Importance of a "Ubu" Nakago and Blade Length

[Cookie4Monstah]

Greetings everyone,

 

I recently spoke with a local collector who placed an emphasis on "ubu" nakago and blade length of 28+ inches when it comes katana. How important are these variables to you any why? I personally don't know enough about this subject matter to formulate an opinion but this does seem like the approach of a perfectionist.

 

Thanks,

Khalid

[1tallsword]

your dealer im guessing is referring to edo and later period swords. most koto swords are o-suriage/suriage  (cut down nakago). In my opinion an ubu nakago is very important in later swords as if my memory serves me they can not get juyo if cut down nakago. this may have changed. earlier koto swords are fine. so if your asking my opinion then its doesnt matter to me being koto but if edo than for me it must be ubu.  

[Surfson]

As a general rule, most collectors prefer blades to be at least "josun" or 70cm, which is just over 27.5".   An ubu nakago is always preferred, regardless of era or age.  Signed is preferred to not signed.  In terms of length, after the Edo period, the standard length for gunto (military swords) was closer to the range of 66-68 cm, so the view of the above mostly applies to swords from Edo period or earlier.  

[Grey Doffin]

Everything is relative. All else being equal, an ubu katana of 75 cm is better than a 68 cm, suriage katana but a flawless though shortened katana is better than an ubu katana with a bad defect.

Grey

[IBot]

I own a daisho, the daito of which has a nagasa of only 52cm and a tang that appears to be ubu with a single mekugi ana. I queried this via a Japanese resident who asked his sword teacher's opinion. The answer given was that it probably belonged to a person of small stature. A person carried and used a sword they were comfortable with and they trained to fight with. [ Being a skeptic, I also tend to think that quite a few daisho probably started life in the Meiji era to supply the demands of the tourist trade. There were plenty of sayamakishi, blades and sword fittings around that could be picked up and turned into a desirable item to sell at a higher price than two disparate swords. ] There is also the matter of period when it comes to blade length. Another of my swords has a blade by Bizen Osafune Saemonjo Norimitsu dated 1468. That is again ubu and has a nagasa of 60.5cm. This however is an uchigatana or katate uchi to, a sword designed specifically for use with one hand. Can we get too hung up on definitions of length?

Ian Bottomley  

[Fuuten]

3 hours ago, Surfson said:

As a general rule, most collectors prefer blades to be at least "josun" or 70cm, which is just over 27.5".   An ubu nakago is always preferred, regardless of era or age.

For OP to add a little on the why.

 

In regards to length. The longer a work the more difficult it is for the smith to control forging conditions and thus be able to make flawless blades. 

 

On ubu nagako, part of the reason is that many swords have had their form changed in order to meet changing fighting conditions. Mainly for swords forged after the start of the Edo period, this practice of shortening swords happens less frequently but besides having say an original painting or a restored cutout of a famous painting, one would rather see it as intended by the painter (or smith in this case). 

 

One of the things I always have a hard time with is to imagine/ reconstruct what a suriage sword would've looked like when made, regardless of whether or not the current shape is pleasing.

[Alex A]

Ubu Nakago is of great help when you want to work out what school made your sword.

[Paz]

From my opinion and experience. 

 

Ubu and blade length is more important in edo period shinto and Shinshinto swords. As these swords were never used or made for intended use due to the relative peace unless they are for tameishigiri. 

 

Signatures are also important on edo period shinto blades for the same reason above. Signatures are also a sales gimmick for sales people and dealers as they beleive it sales the swords even if they are fake and from a less reputable school. 

 

Some dealers are so ill informed that they would rather buy a signed inferior blade to a koto which is tokubetsu hozon. Again because they don't actually know anything. 

 

I collected shinto swords ubu and sold them. Now I stick to only koto blades which are papered. And koto blades are mostly suriage, but superior to ubu long blades if they are of superior school. And not all shinto swords are that great. 

 

Also koto swords are more historical, made for purpose and have usually more activity. 

 

But some may disagree with me. But I collect on basis of history, as that what interests alot of people. Yes I have a great ubu shinto blade, but there's no history to it. 

 

I've collected both.But now I tend to stick to koto blades. 

 

Regards 

[IBot]

In my comment above I managed to include a mistake that bothered me all night.  'SAYAMAKISHI' - what rubbish!! I meant simply 'sayashi', the makers of scabbards. Groveling apologies.

Ian Bottomley

[Surfson]

Paz, many are bitten by the "koto bug", including myself.  

 

However, I have kept most of my great shinto and shinshinto blades (mostly signed, ubu, polished, papered and obtained in need of restoration from ebay over the last two plus decades), and just been adding koto blades to the collection.  

 

My frustration with koto blades is the huge emphasis on kantei, since so many of these swords are osuriage.  That puts collectors often in the position of buying, for high prices, mumei (osuriage) blades with high level papers to makers that the shinsa team chose.  In many cases, we are paying huge prices just for the papers on swords lacking a signature.

 

Since I have bought many of my koto blades on ebay or at shows and had them restored, I have to say that I have several that have gotten two, three or even four different attributions.  

 

I don't share your sense of koto superiority - shinto and shinshinto blades are wonderful, are often great examples of the pinnacle of Edo period sword making and can be found in perfect, near-mint condition, as they were when new.  

 

Also, the imagination of swords as art fluorished during the shinto period and later, and there are many schools that produced magnificent pieces of sword art.  Many of these, e.g. Kiyomaro, command prices at or exceeding the prices brought by many of the koto masters.

 

The path you have taken is very common and perfectly normal, though it need not be accompanied by a loss of affection for shinto swords.  I have found some very nice koto blades and love owning and restoring them, but I love my Edo period swords as well.

[Alex A]

Really well put that Bob!

 

Afher that Kantei experience, couldn't agree more

 

Seriously though, some wonderful blades from the Edo period, Ubu and signed

[Paz]

3 hours ago, Surfson said:

Paz, many are bitten by the "koto bug", including myself.  

 

However, I have kept most of my great shinto and shinshinto blades (mostly signed, ubu, polished, papered and obtained in need of restoration from ebay over the last two plus decades), and just been adding koto blades to the collection.  

 

My frustration with koto blades is the huge emphasis on kantei, since so many of these swords are osuriage.  That puts collectors often in the position of buying, for high prices, mumei (osuriage) blades with high level papers to makers that the shinsa team chose.  In many cases, we are paying huge prices just for the papers on swords lacking a signature.

 

Since I have bought many of my koto blades on ebay or at shows and had them restored, I have to say that I have several that have gotten two, three or even four different attributions.  

 

I don't share your sense of koto superiority - shinto and shinshinto blades are wonderful, are often great examples of the pinnacle of Edo period sword making and can be found in perfect, near-mint condition, as they were when new.  

 

Also, the imagination of swords as art fluorished during the shinto period and later, and there are many schools that produced magnificent pieces of sword art.  Many of these, e.g. Kiyomaro, command prices at or exceeding the prices brought by many of the koto masters.

 

The path you have taken is very common and perfectly normal, though it need not be accompanied by a loss of affection for shinto swords.  I have found some very nice koto blades and love owning and restoring them, but I love my Edo period swords as well.

 

That's well put Robert. 

 

I am quite harsh it seems on my statement about shinto blades. My problem may be that I've viewed and seen more koto blades which have caught my attention and wowed me more than shinto swords. 

 

There are some shinto era blades which I adore such as the kotetsu which belonged to isami kondo. 

 

At the stage of my collection, I go by historical significance, if the blade talks history I'm all ears and eyes. And seem to have a biased towards battlefield weapons. 

 

However, I'm early in the journey. And my taste may soon wear off and that could be where I wake up from the Koto sting. 

 

Regards 

Paz