To Shinsa...or Not to Shinsa...That is the Question.

[waljamada]

Greetings all,

 

I have four items: three signed unpapered blades and one signed unpapered tsuba and only two shinsa tickets to the NTHK in the upcoming Chicago Sword Show.  Which two items would you submit?

 

All three blades have different strengths and weaknesses/flaws and even gimei potentials so I submit them to the highly esteemed NMB members for their opinions to help me choose wisely on my first shinsa opportunity.

 

I will list some general information about the blades and tsuba in order that they appear in the video.  Disclaimer: All information is "to the best of my knowledge".

 

1) Mei: Kunitsugu

Era: possible Bunmei Period or between late 1400s and early 1500s. 

Nagasa: 25.5"

 

2) Mei: Ashu Ju Michimasa

Era: Either 1716 or 1804 Generation Nagasa: 26 1/3"

 

3) Mei: Kanekado

Era: Possibly Tenmon (1532-1555) Nagasa: 27.5"

 

4 Tsuba Mei: Hashimoto Isshi (Yushusha)

Era: possibly between 1820-1896?)  I know very little about this tsuba...

 

ALSO it's requested that one submit the blades in a "paper saya".  Does anyone have a photo example or perhaps instructions/suggestions how best to make one?

 

Video of above items in the Shinsa running:

 

Below some additional photos:

 

 

[Mark S.]

Mr Paul Martin gave an excellent primer in making a paper shirasaya.  

 

You can get away without using the extra reinforcement.  The paper shirasaya for shinsa is there for 2 reasons;

1) to protect the shinsa team

2) to safely get the blade to and from the show

 

No need to overdo.  You will throw out afterward.  

[waljamada]

Mark, thank you very much!  Don't think there could of been a more perfect resource video!

 

Adam

[Mark S.]

It doesn’t have to be perfect… it just has to be good.   And I know you received the letter, but just to reiterate some of the info - remove the habaki and completely clean the blade of all oil.  You want the shinsa team to see the bare blade in as clean a state as possible.  You do not need to cover the nakago with anything, it should be exposed out of the paper shirasaya.  And another important thing… CASH ONLY for the paperwork if the blades pass.  They are not set up for credit card.  More than one person has had to run to the ATM at the last second.  Seen it in person at my last shinsa event that I attended so it does happen. 

[Mark S.]

Now on to which items to shinsa.  I would choose the first two blades you listed.  The third blade has a bit of damage (hard to tell from the photos) and unless it’s something special, I would want to know more about the first two.  I do not know as much about ‘good’ tsuba  (just admitting my limitations) so I will rely on others to steer you in that direction if they feel the tsuba & artist are noteworthy enough.  It’s just out of my lane to give you that advice and I don’t want to steer you wrong.  

[ChrisW]

6 hours ago, waljamada said:

Greetings all,

 

I have four items: three signed unpapered blades and one signed unpapered tsuba and only two shinsa tickets to the NTHK in the upcoming Chicago Sword Show.  Which two items would you submit?

 

All three blades have different strengths and weaknesses/flaws and even gimei potentials so I submit them to the highly esteemed NMB members for their opinions to help me choose wisely on my first shinsa opportunity.

 

I will list some general information about the blades and tsuba in order that they appear in the video.  Disclaimer: All information is "to the best of my knowledge".

 

1) Mei: Kunitsugu

Era: possible Bunmei Period or between late 1400s and early 1500s. 

Nagasa: 25.5"

 

2) Mei: Ashu Ju Michimasa

Era: Either 1716 or 1804 Generation Nagasa: 26 1/3"

 

3) Mei: Kanekado

Era: Possibly Tenmon (1532-1555) Nagasa: 27.5"

 

4 Tsuba Mei: Hashimoto Isshi (Yushusha)

Era: possibly between 1820-1896?)  I know very little about this tsuba...

 

ALSO it's requested that one submit the blades in a "paper saya".  Does anyone have a photo example or perhaps instructions/suggestions how best to make one?

 

Video of above items in the Shinsa running:

 

Below some additional photos:

 

 

I agree. First and second. Third shows promise but needs work first I would say. Looking forward to seeing you at the show!

[waljamada]

Mark and Chris,

 

Thanks for the advice!  Just to share some of my internal debate; I was also thinking the first two blades.  The main  reason i still feel tempted by the Kanekado is because that blade and the Kunitsugu, with so many generations and potentials, increases the difficulty for me personally to "verify" or narrow down facts around them.  The ashu ju michimasa in sheer numbers is much less therefore easier for "amateur verification" within a higher degree of certainty.  I am also unsure if the current state of polish of the blade is good enough for shinsa as I have no experience submitting and don't know required parameters.  Also, I am in the que with Woody Hall for the Michimasa to be polished.

 

So right now I am still leaning towards the first two blades, Kunitsugu and the Michimasa.  I believe the tsuba is pertaining to be made by a well known maker but I don't know enough to feel strongly about it.  

 

I know none of these are "heavy treasures" but I look forward to adding a bit more shinsa light to my little Nihonto corner to where there was none before.  Playing my part in helping some of these items in my care.

 

[SteveM]

Hi Adam, can I ask where the dates for the Michimasa blade come from (1716 or 1804)? 

 

[waljamada]

Hey Steve

,

From the seller and I believe from the seller before him whom I believe was a dealer.  So it's a pass down of unknown origin.  Google searches are zilch for the smith but I do perhaps remember someone looking him up in a book for me and found those two active periods for a smith going by Ashu Ju Michimasa.  It's been quite a while.

 

Also I noticed you were the one who shared/translated who the maker of my tsuba with me many moons ago.  Thank you for that.

 

Adam

[SteveM]

Yes, I remember the tsuba, and I am now wrestling with your dilemma of two shinsa slots for 4 items, which is why I am looking at the dates for Michimasa. Personally, I think the Michimasa is slightly problematic because he doesn't appear in Markus's index, or Fujishiro, or Tokuno. He's a bit of an unknown smith. The shape of the sword screams kanbun shintō, which is not a favorite shape/era for collectors. So the combination of unknown name, and slightly boring shape (your mileage may vary) makes me think there is not a lot of value in trying to get an authentication for this sword.

 

Normally I would lean towards submitting the Kanekado and the Kunitsugu for shinsa. There are many smiths with these two names, spanning kotō to shintō, and I feel the value of getting even one of these smiths authenticated would well outweigh getting the Michimasa authenticated (assuming he can be authenticated). But I'm slightly suspicious of the carvings on the Kanekado and the red lacquer on the Kunitsugu. Only slightly suspicious... because these things can be used to hide or disguise flaws. If there are no obviously suspicious cracks or openings, they should be OK. And of the two I'd say the Kunitsugu looks promising. 

 

The tsuba looks good to me, but here too, the risk/reward proposition seems much greater for the swords than it does for the tsuba. 

 

Anyway, still thinking on this, and its kind of an interesting exercise in game theory. Also, if one of the swords did come back with a kotō attribution, I would swap out the Masamichi for the authenticated kotō sword in Woody's polishing queue. 

 

Edit: Markus lists a Michimasa, but he is from Owari and not Ashu. 

 

[John C]

5 hours ago, waljamada said:

I believe the tsuba is pertaining to be made by a well known maker but I don't know enough to feel strongly about it.  

Adam:

This sounds like a good reason to submit it. I would pick the two items I know the least about. Shinsa may be a good educational experience.

John C.

[waljamada]

John,

 

The tsuba is definetly tempting because of the name attached.  I don't have any papered tsubas but do have a nbthk white papered koshirae which I do enjoy.  That tsuba came on the Ashu Ju Michimasa blade and I actually love the koshirae of that blade so having the tsuba authenticated would be a nice treat.  The tsuba never did inspire much feedback on relevant forums/groups which maybe says something though.

 

I do want to try and get the items that would best benefit from a shinsa done and I dont know enough to decide if the tsuba would shine a bit brighter being papered.

 

As to the tsuba itself I did receive some help with some of the translation.

 

"I think the inscription on the back is 寒山行旅 kanzan kōryo, meaning “going on a trip to cold mountains”.  

 

Engraved are 秋江 (shūkō) and 帆彩？ (hosai?), which I think allude to a Chinese painting, or a common theme in Chinese painting.  I think it says 秋江帆影 shūkō han'ei, which is an actual theme for Chinese and Japanese classic pictures."

 

Then I did find one verified signature of this maker on a kozuka I'll post below next to the mei on the tsuba and they have differences.

[waljamada]

Welp, time to paper saya up and prepare for my Sunday trip to the Chicago Sword Show.  I decided to go with the Kunitsugu and the Kanekado.  My logic goes as following....1) With so many generations etc..it takes someone with knowledge and/or resources to narrow things down.  2) I personally have the most curiosity about those 2 blades  3) The traveling shinsa team may have more resources on hand that may cover these two smiths unlike... 4)The Michimisasa being such an "unknown" smith I think would be difficult for a traveling shinsa team without full resources at hand.  5) I want to take the tsuba to shinsa one day and I wish IWell, just purchased three slots...but I'd personally rather have the blades papered (if things go well) than the tsuba.  So next time!

 

Thank you to all those who weighed in to help me navigate this!  I greatly appreciate it.  Will post an update after the judgements.

[waljamada]

Well not quite as pro level as Mr. Paul Martin.  But It'll do.....it'll do...

[waljamada]

RESULTS ARE IN:

 

1) The Kanekuni failed shinsa and was ruled as gimei with a wider possible attribution to Mino Den.  It was kantei'd to be from the Oei Era.

 

2) The Kunitsugu passed shinsa with 73 points to Etchu Uda Kunitsugu also from the Oei Era.

 

Ōei (応永) was a Japanese era name (年号, nengō, "year name") after Meitoku and before Shōchō. This period spanned the years from July 1394 through April 1428. Reigning emperors were Go-Komatsu-tennō (後小松天皇,) and Shōkō-tennō (称光天皇).

 

So we had a 50% success rate on the Meis but I'm still glad that the Gimei Kanekuni at least has a "confirmed" age.

[SteveM]

Nice - thanks for the follow-up. I think this was a very good result. I'm glad the Kunitsugu passed. I'm also glad the shinsa team at least validated the Oei period for the gimei Kanekado. Well, bear in mind all shinsa are opinions, so the NBTHK could well have a different opinion - but that's a debate for a different day. For now I think you got a pretty good result. Much better than authenticating the Michimasa, in my opinion, but you still have the option of submitting that one at a future shinsa. 

 

[John C]

8 hours ago, waljamada said:

So we had a 50% success rate on the Meis but I'm still glad that the Gimei Kanekuni at least has a "confirmed" age.

Adam:

The best thing is that it sounds like you had a good time...and time well spent.

John C.

[waljamada]

Thanks Steve and John,

 

Thank you both for your input and kind statements.  This for me was to do my little part in helping out the nihonto in my care and well worth the experience.  Was cool to see the shinsa team at work, all the efforts of the organizers come together, all the vendors and the enthusiasts coming together.