Christies London Sale

[Ed]

Christies London "Japanese Art & Design" Auction, #7582 is being held May 14, 2008.

Considerable number of swords (45) with some big names being offered. Names like Go Yoshihiro, Rai Kunimitsu, Kotetsu, etc., etc.

 

Here is the link for those who wish to take a look:

http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/searchresults.aspx?intSaleID=21503#intSaleID=21503

[Rickisan]

Thank you for the info Ed

:D Rick

[Stephen]

Oh to play with the big boys, ill take the two tanto Sword Gods

[undermilkwood]

I would love to own a Go, or a ghost for that matter. I've seen more ghosts than Go's though. Lovely stuff.

 

Roll on this weeks lottery!

 

 

Joe

[Darcy]

I was lucky enough to photograph that Go Yoshihiro the day before it was handed over to Christie's.

 

It has to be seen to be believed, the photos cannot capture the vibrancy of this sword or the condition of the nie. It gave me goosebumps. I can't even really formulate a statement on it, it is too complex and overwhelming in activity to try to nail down without extended study. Best I can say is Oh My God.

 

Any sword collector who is in England or Europe, I'd advise making the trip to Christie's to see this sword. It is a masterpiece by a grand master smith.

 

The other pieces in this sale are no slouches either. There are many that I'd give up a kidney to own.

 

Anyone want to buy a kidney?

[undermilkwood]

You've just sold me!

 

Now I'm goning to spend the next few days thinking of inventive ways of getting time off work to see it

 

Damn you lottery gods!

 

Joe

[Brian]

A lot of the good lots remained unsold. Quite surprising some of the items that remained unsold..perhaps there is some hope for those of you still saving up.

http://www.to-ken.com/articles/Bonhams.htm (Christies sale is lower down the page)

 

Brian

[undermilkwood]

Do you think the gentleman who owns the Go would accept installments over 20 years? :D

 

 

Joe

[Guest reinhard]

A lot of the good lots remained unsold. Quite surprising

 

Not really; and what is a "good lot"?

 

reinhard

[Brian]

I am sure you don't need a dictionary definition of what is a good lot..

But there were some good swords there, and judging by what good swords have fetched there in the past, I would have expected them to sell. Maybe it demonstrates how under-rated Nihonto still are in the art world, or maybe it shows a weak market.

Not all of the unsold lots were bargains and some were probably gimei, but in the "good lots" I would have considered the Tokubetsu Juyo Go Yoshihiro, which only reached GBP75K, and the Rai Kunimitsu didn't go higher than 19K? Even if not one of the best, it should still be worth more than that.

The Nobuie kabuto with its history was probably a worthwhile investment too, but went unsold.

Not everything was good...but it does seem like the market is a bit down, or the high auctioneer commissions are having an impact as predicted.

 

Brian

[paulb]

As mentioned in an earlier thread I was able to go and see some of the swords on sale at both Bonhams and Christies. I was also surprised that the good swords did not generate more interest. I could not understand why the Kuniyasu Tachi failed to reach its low estimate of £40K when a Sukesada blade sold for £36k. Without detracting from the Sukesada the rarity of the Kuniyasu plus its Tokubetsu-Juyo rating should, I would have thought made it much more desirable.

At the other auction the Rai Kunitoshi reached its lower estimate. Personally I did not find this a particularly attractive sword. It was described as Ubu although I note that in Clives description of the sale he said it was suriage. This would make more sense of both the fact it was mumei and a wakazashi (Kodachi). Maybe it was the lighting but I didnt see a great deal going on in it.

There were some very fine blades at Christies and when you consider the sometimes astronomical figures reached by swords in the Mano collection sale and the fittings museum sale it is surpirising that these floundered.

I think as Brian says it is indicative of the general market, notably many lots from other sections of both sales remained unsold. So it is just swords and fittings that are struggling at present.

[Guest reinhard]

I am sure you don't need a dictionary definition of what is a good lot..

Maybe it demonstrates how under-rated Nihonto still are in the art world, or maybe it shows a weak market.

Not all of the unsold lots were bargains and some were probably gimei, but in the "good lots" I would have considered Rai Kunimitsu go higher than 19K?

 

I don't need a dictionary, but others might do. You can't tell a "good lot" by auction catalogues alone. You are right in so far as the market is satiated and the prices are down, as far as the Japanese market is concerned, but what is going on in auction houses like Christies and Sothebys for the past two or three years is a shame. Since they have become even more profit-orientated companies than they were before, they care even less about reliable infos than before, but just publish the ones that suit their purposes. Even swords, which were proven false or at least doubtful appear again years or decades later without correction. You have to see these swords first hand and know their (auction) history before calling them "good lots" or not. Top-class NihonTo still fetch appropriate prices, even at western auctions. If they do not, there's a good chance of something's being wrong with them. This will not work as a general rule, of course, but a Rai Kunimitsu selling for 19K is in all probability not a genuine Rai Kunimitsu, unless the blade has other serious problems.

 

reinhard

[Brian]

Valid points, which is why my reference to "good lots" wasn't based on the catalog descriptions,, but the descriptions by Clive Sinclair who I am sure is qualified to comment.

Of course anyone bidding would have to attend and see for themselves, but I maintain that whilst some of the lots weren't superb, there were good swords that went for lower than they should have. This is based on opinions of those that did attend.

No point debating this, as we all agree that the market is down, and good swords don't go for what they should. I am sure there are many factors causing this, but remember that Nihonto are still a bargain in the art world.

 

Brian

[Jean]

Brian wrote :

 

as we all agree that the market is down, and good swords don't go for what they should

 

Except for buyers

[Guest reinhard]

..., but the descriptions by Clive Sinclair who I am sure is qualified to comment....

No point debating this,...

 

I knew this was going to come, but there is a point very well worth debating. It is the point of reliability and trustiness of auction houses; especially of those which are brands for a long time now. I don't really care who's risking his reputation for whatever sake at present; maybe it's not even his fault, may his name be Clive Sinclair or other. To proove my point I want to give you an example. Three years ago Christies NY offered the collection of swords from the museum of Japanese sword fittings. There was a history of bankrupcy and strange deals predating this auction. In the end the former top-class swords of the collection didn't came to auction, but many unpapered, poor swords did. I would like to show you a "Hankei"-katana, which is obviously gimei (even visible for an advanced beginner and far from his workmanship). Christies offered this sword as "Edo katana signed (not inscribed !) Hankei" accompanied with a sermon describing Hankei's workmanship. The only "hint" by Christies was the ridiculously low estimate of 12'000-18'000$. It was sold for 66'000$!, either to someone with a thick wallet, who trusted Christies and doesn't know sh... about NihonTo or to someone who exactly knew what he was doing beyond art-sword criteria.

reinhard

[Guest Nanshoku-Samurai]

xxx

[Martin]

Max,

 

I think Reinhard wants to point out that Auction houses usually choose the term "signed" when the signature was approved to be valid and "inscribed" if they are not sure (or the signature is false).

Using "signed" would then imply the signature to be correct.

 

best,

[Guest Nanshoku-Samurai]

xxx

[Brian]

Max and Martin are correct, it is common practice to use "signed by xxx" (implying shoshin) and "inscribed xxx" or "ascribed to xxx" (implying gimei or questionable)

Not a rule though, but it is the right way to do it. However when a sword doesn't have papers, I would be wary of any of those descriptions anyways. Don't expect swords at auction to be any different from those you find at the dealers. I am sure Darcy and others will be able to give more input on this.

 

Brian

[Guido]

I'm holding the catalog right in my hands: all blades are described as either "unsigned" or "signed", no matter how dubious the signature is. If one goes to the back of the catalog, an explanation says:

'signed' Has a signature which in our qualified opinion is the signature of the artist.

'bears signature' and/or 'inscribed' Has a signature and/or inscription which in our qualified opinion might be the signature and/or the inscription of the artist.

 

I agree with Reinhard: they did a fine job being misleading. If giving them the benefit of the doubt, and assuming it was unintentionally ... well, there goes their "qualified opinion" ...

[Guest Nanshoku-Samurai]

xxx