Saint-Just

What a splendid initiative! If you would consider, Yurie, I will join, if work permits. Warm regards from Amsterdam, robert

oeps... i oversaw an earlier message.. sorry

Thank JUSSI EKHOLM So you're back home :-) Thank you for all your information. Michael was here this afternoon for a few hours - and he liked the sword very much. It may be late Heian, it may be early Kamakura. It has the low 'hip' of those periodes and some other characteristics. It is judged by National Treasure mr Nisshu - who seems do value it 'National Cultural Property' I now am exhausted - all that new information etc- but I will ask Markus to have a good look at the sayagaki. More from me soon. Warm regards, robert

Yes, Baba Yaga, they take me out for lunch and diner twice a year. And then we have the Summer Garden Party et cetera. But I am very much at home at the Rijksmuseum, the national museum of the Netherlands, since I was a toddler. My great great great grandparents were at the cradle of the (later) Rijksmuseum, when they sold their The Hague home to the Prince of Orange in 1771 (for 15.000 guilders). The Prince of Orange started his Painting Gallery there the year after, from out of which the Rijksmuseum originated. So to me, the Rijks is a natural heir.

That would be lovely, Micheal. I live in the city center of Amsterdam, and you are most welcome - so you can see and hold the sword yourself. How do I pass my address to you? Can one send private messages here ? Do let me know. robert

Wise words, GAKUSEE. Many thanks. Yes: there is some difference between Western thinking and how in Japan things are looked upon. Concerning 'facts' I am quite a fetisjist - which is no problem in my small collection of Roman coins - determinable to the year - but it does not seem to make full sense when it comes to Koto blades with (yet) unreadable mei. Also to me, an absolute beginner, de sugata of the blade very much has an Heian (or early Kamakura) elegance. Visiting the National Museum in Tokio, I noticed later Kamakura blades are much more sturdier. This Tachi is pure elegance. I should find my own way - and take mr Nisshu serious, of course (me myself NOT being a Living National Treasure :-) Thank you for the exerpt from the NBTHK article about the Yukiyashu blade. One last question: is there an illustration of the sword - I cannot find it by google. Much to think about: I will take my time to grasp it all. Warm regards from Amsterdam, robert

Dear Jon, chère French nihonto. Thank you for your kind and concerned replies. The Museum-issue is not heavy on my mind. Although we don't have a Da Vinci in the Rijksmuseum, unlike the Louvre, nor do we have a national duty to display Nihonto, like the Tokio National Museum, my experience with the conservation of items which are not permanently on display, are very positive. I happen to be a Patron of the Rijksmuseum, live in Amsterdam on and of my entire life (58 years) and walked around there - and behind the scenes - since I was a little boy. No one, indeed, can guarantee what will happen in 100 years. But no one can guarantee that, selling the nihonto at an auction, sooner or later a buyer would do with the swords either. They may just as well - with even greater change- end up at someones attic. Perhaps one should just have left valuable nihonto at the daymo families where the swords have been preserved so well for ages :-) In a museum, things are well documented, on and off on display, worldwide available on the internet (the entire collection of the Rijksmuseum is), accessible for researchers and, most important, for kids (and adults) to get acquainted with. Jon and I are very much on one page in respect of when transferring objects. I am only 58 and I already made arrangement with 3 musea to sooner or later transfer part of my collections (Asian art and Dutch ancient and contemporary art to the Rijksmuseum; my small collection 18th century drawings to Teylers Museum in Haarlem, est. 1785, and some Russian icons to the museum of Recklinghausen, Germany. I prefer to transfer some objects long before my death - who can tell when that may be - because I fancy the fact sharing some items when I am still around. Like most Dutch museums, who get free offers hundreds times a year, the Rijksmuseum has the strict policy only to accept items they are intending to display and/or are filling a gap in their present collections. Storage cost space and money, so swords they don't want to display, they simply wouldn't accept. Thank you all very much for the comment - I am waiting reply from Markus Sesko to what is more on my mind than museums: a good determination of the sword. I expect his judgement soon - and I will post it. Have a great day! robert

IMPORTANT! Respons of Markus Sesko :-) He asked me to share it with you: Dear Mr. Dulmers, I had a chance to look at the thread on NMB. First, I can confirm that the sayagaki by Hon’ami Nisshū is indeed from 1990. His direct attribution to Naminohira Yukiyasu is where the confusion starts, if you will. The problem with Japanese sword attributions is that they are objects-based on the one hand, and based on period records on the other hand, with the latter often overweighing the former. That is, Nisshū coming to the conclusion that the blade was a work of Yukiyasu, he so to speak “had” to quote the accumulative period lists of swordsmiths (referred to as meikan), which state that the smith was active around Hōgen. We find several later Yukiyasu smiths in the same meikan, one, e.g., as having been active around Bun’ei (1264–1275), which means that Nisshū regarded the blade as going back to the hand of the earlier Yukiyasu and not to him. In other words, Nisshū can not pick Yukiyasu and then opt, for example, for an era from the 1230s. He is traditionally bound to either pick Hōgen or Bun’ei, or a later era. Another difficulty lies within the fact that there were different lineages of appraising swords, e.g., Hon’ami vs. institutions like the NBTHK or NTHK, which slightly (or greatly in some cases) differ in their approach. Institutions have become more conservative over the years (partly connected to liabilities, partly to changes in leadership, experts panels, etc.) and are often not comfortable to nail down an attribution to a single smith (if there are just not enough individual characteristics to say this with some certainty). Thus, judging the blade in quesion as an “early Naminohira work”(which would be the literal translation of Ko-Naminohira) is a sensitive approach. With this, however, we are facing another difficulty, which is that the NBTHK often does not specify further on the Hozon or Tokubetsu-Hozon appraisal level. Again, there are times when they were, and it seems that they are returning to this practice a bit in more recent years when we see supplements in parentheses like “late Kamakura,” “early Muromachi,” “end of Nanbokuchō to early Muromachi,” etc. Looking at the pictures of the blade and the description of the seller, it is with a motohaba of 3.2 cm (if this is correct) on the wider side for Ko-Naminohira. I quickly checked some of my references and most of such wide Ko-Naminohira blades were dated by the NBTHK to the end of the Kamakura period. That said, what I would like to see, if possible, is a shot from top of the area of the blade transitioning to the tang (without habaki) (like the picture attached). I would like to see how thin it is and how much material it has lost due over time due to polishing. I will go into more specifics about dating after that. I will elaborate more on the museum/collector issue shortly. Best regards, Markus

ERRATUM ! I am a hopelessly romantic - but I just got word of mr. Markus Sesko concerning the flooding in New York City and the basements of the Met. I pictured mr. Sesko to his knees in the water rescuing precious artifacts. Luckily this is not the case. Mr. Sesko aks me to clarify - and to ease our minds: To be exact, I quote: 'I was only monitoring our storage areas if water comes oozing in, but all artwork is safely stored in a raised manner (there were some lessons learned from hurricanes of earlier years). I just don’t want people getting the wrong idea that things are floating around in the basement at the Met.' I guess, being a war correspondent in Syria, the dramatic ad-hoc evacuation of the museum of Raqqa, Islamic State entering from 200 yards away, did influence my imagination. The Met is safe. And so are the artifacts. No worries.

Dear Daniel (Goedenavond!), dear Matsunoki, dear NewB. Thanks for the replies. To cut the branches in the garden :-) That's very amusing Monthy Python, Daniel :-) But the Museum Question is not the topic of my tread. The situation is: I am a modest art-collector with no children or heirs, and the Rijksmuseum, for over 200 years the Dutch National Museum, gracefully accepted some objects from my collections. They have an outstanding reputation in conserving Rembrands and Vermeers - and extravanganza as Medieval textieles et cetera - and are ranked within the top ten of Musea worldwide. But, you are all right: due to the fact they have no Nihonto-department (although they have a department and curators of Armour) I will talk with the General Director and the curator Asian Art about future preservation. Still: the Rijksmuseum can be easily compared with the Louvre, the British Museum and the Met, so I can be quite at ease my Nihonto will find a good home there. To me it's also of significance we in Holland have some good Nihonto on display: all the kids visiting prefer swords over Rembrandts. This leaves us to the most exact determination of the Tachi. I just received word of Markus Seiko, THE authority outside of Japan. This very moment, at the Met in New York City, he is working rescuing artifacts from the basements, because New York City today has been flooded by rain. At the least: one cannot say that the Met Museum is not acting swiftly and decisively :-) Warm regards from Amsterdam. robert

Good morning all! Dear GAKUSEE: thank you for your encouraging words. I will get into it: Mr. Nisshu and the possibility of X-ray. Markus Sesko I already emailed - and I am waiting for his reply? Who is this Peter you are talking about? Thank you for the scan of the Juyo papers. For my blade, please see the pictures below (cannot upload them in a higher resolution). Dear STEPHAN, GREY, BRIAN,: thanks to you too! Grey makes a point. The Rijksmuseum, for over 200 years depending of gifts by the public and government money to buy the Rembrandts, happens to have no collection of Nihonto, except from some rusty Edo-swords taking by the Dutch from the island of Decima in the 1600's. They do rank in the top-10 of the worlds greatest museums (along with the Louvre, the British Museum, The Met etc), they have a huge department for conservation, and both the General Director and the head curator of Asiatica will accept my swords on the condition they will be on display. As did they do with some other artefact I transfer to them. I see Menno, the head curator one of the coming weeks, so I will surely take up the matter of conservation with him. Thanks for pointing this out to me. But a museum as the Rijks, with its Rembrandts, its Vermeers, its great collection of mediaval textiles etc must be able to attract the right staff and knowledge. I will keep a close watch though. Dear RIVKIN: I begin to realize that appraisal is a science as such and a matter of permanent deliberation. Rather than sticking to what the sasaya reads, I turned to this forum and wrote an email to Markus Sesko - the Sword has to be judged, more than just the sayagaki. Many thanks to all of you for your input ! robert

Hi Gakusee. Thank you for your insight. Nice to hear mr. Nisshu has a solid reputation. Yes: My google translate camera picked also up Important Cultural Property. And I was puzzled. It is a beautiful tachi, ubi and of goog health and perfect dimensions.... But do you think the sugata is consistent 'with no later than early Kamakura' assessment? Is that your profound assessment or is it written somewhere on the saya? In other words: no fears it will be ... Nambuchuko? (I can judge that a little in the main Yamato streams, in Bizen but not in a province as far as Satsuma - where perhaps swordsmits did not follow the most actual trends? Although thinking buying a late Heian: with an early Kamakura I can live. With a Nambuchuko I can not (I already have a katana from that era). By the way: my 3 swords, the ubi Tachi, the o-suriage Den Ryumon katana and the Mihara wakizashi - all Yamato-style - give a good insight in the development of the Nihonto - and I plan to donate the set in a few years to the Amsterdam Rijksmuseum (which does not have any proper blade). Nor much knowledge on Nihonto. So you think it is not later than early Kamakura? That would be perfect. Thank you. Warm regards from Amsterdam. robert

Thank you RAY SINGER, thank you Jussi Ekholm. I am new on fora and quite a digibete, so I hoop this message is reaching you. Yes, Ray, google translate told me the mei is unreadable. The original seller says it is the character An - and makes some far-going conclusions about that. I am just happy there IS a mei, on the right Tachi site :-) Hi Jussi. So you saw the blade. It was - and actually is - quote on top of what I could afford. But it came to Holland last year and I simply fell in love with it. I suspected the Japanese dealer has been quite optimistic in age attributions - but only after I did put the sword on hold. With Kamakura, perhaps I can live - the sword has a great size, a great elegance and seems very healthy to me. Late Nambuchoko periode would be unacceptable - and then I really should ask the dealer to reverse the sale. (I already HAVE a Nambuchuko katana). No hurry, but would you have a look in your files? I would be much obliged. It could be very well the sayagaki is from 1990. At the Tokubetsu Hozen paper one reads the blade is registraties May 1 1952 - so I simply thought the sayagaki would date from the same time. Mr. Honami Nisshu - according to my google translate camera - writes on the saya: Hogen-era. Now we must know of Mr. Nisshu has some authority. Really looking forward to your reply - take your time. Warm regards from Amsterdam, robert robertdulmers@gmail.com

Thank you RAY SINGER, thank you Jussi Ekholm. I am new on fora and quite a digibete, so I hoop this message is reaching you. Yes, Ray, google translate told me the mei is unreadable. The original seller says it is the character An - and makes some far-going conclusions about that. I am just happy there IS a mei, on the right Tachi site :-) Hi Jussi. So you saw the blade. It was - and actually is - quote on top of what I could afford. But it came to Holland last year and I simply fell in love with it. I suspected the Japanese dealer has been quite optimistic in age attributions - but only after I did put the sword on hold. With Kamakura, perhaps I can live - the sword has a great size, a great elegance and seems very healthy to me. Late Nambuchoko periode would be unacceptable - and then I really should ask the dealer to reverse the sale. (I already HAVE a Nambuchuko katana). No hurry, but would you have a look in your files? I would be much obliged. It could be very well the sayagaki is from 1990. At the Tokubetsu Hozen paper one reads the blade is registraties May 1 1952 - so I simply thought the sayagaki would date from the same time. Mr. Honami Nisshu - according to my google translate camera - writes on the saya: Hogen-era. Now we must know of Mr. Nisshu has some authority. Really looking forward to your reply - take your time. Warm regards from Amsterdam, robert robertdulmers@gmail.com