seattle1

Hello: If you can find traces of linear lamination on what might be termed the vertical surfaces it might be a Ko Shoami or early Akasaka. Arnold F.

Hello: That is a really interesting question and hopefully someone, not me, will have an authoritative answer. If the answer were logic rather than knowledge, one would expect that particularly in koto times the initiation into a tradition would follow, perhaps more than anything, the laminate construction practices of that school as such could influence the jihada properties which are special "trademarks" to each tradition. Thus during Edo times, when smiths were less dependent on locally materials, we might expect that the use of unique metals and complex structures would be less controlling in the production process as jihada tends to be more uniform. Arnold F.

Hello: Anyone have an idea of what a complete set goes for these days? Arnold F.

Hello: I believe the kanji is "chu", the middle, perhaps meaning the place in a set, or something similar. Arnold F.

Hello: It appears to be signed - can you make the image clearer? Arnold F.

Hello Jo: You are getting a lot of helpful comment. As for the "mon", while it could be such there are two kanji that could be used in a name, "naga" and "ta", which could be someone's surname, but I doubt it is a mon in the usual sense of the term. I checked the most commonly used mon book, Hawley's, and no family appears to have use those two kanji as a family mon. Perhaps a more comprehensive one would show it as a mon, so this is just a guess. Arnold F.

Hello Darcy: My initial point, a fairly obvious one I thought, that the Akihiro example, perhaps only n = 1, demonstrates that in such situations, to be determined in individual cases, at least former designated blades of Juyo Bi level may be able to legally leave Japan; and further that that is a phenomenon linked to market internationalization. What is interesting about the NMB is its provision for the civil exchange of ideas, observations and opinions. Your posts have provided a rich assortment of interesting and educational contributions and I for one certainly hope your last statement in the above will be swiftly reconsidered. Arnold F.

Hello: Just to set the record straight on the post above that began with a quotation from my post: "It is very interesting to hear that such material can now legally leave Japan ..." and which led to a string of disjointed non sequiturs. 1. There is a nuance of meaning in the English language which restricts the generality of a statement by the use of the word "such". The word means of that kind, or similar, and thus it was not an assertion that any and all other disestablished Juyo Bi blades can scoot right out of Japan. Each would be a special case unless some clarifying document is generated by the Japanese authorities which throws the net much wider and establishes a commonality of treatment. 2. Who said: it is "the same situation as someone going over and buying on" ? - not me. 3. Who said: "oh it is easy to export Jubi now" ? - not me. 4. Who concluded: "that it a slam dunk..." - not me! 5. I don't understand the issue of a year in process being somehow a determinant of the issue of a legal release for the Akihiro. The sword was seen by me a very few years ago, I believe at the Tampa show, and it had then returned from a round trip to Japan for restoration. The togi at that time did not, in the opinion of a number of people who saw it, present the blade in the full glory of its inherent quality, and under new ownership it went back to Japan. I don't know the exact chronology of it going back for a new togi, perhaps a new habaki, probably a new shirasaya, a sayagaki by Tanobe sensei, and then an application for legal export, which was granted. To me it would seem that a year is an amazingly short time! 6. Finally on the issue of "internationalization," which I had termed a "growing reality", and it was dismissed by the claim that it is impossible to say send a piece of tosogu from Tokyo to anywhere in the world. It took a while to figure out what that "proof" was addressing. Internationalization, or intranationalization for that matter, only means that the legal and institutional relaxation of constraints on what Adam Smith in the Wealth of Nations referred to as the "truck, barter , or exchange" of goods and services, are lessened. The generality of the process is not dependent on totality. The market for Japanese swords and tosogu has dramatically internationalized in the last quarter century. At least one well know Japanese dealer has perhaps the major fraction of his sales going outside Japan, the yearly Dai Token Ichi in Tokyo draws a large number of foreign collectors and dealers, Japanese dealers have once again begun to appear a US sword shows as buyers and as sellers or both, every month we see more collectors, or perhaps just the curious, posting on this Board from all over the world - their geography is varied, there interests are the same. No trade process or carting of goods here and there is free of constraints set by governments and that is not inconsistent with relaxation of barriers. On the issue of Juyo Bi's it is obviously in the interest of both buyers and sellers for such goods to move internationally, and it would not be surprising to see more such legal authorized examples in the future. Arnold F.

Hello: Well it is a super blade seen by some of us a few years ago at a US show after it returned to the States from just having been on a preceding round trip to Japan for a "restoration" and how much better it looks now! It is very interesting to hear that such material can now legally leave Japan and I would put that down to the growing reality of the internationalization of the market for Japanese swords - a good thing for all participants. Arnold F.

Hello: With all due deference to the NBTHK if they called the tsuba Heianjo, it appears to be a Onin piece done at the end of their span. The evidence is the precast zogan placed into prepared spaces in combination with a small number of taka-zogan, all standing proud. It has a somewhat early look with the ko-sukashi elements sometimes found on the ko-katchushi antecedents, but the entire composition looks rather "commercial" and not bespoken to anyone's particular case as might occur if an early ko-katchushi-Onin transition period work. The brass dating origin is controversial, however from Onin (1467-68) to Temmon (1532-55) would be reasonable, and some argue that such material came from China as early as Ekiyo (1429-41). Arnold F.

Hello Bob: Well I was at the auction and while $100,000 today might only seem like the price of an expensive car, in 1981 it would have been the equivalent of just short of $270,000 today, i.e., a lot of dough! Even so too much can't be read into that as all indexes, like the CPI, upon which such comparisons are made, omit all the reality of changes in relative prices, and thus consequences on our consuming behavior, at the same time that prices on average are rising so retroactive scenarios of past behavior are all fictitious to a degree. The more interesting issue is the guitar issue you raise. Such compilations are far short of what is needed for a comparison of returns over time. Swords are all heterogeneous and what is needed is not like a model number for such and such made in a given year, with its then price compared with the sale of a similar piece some years down the line. What is needed is initial full cost data for a wide compilation of swords bought most likely at different times by a given collector, what was paid for them, costs of maintenance, restoration, upkeep, real property taxes if any, insurance and storage costs, and inflation of course, to mention only a few things. At the other end comes a sale date, hopefully all at the same time, and what would be needed such as all transactions costs of the sale, including possible foreign exchange issues, if sold at an auction the house cost imposed on the seller, such as catalog photography, printing and distribution, and of course the houses' take from the hammer price. Add to that taxes paid to local, state and federal authorities. That is only a short listing of considerations that would have to be known for a proper economic analysis. A study like that of the Compton was probably the last best chance. I doubt we will ever see enough data gathered for a serious study that carries credibility. I think our enjoyment of swords and tosogu should not be based on the premise of a speculative financial yield, as speculation and not "investment" would be the positive end product, and I doubt that a positive yield could generally exist across the board for swords or any other art object. Enjoy them for what they are: wonderful and fascinating works of art that open a sort of window of our imagination to a different world. Arnold F.

Hello: The following story is not intended to be evidence of "buy high/sell low" and it is most certainly not the longitudinal empirical data we need to say anything useful about the notion of investing in art. It is just an n=1 interesting story which I stumbled on after this thread had been started and thought you might enjoy it. The first Haynes cataloged auction was in November of 1981, held at the Miyako Hotel, San Francisco. Lot 304 was Kokuho sword by Bishu Osafune Iyesuke, dated Oei 21 (1414) and it had received the National Treasure designation in 1920.It was taken from Japan during the Occupation after the war. There was a $100,000 reserve and it was not met. The same sword was sold at the Shinwa Art Auction, Japan, in October, 2013, for 25,000,000 JPY. The old National Treasure sword designations had been disestablished after the war and the blade had been redesignated as a Juyo Bunkazai (No. 1566), so the blade still carried a great deal of clout. What do we compare? There is no perfect way to assess the gain or loss over the 32 year period as there are two currencies and different inflationary experiences in the US and Japan, and many other variables that cannot be readily accounted for, including the upkeep cost of the sword, to say nothing of the transaction costs of the sale for the seller. I do not know if the selling price included the buyer's premium. If we assume that the reserve in 1981 was the fair market price of the sword then, and converting the Japanese sale price (without further adjustment) into USD at the then 2013 prevailing rate of $1.00 US = 97.7 JPY, the selling price would be $255,885.36 which implies a nominal gain of 2.97% per year. Inflation in the US during the 1981-2013 period was, co-incidentally, 2.98% per year on average, resulting in a tiny purchasing power loss. During that same period the US Government 10 year, an extremely safe and highly liquid asset, would have yielded the $100,000 1981 amount, omitting tax considerations, a return of 6.52% per year. Alternatively we could value the sword in JPY which in November of 1981 was 223.1 to the USD, and the resultant nominal gain expressed in Yen would be 0.35% per year. Inflation in Japan ran at an average rate of 0.81%, 1981-2013, so the real return in purchasing power terms would be distinctly negative. The Yen has been a rather "managed" currency and factors other than inflation have played an important role in its nominal appreciation. Neither currency choice in the comparisons is necessarily better than the other. Draw whatever conclusions you wish. The story of the Iyesuke could be sliced and diced in other ways. We need much more comprehensive longitudinal data to begin to address the investing/return issue which always seems to be present between the lines. In the meantime lets enjoy these things for the wonderful objects they are! Arnold F.

Hello: While the blade appears to have the shape of a nagamaki-naoshi, and if we assume for purposes of illustration that the mei is original, something is probably wrong as nagamaki and naginata are signed on the opposite side. That might not be an invariant rule, but it is fairly general. The blade might just be a wakizashi from day one though probably not. Arnold F.

Hello: Another interesting thread, one where my position since its initial airing in the 1972 Dallas show and NBTHK shinsa, was made fairly clear through my essay published then, with the title "On Investing in Japanese Swords" in The Book of the Sword. The argument was laid out in fairly straight forward Econ. 101 terms that one should never expect to make an "investment" return on such storable tangibles as Japanese swords, which offer neither a monetary dividend or interest, in comparison with financial assets of the same risk (!). The argument was general and over a large population, and individual exceptions would be exceptions which might weaken the thesis, but not destroy it. The position was theoretical and not empirical, and the latter still generally awaits in the field of all arts. Anyway, since then what has impressed me is how much more "perfect," in the economic sense, the Japanese sword market has become. Many factors have contributed to that and the two biggest forces have probably been the widespread translation of some of the goldmine of Japanese language knowledge into Western languages, by facilitators like Harry Watson and Markus Sesko, but others as well, who can claim a real and lasting impact through their skills. The second dramatic change over time has been the internet. The impact of those events have come close, only close, to wiping out the huge market advantage once held by folks "in the know," a tiny percentage who knew price differentials East and West, sources of supply, who the deep pocket buyers were, etc., etc. These days the price for a narrowly defined representative sword, representing almost any period, school, smith level, etc., is virtually the same anywhere in the world net of taxes and transportation costs including "red tape." If a sword is bought today, given all the information out there and a reasonable bargaining skill balance between seller and buyer, it is likely that the price will be closer to a realistic market price than ever before. If the buyer thinks of the acquisition as something to profit from, that likelihood would be quite dependent of the time lag after purchase. To expect to buy for x dollars today and sell, for example x plus 10 % in the very near future would seem unrealistic to me, given the increasingly equal knowledge held by most prospective buyers. With the passage of time, which would allow primarily for changing tastes, that sword bought for x dollars might appreciate or depreciate in the view of prospective buyers and thus generate a gain, but perhaps a loss with equal likelihood. Once a substantial length of time between buying and selling one's "investment" has occurred it should be no surprise that the nominal selling price the owner gets might generally be expected to be higher than what he initially paid ,and that of course would be on account of the destruction of purchasing power of the dollar - we are abstracting from currency valuation issues of course - brought about by inflation. The seller might easily have sold for a higher nominal price with the same purchasing power value of cost of the item five or ten years earlier. Economists call that the money illusion and it is an endless slight of hand that makes us think we are better off when we are not. I think that as collectors we get a sort of psychic income from the pleasure of ownership and that is the compensation for a lower expected dollar return on a storable tangible like a Japanese sword in comparison with a higher dollar return demanded by the owner of a financial asset yielding a dividend or interest payment. Midas might differ on that view, but for most of us enjoying the beauty of a wonderful sword just has to trump counting up one's shares held by some brokerage. To digress on just one more point, I am not at all sure that the collecting community is shrinking. I think we should be optimistic about an interest in Japanese swords spreading to cultures and countries well beyond the usual site of Western buyers in North America and Europe, and further in our new electronic world physical presence in a person to person group is less pressing than it was decades ago. Finally it seems to me, perhaps Brian can confirm this, that new folks are posting here all the time with questions, seeking information and expressing their own interest in the Japanese sword and things that go with it. I feel strongly that while those folks might not stick around or become collectors, and most have a knowledge deficit position at the moment, they ought to be welcomed and treated with courtesy to the best of our collective ability. Arnold F.

Hi Stephen: Almost certainly I would think as hardly anyone else signed that way. Arnold F.

Hello Stephen: If the jidada is so different on both sides it makes me wonder how the kawagane plate would have been differentially fashioned prior to the insertion of the shingane, and aside from that how would the metal with differently woven interlacings of the steel in the kawagane respond to the stresses of actual use. I have no idea but in that such side to side differences are hardly common, what is the point and what are the consequences? The differences might seem visually interesting, but what are the practical effects if any? Arnold F.

Hello: Is it well forged to have the jihada vary so much side to side? Arnold F.

Hello: Great advice Brian. Arnold F.

Hello: Speaking of papers, this evening up pops an Aoi offering, AS17125, a Kashu ju Sadayuki with an NTHK (NPO) paper, dated Heisei 26 (2014), about which Aoi raises some doubt. I believe that was the US shinsa that Miyano sensei was unable to participate in on account of health. It is not particularly unusual for Aoi to demur on an attribution, but it more unusual to see any paper other than an NBTHK paper on a Japanese site. I agree with Paul that during the days of the "unified" NTHK the papers of the late Yoshikawa Koen were highly respected in the West, and he was a sword scholar in his own right. Arnold F.

Hello: This has been an interesting thread indeed and it is obvious that once the whiff of bad green papers got into the air the consequential resubmission process of green papered swords year by year would increase the probability of those remaining, and not having been resubmitted, being wrong. Unless I missed it what is unknown is what proportion of green papers were ever wrong? For example for the many collectors outside Japan who have green papers, what is the risk/reward of the lengthy and round about process of sending those blades to Japan as resubmissions? The entire year by year agony which has portrayed those so papered as bad has of course skewed, and not necessarily objectively, that relation towards reward, but with all the attendant costs which may have been unwarranted in the first place. Is there any data on the proportion of bad papers at the out set? The only thing I recall seeing about the 1981 scandal related to Tokubetsu Kicho and Koshu Tokubetsu fakes is found in the January, February, March and July 1986 issues of the Newsletter of the Japanese Sword Club of Southern California, which illustrate several dozen examples and points to but does not name a particular faker in the Fukuoka area of Kyushu. Most of the blades were gendaito it seems and if only one culprit was involved in doing the counterfeits the total output could not have been very large. Does anyone know the actual numbers that were the basis of the allegations at that time? Arnold F.

Hello: As for the line drawing above, the two on the right in any event, do not appear to be generic hoso or ito suguba. They are, and say they are, types of midare where the upper boundary approximates something close to suguba. Classic hoso or ito is, as "ito" makes clear, more or less thread-like. They often will be scant on complementary activity devices like ash, kinsuji, and the like, but not necessarily so. I would image that such hamon tend to be correlated with excellent cutting blades. Arnold F.

Hello: Really interesting thread John! It seems like a nice sword indeed, however we should remember that nobody ever, except the man who did the initial suriage, really knew what mei it carried, if any. That unknown should call for a substantial negative value impact from the get go. I wonder whether just a designation of "Rai" might be a better aspirational thrust than to be so specific as the possibilities would stimulate quite a range of candidates. Second, there is the ambiguity of "...comparable to NBTHK Juyo..." That isn't as clear as the tout's "Put a hundred to Win on horse 7", as it just raises another degree of the unknown. I know many dealers can't resist stoking that imagination machine, but it has its risks and said too many times without good consequence, it can be credibility damaging. Arnold F.

Hello: In my experience the term "Showato" tends to be treated more or less the same as "Gunto", ie, a blade made non-traditionally for military or naval use during Japanese expansionism and war during the 1930s and early 1940s. As Steve says shinsakuto are traditionally made and the term is applied to those made after WWII. When someone speaks of "investment" potential, which could start at zero, that is something entirely different. Buying a bundle of Gunto blades could lead to a tidy "profit" if that is your object and they are not traditional at all. When risk - a very big deal - is figured in, art and "investment" tend to be like oil and water. Arnold F.

Hello: Terrific essay and stunning new institution - Ausgezeichnet! Arnold F.

Hello Joel: There are Japanese National Museums in Tokyo, Kyoto and Nara, and each will have displays of swords and armor. The quality will be high, usually usefully labeled, and the best thing is that each Museum with have other galleries showing the other physical artifacts of the times during which the samurai existed. Those things, sometimes on Zen themes, and of great interest to members of that group, such as sumi-e paintings, tea ceremony items, and the like, always highly complementary to that life and eras, add a lot of aesthetic appreciation and understanding, and will be found in other on site galleries in the same buildings. Arnold F.