Ubu and Mumei

[Surfson]

This is the other sword that I just bought. My powers of kantei, especially of old mumei blades, are not well developed; my powers of photography are even worse. So with those complete and full disclosures, here goes.

 

The blade is mumei, appears to be ubu, has one hole and is quite long - 79.3cm/31.25". It has funbari (don't want to start up the debate about what that is - I am referring to rapid tapering of the motohaba in the first 4-6 inches of the blade). It also has significant tapering of both the kasane (thickness) and the width (from motohaba to sakihaba). It has a deep koshizori and is fairly straight in the monouchi. The hamon is what I would call notare and the hada is mokume, including in the shinogi ji.

 

Based on the shape and condition, including significant old rust in the nakago, it looks to me like it could be a kamakura tachi. But maybe I'm just experiencing some wishful thinking here. So I would love to hear the opinions and commentary of any and all. I am posting a few of my bad photos and have many more if there are certain features you would like to see. Cheers, Bob

[Lance]

Looks to be masame hada and a wide shinogi, maybe Yamato school?

Below's a pic from a Yamato Hoshu school sword to compare

 

Looks like a nice find, hope this is of some use, I'm sure someone will provide more or correct info if I'm mistaken about school.

 

 

http://www.sho-shin.com/yam12.htm

 

Regards,

Lance

[Surfson]

It's a good suggestion, Lance. The shinogi seems to be fairly high, which I understand is a feature of Yamato blades. I couldn't take good pictures of the hamon, but there appears to be a mix of masame and mokume. Cheers, bob

[SwordGuyJoe]

Looks as though you may have something here...

[Surfson]

One thing that has me wondering is that it has a small bit of muneyaki in the region of the kissaki. It's no more than an inch and goes back just past the yokote, but it looks to me like it should be a kantei point. Did koto blades have that type of turn back or is this a feature only of younger blades? I'm attaching a photo, though it's not great. Cheers, Bob

[cabowen]

A general, rule of thumb, if you like, is the longer the turnback, the later the blade when it comes to koto. Nakago looks Muromachi to me. With that kaeri, that would fit...just speculation...

[Surfson]

That's a useful guide Chris. I've been looking through Nagayama, and find at least three boshi shapes that it might fit; Jizo, notare komi and kaeri (either yoru, katai or fukai). Of those, the kaeri fukai looks most like it to me. When I google "kaeri boshi kamakura", I come up with this image, which looks quite like it. Oddly, it links to Yamashiro Rai Kunitsugu school, and when I go to the link, it is Bob Cole's nice site of schools but the image is not there. If I google kaeri fukai and Rai, I do get other examples of this type of boshi, but they are on tanto. Cheers, Bob

[cabowen]

"kaeri" means "return" and needs an adjective with it to mean anything...."kaeri fukai" or "kaeri nagai", for example.

 

You can surely find exceptions to the general rule if you look around but be sure to consider all factors when arriving at a conclusion.

[Surfson]

Yes, that was my understanding. Since I was using google image, I thought that just using kaeri would capture all images of the various lengths of kaeri. The image that I posted looks very much like the kaeri (fukai) on this blade, so it got my interest up, but unfortunately, the link was not a good one, as is often the case with google image, since it searches the entire text of the site, not just the legend to individual photos. Anyway, I'm beginning to think that I might submit it to the NTHK-NPO and see what they say about it. I have to admit that the length and the shape both lead me to older than muromachi. What is it about the tang that makes you think muromachi, Chris? Cheers, Bob

[cabowen]

Ubu, one meguki-ana, well shaped, with an even, unpitted surface, crisp edges, etc., makes me think it isn't Kamakura old. Again, certainly there may be the exception, but in general, from what I can see in the photos, it doesn't give me the impression that it is that old.

 

I believe there was a period in Muromachi when the older tachi style was in vogue, was it not?

 

Of course, it could be an old Kamakura Yamato blade that sat in a temple for 700 years....Shinsa would be a good idea....I'm just throwing out impressions based on your photos...certainly not a definitive answer...

[Surfson]

Well this is fun Chris. I did fully disclose my weak photography skills. Do any of these photos lead you to reconsider? Cheers, Bob

[cabowen]

No, not at all. They show a lot what looks like the type of rust that forms from high levels of humidity rather quickly, rather than the slow, deep, dark kind of rust that we see on really old blades. This rust bubbles up and has a red cast, forming a rough surface...I have a WWII Nagamitsu here that must have had the tsuka dipped in water at some point as the end of the nakago looks just like this.

 

Look how sharp the edges and the rust are- also the mekugi-ana. Really old blades are usually worn quite smooth.

[Surfson]

Thanks Chris. Well, I think that shinsa may be in order before sending this one to Japan. It is very rare to find ubu koto so long, whether it's muromachi or earlier. Cheers, Bob

[cabowen]

  Surfson said:

Thanks Chris. Well, I think that shinsa may be in order before sending this one to Japan. It is very rare to find ubu koto so long, whether it's muromachi or earlier. Cheers, Bob

 

 

[Tcat]

Such an elegant looking sugata and hamon. It probably isn't Kamakura and Rai but looks at least like a nod in that direction as more knowledgeable than I have said. I cant add much to the discussion other than to say on looking at the pics Kamakura and Rai were the first things that popped into my head. What a beauty. If goes to shinsa please post results!

[Jean]

Beginning of Muromachi (1394-1450) smiths carried on forging swords with late Heian early Kamakura sugata, I have seen Oei Yasumitsu (I have one) and Eikyô Norimitsu blades having this sugata.

[nagamaki - Franco]

  Jean said:

Beginning of Muromachi (1394-1450) smiths carried on forging swords with late Heian early Kamakura sugata

 

Greetings,

 

This would be my opinion for this blade. Visible size nie suggests perhaps Yamato, but I 'm thinking this is not a mainline blade, more likely a branch school copy. Would suggest getting a traveling shinsa result as well as talking things over with a good polisher before proceeding with this sword.

[Marius]

I think it does not look like Hosho (not pure masame - see below).

 

What do we have here:

 

Hada is coarse itame nagare with some masame, some o-hada can be seen (?), hamon is nie-based, there seems to be a turnback in the boshi (?), the nakagojiri i bulbous and nakago mune is maru. Sugata is indeed suggesting an early sword, but as already has said here, such sugata was also used in the early Muromachi period.

 

I could imagine the NBTHK attributing this one to Uda, a Yamato offshoot, and a popular grab-bag for wakimono with Yamato characteristics. As for me, I have no idea what school

 

Whatever it is, certainly an excellent find. Congratulations :-)

It deserves a polish and shinsa (if your finances allow).

 

Well done!

[Stephen]

Been told when in doubt go Uda....

[Marius]

Precisely Stephen, precisely

 

In tsuba the rule is: If in doubt, go Shoami

[Surfson]

Wow, lots of great feedback. As of now, I have been leaning toward getting a local shinsa, either NTHK-NPO or NTHK, before deciding about sending it to Japan. But I sense from some of you that if it were to paper to a secondary school and early Muromachi, some of you may have it restored anyway and others would reconsider. Do I have that right? I would love to hear what other collectors think about restoring Muromachi blades that aren't bundle swords but are actually well made. By the way, the macrophotography overemphasizes the hada grain size. The hada is barely visible with the naked eye. Cheers, Bob

[Jean]

Is Uda to sword what is Shoami to tsuba?

[Marius]

Robert,

 

I think that is a good way to go. If the state of the polish allows it, submit it to a local shinsa, by all means. Good swords have been made in all periods, and this does not look like a kazuuchimono (look at that length!). It is ubu, it looks good, and if there are no fatal flaws (might be hard to tell), it is definitely worth restoring.

 

Side schools have also produced very good swords. It is just that they are less popular with collectors, most likely because they were flexible regarding style. You know, you get that lovely Bizen sword, you are all excited, and shinsa says "Bungo Takada"

 

With Uda, some look like Norishige, some look like Taema, etc...

[nagamaki - Franco]

  Surfson said:

Do I have that right? I would love to hear what other collectors think about restoring Muromachi blades that aren't bundle swords but are actually well made.

 

There comes a time when one must determine what their collecting objectives are and state them clearly if they wish to become a serious collector or just remain a hobby collector. Then it becomes simpler to decide what to do. It is easy to tie up significant investments in swords that don't amount to much more than hozon level.

 

Enjoy the sword, study and learn from it, then move on, take the next step. On the other hand if the sword turns out to be something better, then follow that through.

[Jean]

  Quote

There comes a time when one must determine what their collecting objectives are and state them clearly if they wish to become a serious collector or just remain a hobby collector. Then it becomes simpler to decide what to do. It is easy to tie up significant investments in swords that don't amount to much more than hozon level.

 

 

[Surfson]

Mariusz and Franco, you have both been quite helpful, thank you. Franco, I'm not sure what kind of collector I am. I love minty Mishina blades with lots of art in them, but I also love koto - the older and more interesting to view the better. I find that the latter, especially when mumei, challenge my ability to appraise much more. If I assume that this blade will paper, as we are collectively beginning to suspect, let's say early Muromachi or late Nambokucho, then I agree that it is worthy of restoration. Both of you raised the financial issue. I am in the enviable position that I have three or four swords that are all worthy (including possibly the Naoyoshi that is under discussion in another thread right now), so I will need to decide which are most worthy, based on both my responses and affections for them as well as the economic issues. If this one were to paper to an important school or to an earlier era, that would influence the economics of the decision. Strange mix of emotions and practicality, no?

[nagamaki - Franco]

  Surfson said:

I love minty Mishina blades with lots of art in them, but I also love koto - the older and more interesting to view the better.

 

Objectives need to be measurable and repeatable, like collecting swords that only meet Tokubetsu Hozon standards and requirements, or collecting only signed shoshin Mishina swords, or, or, or ..... . Saying "I love minty Mishina blades with lots of art in them" is a subjective statement.

 

  Surfson said:

If I assume that this blade will paper, as we are collectively beginning to suspect, let's say early Muromachi or late Nambokucho, then I agree that it is worthy of restoration.

 

Hmm, careful, mumei early Muromachi is not the same as mumei late Nambokucho. Best understand all the issues, "objectives", involved and going on here and what the differences mean, otherwise one could be making a big mistake.

[Surfson]

Yes Franco, my likes and dislikes are very subjective, and many have been learned from other collectors and colleagues. I do want to avoid a big financial mistake, that is for sure. To me, investing $5K into this blade and having it stall out at Hozon would be a financial mistake. At the end of the day, my expertise will never match that of the true experts that are at the NBTHK and NTHK organizations (and some on this board!), and we are all aware that the views of these organizations about swords can really drive both the market value of an individual sword as well as the perceived worth subjectively. I am benefitting from this discussion, and do plan to come back to it once I have put the sword through a local shinsa. Cheers, Bob

[seattle1]

Hello:

Franco has gently raised some interesting considerations. The issue of mu mei, particularly mu mei ubu, and just when and under what conditions they might be collected, particularly given the cost of restoration and its consequent value adding impact, is, to say the least, interesting. There is no right or wrong answer of course, but the surrounding questions raise issues that any collector might want to consider.

I would add to the foregoing the very serious cautions raised by Nobuo Nakahara. Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords: A Collector's Guide (Kodansha, 2010). Mu mei are not "bad" per se, some are entirely legitimate (as the translator of the text, Paul Martin, points out at some length), however sometimes they are mu mei post manufacture, to make them to appear to be more than they are and thus a bigger drain on the collector's wallet than they ought to be. It is a broad topic, one not often discussed in the sword literature, but one well worth consideration and fleshed out by the reality check(s) provided by Nakahara.

Arnold F.

[Marius]

Arnold,

 

Do I recall correctly that Nakahara writes primarily about mumei ubu swords made to look like older o-suriage swords? This is obviously not the case here. Well, mumei is a controversial subject, I guess