How Bad Is It Long Term For Mumei?

[Guest Rayhan]

Hi all

 

I just got done reading Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords by Nobuo Nakahara (translation by Paul Martin).

 

In the chapter of Mumei blades beginning on page 119 the author takes a very firm stance on the lack of 1) value and 2) provenance. So just to put this one out there, what do the members think of Mumei overall any staunch stances on them?

 

Rayhan Perera

 

 

[Stephen]

 

NO worries about gimei...lol

[Guest Rayhan]

Absolutely Stephen! I'm with you, lol, no risk of Gimei!

[BIG]

Don' love mumei on shin shinto blades

 

Best Regards

[Guest Rayhan]

Hey Peter

 

I know right, I have a Mumei (Hozon papered) Hosokawa Masayoshi but after reading the segment on Mumei my heart kinda sank. It screams Hosakawa from the Nakago and the Hamon, etc but alas no Mei. It was a purchase, as they all should be, of the heart, a beautiful sword.

 

Rayhan Perera

[paulb]

Facts and fundementals contains some very interesting material and useful information. However despite the title some of it's content is not fact but opinion. The authors stance on mumei blades is not supported by the market or the academic bodies associated with swords. I dont have the exact data but just looking at the Juyo zufu volumes you can see the huge number of highly ranked mumei blades (including most of those attributed to Masamune, Sadamune etc).

Yes it makes perfect sense to say that ubu signed blades are easier to authenticate, although many shinto signed works have been proven to be gimei over time. To suggest  mumei work  lack value is not supported by the current market, the historical market or I doubt the future.

[nagamaki - Franco]

 So just to put this one out there, what do the members think of Mumei overall any staunch stances on them?

 

Rayhan Perera

 

Staunch stances? Yes, if my lottery number comes in I will staunchly be lined up to buy all the mumei nihonto I've had my eye on for sometime. And as a buyer I will almost certainly be pointing out that written portion in the book when negotiating price.

[Guest Rayhan]

Agreed Paul - And so many of the Koto Mumei are captivating!

[paulb]

BTW I also have a mumei blade attributed to a shinshinto Hosakawa smith which I think is aboslutely beautiful and was bought simply becaue I liked what was in front of me.

[IJASWORDS]

If you get a MUMEI blade papered, no one can question it. Neil.  

[nagamaki - Franco]

An additional note. Search hard enough and a student/collector can find excellent mumei swords that will have paper(s), sayagaki, and additional attribution in one form or another, all agreeing as to who made that sword really leaving no doubt, and that is the kind of (mumei) sword a student/collector in my view should be focused on collecting anyway, where mumei swords are concerned. 

[kissakai]

My mumei is:

Tairyusai Munehiro (Sokan)

With papers and sayagaki

A wonderful katana

[lonely panet]

The 62nd newly designated IMPORTANT SWORDS display at the Japanese Sword Museum, has 26 of the finest sword imaginable.

 

8 are mumei (including a Masamune and a Hein GOJO)

 

and 3 shumei (one is a sadamune)

 

so maybe his standards/opinions are ridiculous high or elitest

 

just my humble, simple and uneducated thought for the week.

 

regards H

[Kronos]

In shinto and shinshinto it's not desirable at all, same as suriage but the further back you go the more permissible it becomes. The Japanese love their brands but having said that it has to be taken on a case by case basis imho. If I found a Hankei or Horikawa Kunihiro that was mumei then the quality is going to be on a level where you can be 99.9% certain it was made by that smith for a fraction of the price.

 

Take these 2 swords as an example:

 

http://sanmei.com/contents/media/K48473_S1245_PUP_E.html

http://www.japanesesword.de/?site=sword&id=74&lang=en

 

¥6m and 25k Euro (About ¥3m), yet I would argue the second is a superior sword in almost every respect except it is not juyo, mumei and machi-okuri (I think the first maybe slightly suriage but not positive). It won't achieve juyo status as it is directly competing with all the signed morimitsu's. To be fair to the iesuke I don't think they're the best photo's and it's in older polish but the fact remains there is such a wealth on knowledge about Morimitsu that if the NBTHK attributes it to him it may as well be signed and it is a fantastic example.

[Dave R]

The old advice is, was and always will be, "buy the blade, not the signature"!

[Greg F]

Interesting topic, thanks Rayhan. I really value my facts and fundamentals book but i still love mumei. All the best.

 

Greg

[Guest Rayhan]

I have to agree with the general consensus that the blade is what counts. We can't help who we fall in love with after all.  I will take the authors comments with a pinch of salt since Mumei will always be part of my collection.

[Alex A]

As mentioned, a good sword will always be a good sword, signed or not signed, signature is a bonus.

 

You might find parts of this thread interesting

http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/9068-why-mumei/

[Jean]

We must be clear on mumei. There are two kinds of mumei Nihonto:

 

- ubu mumei Nihonto

- O suriage mumei Nihonto

 

judgement can change according to the case. If you want an opinion just have a look at NBTHK criteria for different kanteisho levels.

 

Now there are fine ubu mumei swords even in shinshinto but don't expect, even with a NBTHK kanteisho, to have found a diamond in the mud. A signed blade by a given smith shall always be better valued than an unsigned one by the same smith.

 

On a koto sword, a Juyo o suriage mumei Kamakura tachi by a sai jo smith will often be offered at less than half the price of a Juyo signed one.

[Guest Rayhan]

Alex that older posting is mega thought provoking indeed. I do see the point when it comes to Ubu Nakago vs O-Suriage and still due to the nature of swords being individuals we can never really determine how much the sword was shortened (in most cases) just form kantei. 

[Alex A]

Hi, not an exact science, but if you look at whats left of the sword, you know the era, look at the sori etc, might be able come up with a decent guestimate, Odachi might be tricky though, read some were massive 

 

This general guide to blade changes comes in handy sometimes http://www.yamakawadojo.com/the%20japanese%20sword%20historical%20changes%20in%20shape.pdf

[Mark S.]

If you get a MUMEI blade papered, no one can question it. Neil.

As I own 2 mumei blades and like them very much, my following comment has more to do with continuing the discussion vs starting an argument

 

I would think any mumei blade's attribution can be 'questioned'... send a mumei blade to another organization (or even the same at a later date) and the results might be different depending on who is looking at it.

 

Of course, if the blade has been inspected on more than one occasion and the results are the same... or very close to the same, then I think it is much more difficult to 'question'.

 

However, that is one of the things I find interesting about mumei blades (at least relatively good ones). There is always something to find, or discuss, or research that either supports or refutes an attribution. Yes, a signed blade that has been authenticated is a safe bet.

 

A mumei blade will always have a bit of mystery. For some, it is not their cup of tea, for others it is.

 

Mark S.

[b.hennick]

With papered mumei blades the attribution is a measure of perceived quality of the blade. I have seen a mumei blade with several papers all going to different smiths but smiths of the same rank (above average but not spectacular). So the attribution may differ but I think that you will see that the level of the smith (quality of work) will be the same. 

[Guest Rayhan]

Barry, I am now tempted to try that, sending in an already TH papered blade and seeing the result, scary and nerve wracking as shinsa is it would be an interesting test. 

[paulb]

it has been done and documented many times before. In the past there have been stories of swords being re-submitted until the owner got the attribution they thought was right (dont know if it is true but there have certainly been changes in attribution on repapering)

The point isa shinsa is an opinion, true it is likely to be a lot more accurate than others might be but it is still an opinion and not necessarily definitive.

Outside of Japan we tend to place much more emphasis on the "rightness" of an attribution, perhaps because we depend on them more with fewer examples to see first hand. This has created a belief that a shinsa opinion is absolute, which it isn't.

BTW attributions well above TH have changed when resubmitted. A few I have heard of are a TH Rai blade being given Juyo to Ko-Senjuin, an Ichimonji being re-attributed to Edo-Ishido nd a Shintogo Kunimitsu to Awataguchi Norikuni

[Jamie]

I have a Mumei sadatsuna. It's practically spectacular. Had a is like silk. Has many very subtle activities.

I also have a Mumei Hasebe

It's the best example of hitatsura I've ever seen. Literally.

I don't need for it to be signed. It's what they were famous for. I also don't care who made it. It's stunning.

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

Kogarasu maru is mumei. How much is the discount ?

[nagamaki - Franco]

Hello,

 

As we talk about resubmission it is my thought, belief, from experience, that one must also talk about polish at the same time. While it might be the sword itself that leaves open the question of exactly who done it, it very well might also be the case that the polisher did not bring out the critical detail(s) that confirms the maker. The detail which gives the shinsa judge the confidence to say "we have a bingo!"  The shinsa judge cannot call what he cannot see. There is also the problem of 'it's a magnificent shinto polish,' if only it wasn't on a koto sword. As student/collectors our work is only half [finished] when a mumei sword returns from shinsa. There have been numerous occasions where a sword with OK papers was bought, repolished, and then went Juyo when resubmitted.  

[Ron STL]

When reading the chapter on mumei swords my first thought was, "Well I guess I'll have set out my mumei Juyo Token Kamakura/Nambokucho swords out for the next trash collection (not)!" As has already pointed out there are mumei swords that are less desirable than others: mumei shishinto vs mumei Kamakura. swords. Just look at the swords that received Juyo rating (or Yushu rating) and notice the percentage of each as the swords move from Kamakura into shinto/shinshinto swords. I'm sure there are swords that were made suriage and only look like old koto examples, but all the more reason to study and learn to realize "quality" and what to look for. Certainly the book deals in "opinions" but also has good advice on that to look for so collectors will know what to and what not to see in honest mumei swords. Interesting topic to discuss and learn from.

Ron STL

[nagamaki - Franco]

Hello,

 

Regarding mumei.

 

 

 

paulb said

I found the piece in Tanobe-sans article I referred to in the earlier text. I quote:
"We know during the Edo period The Honami family applied Kinzogan-mei to blades which got mumei after the O-suriage process. When an attribution was done on an ubu but mumei blade, it was inscribed via a Shu-mei (red lacquer signature) From time to time we find blades which show a kind of shu-mei but which can be identified as O-suriage by the way the yakiba goes over the machi. Such attributions were done from the Meiji period onwards, and are not called shu-mei but shu-sho (red lacquer inscriptions). Also Kinpun-mei were not applied during the Edo period but also from the Meiji period onwards"
I hope this may help to clarify and confirm peoples views

Regards
Paul