Thoughts On First Nihonto (Nanbokucho)

[Schneeds]

Hello All,

 

I would appreciate any thoughts on what I'm hoping will be my first nihonto.  I've spent most of the last year learning as much as I can here, but I am still a complete newb and determined not to make any stupid mistakes.  Therefore I am going by the three rules I see mentioned over and over again here:

 

1. Buying papered

2.  Buying from a reputable source

3.  Buying the sword, not the paper (sentiment)

 

Here is the piece in question: Katana: mumei attributed Uda Tomotsugu

 

I've been looking at it for quite a while now, and with my relatively limited budget (~6,000 USD), I'm not sure I can do better for what my individual, but realistic, goals are:  one from the late kamakura-late Nanbokucho period, with a long blade and deep sori reminiscent of a tachi,  polished, and with a presentable mount. 

 

It has been listed for quite a period of time now, so that does have be wondering a little if I am missing something.  It does not appear from my limited translating abilities to mention a date or era on the origami, but is attributed to Uda Tomotsugu.  i did reach out and ask about defects and was told there are some cracks with close inspection that are common for blades of that age.  The overwhelming majority of members seem to speak very highly of Aoi. 

 

Any thoughts?

 

Erik

 

[David Flynn]

Aoi Art, as well as anyone, do your homework first.

[Shugyosha]

Hi Erik,

I think that the issue is that the papers list it as Uda rather than Ko Uda. A quick search on the internet suggests that blades from the Nambokucho period or earlier are papered to Ko Uda school and from the Muromachi period as just Uda so, reading between the lines, the NBTHK think that this blade isn't a Nambokucho period blade and that Aoi are spinning a yarn to get the blade sold. Some discussion here:

 

 

That aside, I'd be put off by the loose grain and that the blade doesn't have the classic Nambokucho sugata because that's what I'd be paying a large chunk of the asking price for. Also, if I had a really suspicious mind I'd be concerned that the deep sori in a what looks more like a Muromachi period blade might have occurred due to fire damage (there might be a hint of damage to the tang due to firescale??) and that it had been re-tempered at some point.

 

You can get some decent blades for $6k so please be patient...

 

[Rivkin]

Its a rough blade maybe pre 1500 but certainly Muromachi.

[Paz]

2 hours ago, Shugyosha said:

Hi Erik,

I think that the issue is that the papers list it as Uda rather than Ko Uda. A quick search on the internet suggests that blades from the Nambokucho period or earlier are papered to Ko Uda school and from the Muromachi period as just Uda so, reading between the lines, the NBTHK think that this blade isn't a Nambokucho period blade and that Aoi are spinning a yarn to get the blade sold. Some discussion here:

 

 

That aside, I'd be put off by the loose grain and that the blade doesn't have the classic Nambokucho sugata because that's what I'd by paying a large chunk of the asking price for. Also, if I had a really suspicious mind I'd be concerned that the deep sori in a what looks more like a Muromachi period blade might have occurred due to fire damage (there might be a hint of damage to the tang due to firescale??) and that it had been re-tempered at some point.

 

You can get some decent blades for $6k so please be patient...

 

 

Answered my question aswell John 👍.  As soon as I looked at it on the website, I was wondering why on earth it hadn't received Tokubetsu Hozon papers, if it was from the Nanbokucho period. 

 

Also yes, ko uda are seen as superior work to later uda. If it has been assigned to a name of a smith from the ko uda school obviously of Nanbokucho period, then you are looking at names such as kunifusa, ect and that will fetch a much higher price and papers. I have not yet seen it. Most nanbokucho uda swords are mumei Ko uda- and would receive depending on condition Tokubetsu rather than standard hozon.

 

I do like the hamon though. 

 

Regards 

[Guest Simon R]

3 hours ago, Shugyosha said:

Hi Erik,

I think that the issue is that the papers list it as Uda rather than Ko Uda. A quick search on the internet suggests that blades from the Nambokucho period or earlier are papered to Ko Uda school and from the Muromachi period as just Uda so, reading between the lines, the NBTHK think that this blade isn't a Nambokucho period blade and that Aoi are spinning a yarn to get the blade sold. Some discussion here:

 

 

That aside, I'd be put off by the loose grain and that the blade doesn't have the classic Nambokucho sugata because that's what I'd be paying a large chunk of the asking price for. Also, if I had a really suspicious mind I'd be concerned that the deep sori in a what looks more like a Muromachi period blade might have occurred due to fire damage (there might be a hint of damage to the tang due to firescale??) and that it had been re-tempered at some point.

 

You can get some decent blades for $6k so please be patient...

 

What John said.

 

Aoi Arts were very upfront when the economy and sword market were buoyant - but now they're down (like everything else), Mr. Tsuruta often spins a lively yarn and you really do have to read between the lines.
He knows his stuff and he's got good connections with the NBTHK so, when something at that price doesn't have higher than Hozon papers, it should give you pause.

[PNSSHOGUN]

The Koshirae looks to be a recent creation, unfortunately all too common from many Japanese dealers.

[Bugyotsuji]

24 minutes ago, PNSSHOGUN said:

The Koshirae looks to be a recent creation, unfortunately all too common from many Japanese dealers.

With genuine old parts, except maybe the koikuchi?

[Alex A]

You asked

 

I would say dont skimp on artistic interest just to get a hold of a sword because its supposedly Nanbokucho.

 

That kind of money opens up doors where when you look at the sword you think wow

 

With the one above, no real detail to be seen in the hamon, the jigane appears rough in places. Seen swords sell like that for £2500

 

On top of that mumei and suriage

 

Anyways, horses for courses.

[Schneeds]

Spoiler

 

Thank you John.  I missed that post on Ko-Uda, that is good information.  I was looking at past and current offerings from other dealers and even Aoi, and wondering why if it was what I thought it was, why it wouldn't have made TH.  I'm glad I was at least smart enough to ask   I still like it for what it is, but will continue saving and learning. 

 

Alex, what is it that gives the suriage away?  I was trying to figure out if it was and came across the below so I wasn't sure. 

 

This has all been great information. Thank you everyone.  

[Paz]

Hey @Schneeds. 

 

Most obvious is that it has two mekugi holes that far apart. And then you have the way the style nakago has been cut at the bottom. Apologies I Don't have the terms right now, but this requires books. You can then easily tell the difference between ubu nakago and suriage. 

 

I strongly recommend books, and then spending the 6k. As aforementioned 6k opens alot of doors for you to get something that you will enjoy for many many years. And you also develop a taste for what you like, which makes it even better. 

 

Regards 

[DTM72]

I threw this together quickly to show what suriage was done to this sword. Many times a when a suriage is performed, it is many years after the sword was initially made, and you can visually see the difference in the color on the nakago, or where the original file marks ended. This particular one does not show those usual signs so I would believe this was cut-down not long after it was made.

 

[Jussi Ekholm]

This is just personal feeling but I do think NBTHK sees it as late Nanbokuchō - early Muromachi period item. I might be wrong with that but I have assumed NBTHK classifies mumei Uda Tomotsugu attributions towards this time period. One problem is that Tomotsugu lineage continued until the end of Muromachi period but as I said I would think the mumei attribution specific as Uda Tomotsugu would refer to the early generations. Although I might be wrong on that. One thing to note that all mumei swords attributed to Uda Tomotsugu that I have on record are Hozon, I haven't been able to find Tokubetsu Hozon with this attribution. That might be an indicator towards Muromachi rather than earlier. However there are many signed items by Uda Tomotsugu that are specified as Nanbokuchō work.

 

You can see here list of smiths that I think as early Uda school smiths

I do think we will see more "just" Hozon blades towards the future. This item in question was just passed with old shinsa type at the end of 2021, but from early 2022 you cannot submit item to Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon to same shinsa. So having to submit a blade multiple times might not be as tempting as dealers as I don't think getting Tokubetsu Hozon for an item would affect the price that much. However that is just a personal view on things.

 

For the koshirae, when you look at the tsuka, you can see there are filled holes around first folds near fuchi. This tsuka was not originally made for this sword but has been made to fit this one. Combining items like that is unfortunately quite common practice, as complete packages are what many people wants.

[Bugyotsuji]

Re the menuki, the suaka suns on the shakudo fans are a really nice touch. 

[Rivkin]

The Art of uncovering what NBTHK really meant is arcane indeed, but my take is by monitoring how setsumei and publications changed in the past 60 years one can guess, though one can be very wrong when doing so.

First, with blades like this usually one submits to TH directly. If it gets TH its Nambokucho, if its H - Muromachi. This one is just H.

Second, I think Tomotsugu and Kunifusa are two most common attributions. Kunifusa generally means jigane is itame and can be rather fine, and most likely its pre 1500, post 1500 fine itame samples tend to go Kaga etc.. Tomotsugu means jigane is rougher, more Yamato styled and possibly has masame. I don't think there is anything more definitive in those attributions, there is nothing overly distinctive about Tomotsugu's work, its sort of just average Muromachi Uda. Dealers always bring into picture that Tomotsugu, Kunifusa and other Uda names have published Nambokucho generations and therefore they Always write its Nambokucho (and ko Hoki, Naminohira and Senjuin are Heian) and admit maybe its MAYBE a bit later, but those are as generic Muromachi attributions as they come. In kantei all these names are counted as atari to each other, and NBTHK simplifies its job by using two-three names instead of dozen.

There is an argument that Uda was relatively conservative sugata-wise in Nambokucho and thus in the absense of dated examples it could be that some of those are Nambokucho, but its quite optimistic since there are many dated or signed  Muromachi examples and its clear this style's popularity went up considerably at the time.

Ko Uda in dealer's speak implies Kamakura, and in 1970s that could have been true as many believed there are quite a few signed Kamakura blades and maybe even something dated.

Today most of those went way forward in time, and what remains is basically Nyudo Kunimitsu so if setsumei says its him, better if its also signed, then the attribution is Kamakura specific.

There are blades with generic judgement ko Uda and attribution to Kamakura in setsumei, but those also tend to be somewhat weak and often reclassified as Senjuin, Tegai or Shikkake on resubmission.

 

 

[Jussi Ekholm]

Excellent post Kirill, lot to think about in that post

[Schneeds]

That is very informative, Kirill, thank you.  I think I see what you mean about being optimistic.  Using Connoisseur's there isn't a whole lot to go off of for Uda School, and unless I missed it, Tomotsugu isn't mentioned at all.  Uda appears mid Nanbokucho where Kunifusa comes up as well as in late Nanbokucho but no specific smiths are referenced at that point.  Mr. Sesko's index does, however, have Tomotsugu listed in 6 generations of the Uda school, beginning around 1381 and ending around 1592, with most of the known works going to the 5th generation.  However, Tomotsugu 1st generation is just listed as Uda, not Ko-Uda, as other smiths are elsewhere such as Kunitsugu.  Other than the specific hamon of the 1st generation using suguha-chō mixed with ko-gunome, ko-chōji, kinsuji and sunagashi there isn't much to go off of. 

 

Do you think it would be better then for me to try and search out a 2nd generation Kunitmitsu work? signed or at least attributed, given what I'm looking for?  Per the Swordsmiths of Japan no first generation works remain. 

 

[Rivkin]

Its unclear if there was a generation before Nyudo Kunimitsu so in reality he might be the first one. Takes about 5 years to find a blade attributed to directly him, about 20 to find a signed one.

[Jussi Ekholm]

If you aim for Uda school tachi especially signed one, then it can be bit difficult task and the variation in price is huge.

 

Here is an example of Uda Kunimitsu tachi from late Kamakura, this is very famous sword and perhaps we wont see it for sale again. It was 9,500,000 yen in 2013: https://web.archive....0/info/item/a470.htm

For mumei Konyūdō attributed katana I have seen few in 800k - 1,5M range.

Finding a signed Uda Kunifusa tachi is also super rare and priced accordingly. This haven't got a price listed but is should be quite expensive: https://www.taibundo...l.php?product_id=471

Mumei Kunifusa attributed katana I have seen prices from 500k to bit over 1M.

For signed tachi I would recommend going for bit "lesser" names.

This Tomotsugu tachi from late Nanbokuchō was for 700k : https://www.kusanagi...ya.com/SHOP/188.html

Here is most likely Muromachi period Tomotsugu tachi, it has been listed in few places but 580k now: https://www.toukenko...i&katanaA071223.html

This Tomonori tachi from late Nanbokuchō to early Muromachi has been at few dealers between 650-800k : https://www.kusanagi...ya.com/SHOP/463.html

[Schneeds]

Thanks, Jussi.  That gives an idea of what is reasonably attainable.  I am certainly open to 'lesser' or lesser known names.  The Uda School/names just seem to be very prevalent.

[Jussi Ekholm]

As someone who has been on a budget for a long time, I think there would be few different types of approaches that I might go for. As getting all the boxes ticked on a budget will be very difficult, especially when seeking very old items.

 

1. Focusing on shape and size. This is my personal preference . Aiming to get an item to your desired size and shape regardless of school or condition.

 

2. Quality and condition first, trying to go after the best item in that field while putting the size and school as lesser importance

 

3. Focusing on a school and perhaps even a smith, looking after available specific swords.

 

For number one you could seek something like c. 80 cm tachi and as available options for them would be very limited on a budget, so you would have to be open for condition issues and perhaps even willing to accept Muromachi period items (even when seeking for earlier ones). Second one would be possibly accepting wakizashi and very short katana blades as you can get higher quality on shorter blades when on a budget. Focus would perhaps be on attributions that are pointing towards high quality. Number 3 is quite self explaining as you could choose for example like Uda as we talked about in here. However when going something like Bizen in general the availability of signed ones rises by great multiples. Some highly desirable smiths and schools are not really available at a budget.

[Schneeds]

On 1/26/2024 at 12:56 PM, Rivkin said:

Its unclear if there was a generation before Nyudo Kunimitsu so in reality he might be the first one. Takes about 5 years to find a blade attributed to directly him, about 20 to find a signed one.

Thanks, Kirill.  In light of the reality you guys have pointed out, I'm looking at possibly taking a different tack towards a more historical and well crafted piece and sacrificing shape and size.  

 

This particular work is TH and specifically attributed to the late the Kamakura period ~1328.  The blade length is only 64cm, however, but does look to my eyes to be healthy with a quality and consistent grain.  How would you consider the health and appearance to be given its age? (relative to my budget range of course)

 

[Rivkin]

I don't know by whom its specifically attributed but it looks like ko Mihara. 

[Schneeds]

53 minutes ago, Rivkin said:

I don't know by whom its specifically attributed but it looks like ko Mihara. 

Kokubunji Sukekuni

[Rivkin]

A fancy ko Mihara. Tend to be rather consistent quality wise. Price is the question, they are not particularly rare.

[Schneeds]

Ah ok.  Attributed works to him seem to be rather rare, but you're of the opinion given the consistency of the ko Mihara school there isn't much appreciable difference between them?  They are asking 950,000 JPY for that one, with koshirae.  The mounts are nice, but appear to be a refit.  

[Rivkin]

Its basically the same school.. 950,000 is sort of ok retail wise, for me its a bit high, but this is the territory where a conflict of interests appears - we are all collectors and we all sell stuff, so we might be unfair to other offers.

[nulldevice]

I'm just going to hop in and say Erik, that I'm in a bit of a similar boat. I've been reading non-stop and researching daily and am still looking to make my first purchase around a similar budget. One day I think I want an old, early koto blade that's mumei, o-suriage, and papered to fit my budget and then today I'm looking at an Edo period blade that's from one of the Kyo Go Kaji smiths...

[Schneeds]

More to think about.  Thank you, Kirill.

 

Yeah, Chandler.  It's both a tough and fun boat to be in.  There's definitely a steep learning curve.  It reminds me of BJJ; if you're at a serious gym you spend the first six months to a year getting absolutely destroyed, but eventually you get the hang of it   Or at least I hope we will.  

[Schneeds]

On 1/31/2024 at 9:50 PM, Rivkin said:

Its basically the same school.. 950,000 is sort of ok retail wise, for me its a bit high, but this is the territory where a conflict of interests appears - we are all collectors and we all sell stuff, so we might be unfair to other offers.

 

I'm curious what the opinions would be on this particular blade.  76cm, TH papers signed Ryokai Katsuyoshi.  The seller has stated that the blade is a Nanbokucho era work which would put it prior to the Tsukushi Ryoaki school, however it appears more likely that it is in fact a later Muromachi blade.  I'm not sure what the miss-shaping/defects on the nakago are, or how much of a concern that is.  They are asking 750,000 JPY which for a Nanbokucho blade such as this I thought would have been quite good.  I'm having a difficult time attributing value for Muromachi pieces.