Mikaveli

4.6m yen for a Nambokucho, Juyo tanto... Tempting, can someone lend me 4 million yen! 😂

It's an obvious fake - mono steel and recently, unskillfully cut mei: 山口川子 Yamaguchi Kawako? Kawashi? Poor choice for a gimei, as there are very few smiths called Yama... (山…), and this isn't one of them.

Just looking at one Japanese dealers (TM) website: Tanto price range, 250k - 500k yen (these happen to all be shinshinto). Wakizashi, 350k - 1.2m yen Katana, 600k - 3m yen Tachi, 6.5m - 20m yen. Admittedly a micro-benchmark, but data none the less. If we compared similar era and smith, does it hold that tanto are more expensive? Or, are people just looking at older tanto, more comparable in price to tachi around the same age (and quality/ maker)?

Yes, and (hopefully relevant to the OP) be aware that some less scrupulous sellers will sell a sword in poor condition, but mislead buyers into thinking serious flaws will just polish out (they won't) and downplay how much a proper traditional polish costs (thousands, unless you want to ruin any history or value).

Maybe so, but there's a delta between typical prices and possible prices. Just last year, I bought a sword for $1330 that papered. North of $3000, the search becomes much easier, granted. Just as north of $10k, you can be very particular indeed.

Oh, and in collecting terms buying a wakizashi Vs katana... Nowadays there's a bit of an arbitrary (modern) distinction between them - blades over 2 shaku (approx 2ft / 60cm) are usually classified as katana. But if you find something just half an inch shorter, they'll call it a wakizashi and sometimes it'll be much cheaper 🙂

Just browsing through some of the social media for sale groups, there's plenty of showato/ gunto for c. $1500 up. For older, traditionally made blades I think I saw one for $1600 - so his budget isn't miles away. But north of $2000 is a more common baseline, and obviously up from there. I totally understand the enthusiasm to buy something (anything) to scratch the itch. But I would recommend the OP doing a little more research, maybe buy a book or two, maybe stretch the budget a little - you can find something pretty special - that you'll get more enjoyment out of (after the novelty has worn off).

Is there a living polisher that's ever done a naginata naoshi? Otherwise, I'd suggest it's likely just educated guesswork?

Well, I've just bought a copy of 槍薙刀入門 (Introduction to the Yari and Naginata) - I'm hoping it is introductory level! 😅

Yes, and no! 🙂 You're right that just because there are differences, it doesn't necessarily mean gimei - many smiths changed their mei over time (along with titles, yasurime etc.), and I've seen documented examples where with age, their mei becomes noticeably more lightly struck. But by the same token, some gimei is very, very obvious. My favourite is western copies of kanji, shape based without understanding of stroke order, stops or direction etc.

Still, even if it's gimei, and even if the condition is not great - don't write it off (especially without having it looked at by someone knowledgeable). Any pics of the blade - overall and in detail?

Looks very suspect to me... Assuming it's unpapered?

It's plausible, although I haven't seen it myself (on nihonto). It nothing else has changed, I wouldn't bother sending it to be re-papered - assuming the nakago is still a clear match.

For me: 1 - What is the "theme" of your collection ? It started by choosing the sword that (in my untrained eyes) best represented my ideal katana. Turns out, everything I shortlisted was Mino, kanbun style. 🙂 2 - What is the "aim" of your collection ? I want to chart the career of one particular smith - from earlier works, to later on after they'd received titles / recognition - evidenced by an evolving mei. Bisected with a good example of each type (tanto, waki, katana, nagi etc.). 3 - What is the "border" of your collection ? Ubu (without additional mekugi ana) and TokuHo (though not necessarily at time of purchase). 4 - What is your "behaviour" in collecting ? I want a small collection that I can appreciate and study, rather than hoard. I want to be able to preserve them as best as possible. 5 - What is your "purpose" in collecting ? It's kind of the fusion of my interests in Japan and its history. So, yeah, probably community now - as I enjoy learning and sharing with people who have similar interests. 6 - At what stage are you ? I'm missing a tanto, an example made with gunome or notare hamon, and an early signature. Maybe that's one blade, maybe it's 3 😉 With extra funds / opportunity I'd like to find a nice ko-wakizashi too. I also saw a small kogatana, which would be nice too. But, to be honest - the chase / search / journey is the most important. If I found and bought everything tomorrow, I think I'd enjoy it less.

I don't know if it's remotely what you're looking for, but I just finished reading a book titled "Tokyo Before Tokyo". I bought it to read about Edo's journey from 1603 through to 1868 - but as much as a history book, it's really an art history book - as much of the information in it comes from artwork depicting the city and life within it. Screens, scrolls and very often ukiyo-e. Perhaps half the book is art, featuring around 100 works - with perhaps a quarter of the book displaying / discussing ukiyo-e, its iconography and the "Floating World" it emerged from.

I've seen a few examples where a certain level of modification to the nakago is still regarded as ubu. Usually more minor reshaping - and not o-suriage. So, purely assumption, but I'd be surprised if chopping the long tang of a naginata was still described this way (unless their focus is whether the mune-machi changes etc).

As Jussi says (below), that's not a new description... But it is an example of a 薙刀直し described blade, that's actually a 造り (tsukuri / form of) - unless I was mistaken?

Yeah, but the point was it's not - it's ubu, so tsukuri, right?

Comes back to the adage, buy the blade not the signature. I took a bit of a punt on an eBay blade - the seller described the condition of the sword accurately, but didn't/couldn't personally authenticate the mei. With my purchase, I reached the conclusion that if it were gimei, it was a really well researched one - as everything fits the smith's style perfectly. Anyway, in the end I had it delivered to an agent in Japan, then on to Shinsha (received TokuHo). 🙂

To make it topical, by way of aligning it to Japanese translation precision... It's blue! 青キリン🦒

I don't really understand this either. I don't suppose we have any stats on how much naginata were produced from muromachi on? I'd also be interested to see there usage stats over time. From battlefield, to ceremonial, "home defence" and I'm sure I read somewhere that it became a custom to give a naginata as part of a dowry at one point too. With all the extant nihonto, what would compel a conversion (which can't have been cheap) rather than just purchasing a new or old katana/wakizashi? Was there ever a surplus of quality naginata, suited to naoshi? Do we know when the last known (non-tsukuri) naginata naoshi dates from?

And (to reply to myself), looking back at the start of this thread, there were a few true naginta-naoshi (not tsukuri) with retained kaeri. After all that, I'm back at "both ends need to be reviewed" and very few absolute rules? 🤠

This is helpful / timely - as I think the nuance / convention has been missed (by some). So, where we have zukuri/tsukuri (造り), following Sesko's definition, it's really stating "in the style of". Hence sabiji's examples being labelled wakizashi. Trouble is, naginata naoshi tends to be used without the suffix, as a short hand term for either. So, back to the start 😅 where the example with the kaeri intact cited as naginata naoshi tsukuri - or as true naginta-naoshi (polearm conversions)?

This picture shows what I was thinking - I don't think the oshigata depicts the flattened net of the mune? My thinking / assumption was this is a nakago reshaping, so that the wielder isn't left with a tsuka too wide for their hands?

It doesn't look like that to me here, but it could be - I'm not sure, after you've said that? If so, it's a little misleading - as it has to either taper unnaturally towards the tip, or becomes asymmetrical? I've seen examples where the mune is unfolded, but then the drawing of the mune stops after a inch or so (resolving the above problem).