during the Nanbokucho created new internal power struggles in southern and western Japan. Those struggles in turn created new demands for sword smiths, and over time some of those smiths started migrating to meet the demand. One of those was Sano Yasuyoshi, O-Sa’s son, who started to work in nearby Aki before relocating to Nagato where he founded the Nagato Sa School, continuing the Sa tradition while incorporating regional influences. Other’s followed suit and overtime the Sa School began to loose its focus as it moved out of its home province. Morihiro is said to have left for Hizen after O-Sa’s death and along with his disciple, Moriyoshi, founded the Hirado Sa school. Another student of some renown, Sano Sadayuki, left Chikuzen and moved across the straights, settling in Aki in the mid-1300s, founding what became known as the Oishi Sa school. (According to some sources, Sadayuki might have later relocated to Hizen and joined the Hirado school.) Some of these schools – which have always been considered minor branches of the Sa tradition – continued into the Muromachi but eventually died out or merged with other schools by the time the Onin War destroyed Kyoto and sent a waves of refugee Yamashiro smiths to Kyushu. While early work from these three "schools" maintained lots of the Soshu influence that Sa brought to Kyushu, over time these faded and later Sa schools showed less nie and hataraki, and the clarity of the steel was not as great in the mainline Sue-Sa schools. Eventually, the work would take on more characteristics of trends that emerged in the Oei period. They would have, of course, forged all manner of blades - long and short, naginata and tanto - to meet demands, but as with so many other schools, smaller blades are most commonly what we see today.

There are a few: John Tirado in PA, Josiah Boomer Boomershine (Brian T's student.) I am sure form members can put you in touch.

What a great and interesting thread. Some great posts here and really awesome observations. I agree with Kirill: there is no clear solution to some of this debate. So much of collecting is like that old saying my mother had: "'It's all of matter of taste,' said the lady after kissing the monkey's bottom." And it is all a matter of taste. There are some obvious agreed on standards and facts, yes, but these shift over time. So, if you believe -- as some die-hard collectors do -- that everything after 1394 is Shinto, then even the most astounding Tadayoshi or Sukehiro or Kotetsu blade will not convince you that the sword is anything more than a nice "newish" folded, sharpened piece of steel. "Cute," as one Ko-Koto enthusiast commented about my Nosada tanto when I showed it to him years ago. On the other hand, if you believe, as some collectors do, that blades without verifiable signatures, are just a blank canvas on to which so-called experts can project their opinions, then nothing without a mei will move you, no matter how stunning the work, because -- as the Asahi Token website says -- "No inscription is no inscription, and it is impossible to determine the author." So - one more cliche - beauty really is in the eye of the beholder. But this thread started out about the market. And the market and taste don't always live in the same neighborhood. So, contrary to the views of Mr. Nakahara (of The Facts and Fundamental's of Japanese Swords, and the Asahi Token website,) a TokuJu O-suriage Ko-Bizen Masatsune Tachi will have no shortage of buyers and will not stay on the market very long, if it even goes to the market in the first place. whereas a good Shodai Tadayoshi might sit around for weeks or longer on a website before it is picked up. This has more to do with the market emotions -- supply and demand, perceived rarity, desirability and exclusivity -- than any comment on quality. And I agree with everybody who says, "collect what you like;" "look for the best condition you can find at your budget;" "buy the sword, not the papers." It is all well and good and true, because collecting is personal. But when the time comes that you might want to sell that piece or trade it for something better, it's is another story entirely. Now you are entering the world of the market. And again, I agree with Kirill: For the marketplace, attribution is quality, attribution is value, top tier papers are both, and that leads us back to the opening question of Lurkez. Since this thread started, I spoke to some dealer/broker friends in the U.S., Europe and Japan and all agree that those amazing pieces from the Kamakura and Nanbokucho like we see in books are becoming harder and harder to find. Many trusted and known collectors are now looking for them and they must put word out that they want them. Then they wait. And when a Juyo Hiromitsu becomes available, it does not go on a website; It is offered at steep prices directly to those collectors who have been waiting, bypassing the open market. This is hardly surprising. Thus, as I said in my earlier posts, yes, Lukrez's observations are largely true. But as the old cliche (God, I am full of them today) goes, "the Market abhors a vacuum." So, when the supply of one commodity runs low, the market looks for the next big thing to fill it, such as works that were previously overlooked or taken for granted, like Ukyo no Suke Katusmitsu, and other top Sue Bizen works. Then lo and behold, prices for Sue Bizen works start to climb and become desirable. Just look at the prices of good Bizen moroha tanto. A few years ago you could pick these up for between $2000 and $8000 (unless it had a zokumyo-mei Yosozaemon signature.) Today those prices -- from what I can see -- have doubled. Eventually these too will be even scarcer than they are today and thus more desirable and collectors will leave word with dealers wanting one and soon you won't see them on websites either. It's the market equivalent of the circle of life. In some ways, the market can be both cruel and democratic. But it's always been that way, responsive to trends and ever-shifting tastes of collectors, and kindest to those with the most cash.

Kirill makes an excellent point about the democratization of the market with the internet and how it has impacted collectors’ knowledge and what they buy. In fact, the market is so dominated by the internet that for years some old timers have long predicted the end of sword shows. This has not happened, nor do I expect it to happen any time soon because ultimately I think there is no substitute for being able to see Nihonto in person. And yes, I agree that big money can pretty much buy whatever it wants, and indeed, there are some amazing collections by extremely wealthy collectors that have virtually materialized overnight. But the rich have never wanted, and this has always been true in all areas of collecting long before the internet was even an idea. But the heart of Lukrez’ original question was has the market changed and grown more acute? And is there noticeable lack of high-end pieces around for sale? From I am hearing, if you ask Japanese dealers this question, they would agree that it is probably true. That is not to say there are not top end pieces available. I know of several places online currently offering Rai and Ichimonji blades of various sizes with various papers, a few Juyo Enju, a TokoJu Chogi, several Kanemitsu, a Yukimitsu tanto, and lots of mumei suriage blades from the Kamakura and Nanbokucho attributed to a sundry of decent schools and smiths. Look no further than Katana Hanbai, Tsuruginoya, IIdakoendo and Eirakudo for some top offerings at hefty prices. And yes, some of the best pieces are indeed not put on the website but are held in reserve. But what dealers and folks I know in Japan are saying is that THEY are not seeing the variety, condition and quality they saw even five years ago. I have heard of one new dealer complaining that he was so excited to gain admittance to Japan’s dealers auctions only to find nothing outstanding to buy. Several point to the DTI and say if you compare the 2024 DTI catalogue to those before 2020, you will see a drop in the variety and condition of top swords. Early to middle period Soshu works seem especially difficult to come by compared to a few years back. But finding swords by most top Koto smiths in near perfect condition that are ubu, not machio-kure with one mekugiana is increasingly difficult to run down, and when dealers do get them, they might not them on a website because there is a queue of collectors who have been waiting. Long, flawless katana from Keicho Shinto are also increasingly at a premium. And while there are a great many excellent wakizashi still around, great tantos by great makers in amazing koshirae we once saw all over are increasingly difficult to come by. It doesn’t mean they can’t be found, it’s just not as easy as it once was, dealers say. Given time and wads of cash, they can be run down. Now these great swords weren’t swallowed into a black hole never to be seen again. It seems that many were scooped up in recent years and aren’t coming back on to the market with the same regularity as they used to. Why? Several possible reasons. Maybe because the Yen is so weak, people want to hold on to their treasures because they fear that the cash will be worth less in a year. Maybe because the market is smaller and older, so they don’t see the point. Maybe because they think it is harder to upgrade because they can’t find what they want. In the U.S., we have lost several leading collectors in the last few years, but their collections, by and large, have yet to come to market either because of family disputes over valuations or the time it takes an auction house to photograph and produce a catalogue. Like I said before, it’s all cyclical. So, if you are patient, know what you want, set aside some cash, you are likely – eventually - to find what you want at whatever it is you consider a “fair price.”