My first Nihonto: a mumei Uda school Katana

[Laurian]

Hi.

This is my first post, so thank you for having me here (and for your patience ).

I'm still new to this complex universe of Nihonto, but I finally managed to purchase my very first blade, a few weeks ago. It was originally sold by Aoi-Art to a dealer in the Netherlands, from whom I then bought it. This link is still active: https://sword-auctio...oduct/14740/as22549-刀：無銘（宇多）保存刀剣/
According to the Japanese site, this katana was made in the mid-Muromachi period, but in my very, very humble opinion, comparing the sugata and the pretty narrow motohaba and sakihaba to some examples and descriptions I found in Kokan Nagayama's book, the blade just looks a bit older (early Muromachi, maybe?). Of course, I wouldn't dare to contradict Mr. Kazushige Tsuruta, but still, I would very much appreciate your take on this.
Unfortunately, as you know far better than me, NBTHK certificates don't mention anything about the estimated age of the blades (which is a shame, in general, I guess). Can that piece of information be confirmed in any way with them? Don't get me wrong, I love my sword regardless of age, but it would be interesting to learn more about its history.
One more thing: my katana has two pretty visible kitae-ware. At first, I was really worried about those flaws, but then I read that they are really common on koto blades and that they are mostly esthetic and in most cases don't affect the sword's integrity or functionality. I would NEVER use a 550-year old katana for Tameshigiri, so it's not a practical problem for me, but, again, what do you think of kitae-ware?
Thank you for your time!
All the best,
Laurian

[oli]

Hi Laurian,

 

not shure why you worry, i think you have a good starter sword. What do you expect for this price? 

And know its time to for study, have fun,

 

best,

Oli

[Laurian]

Thanks, Oli.

This is not a price or value issue. The auction winner got the sword for cheap; that’s a fact. Lucky him. I paid much more than that, of course, as I purchased the sword in Europe, where we owe VAT and import duties, plus the profit of the Dutch dealer I bought the blade from… Japanese sellers I wrote to were reluctant to dealing with a bloke from Romania. The politely said “no”… I live in the “wild Eastern Europe”, so I guess I can’t blame them for distrusting me.

So, what I paid is not relevant right now. It’s not a question of buyer’s remorse, as I obviously didn’t expect a flawless Juyo for that kind of money.

I simply want to learn more about the sword as it is, with all its ups and downs that are part of its story (and history). Actually, I’m glad it has a few minor nicks on the mune, which I like to think are battle marks. All flaws add to the character of a weapon that was forged before the peaceful Edo period. That’s exactly why I was looking for a koto, even if it’s not “artistically” perfect.

Kitae-ware, on the other hand, are forging flaws, as I understand, so I want to know more about them and aboult how they can hurt, not the value, but the potential “wothiness” of a blade. Even if I’d never use this sword, in any scenario, it feels good to know that, in case “I had to” go out cutting things with it, it wouldn’t break.

 

[oli]

Hi Laurian,

 

sad to here about the situation in Romania. Have a look in the sale section here, i think where you have better opportunities.

Here is good articel about flaws of blades: http://www.ksky.ne.jp./~sumie99/flaws.html .

 

 

regards

Oli

[Laurian]

Great link, Oli! Thanks!

[Jacques D.]

Bear in mind that Nagayama's book is very general and that there are always variations, sometimes even within a single school. A flaw is and remains a flaw, and the argument that it's common in koto is just a sales pitch. 

[jeremy]

On 6/22/2024 at 11:55 PM, Laurian said:

Hi.

This is my first post, so thank you for having me here (and for your patience ).

I'm still new to this complex universe of Nihonto, but I finally managed to purchase my very first blade, a few weeks ago. It was originally sold by Aoi-Art to a dealer in the Netherlands, from whom I then bought it. This link is still active: https://sword-auctio...oduct/14740/as22549-刀：無銘（宇多）保存刀剣/
According to the Japanese site, this katana was made in the mid-Muromachi period, but in my very, very humble opinion, comparing the sugata and the pretty narrow motohaba and sakihaba to some examples and descriptions I found in Kokan Nagayama's book, the blade just looks a bit older (early Muromachi, maybe?). Of course, I wouldn't dare to contradict Mr. Kazushige Tsuruta, but still, I would very much appreciate your take on this.
Unfortunately, as you know far better than me, NBTHK certificates don't mention anything about the estimated age of the blades (which is a shame, in general, I guess). Can that piece of information be confirmed in any way with them? Don't get me wrong, I love my sword regardless of age, but it would be interesting to learn more about its history.
One more thing: my katana has two pretty visible kitae-ware. At first, I was really worried about those flaws, but then I read that they are really common on koto blades and that they are mostly esthetic and in most cases don't affect the sword's integrity or functionality. I would NEVER use a 550-year old katana for Tameshigiri, so it's not a practical problem for me, but, again, what do you think of kitae-ware?
Thank you for your time!
All the best,
Laurian

You definitely could've done alot worse than  this sword as your first. I know I did . 

In regards to kitae-ware / tate-ware  , they're usually not a problem in regards to structural integrity as long as they're not located too close to the edge of the blade. Alot of the blades I've cut with have had small openings here and there  , mostly in the shinogi-ji. It's more common in older koto blades as they have generally seen few more polishes than newer swords hence the propensity for these kind of kizu.

Regards 

Jeremy 

[Laurian]

Thanks, Jeremy! At first, as I didn’t have my glasses on, I didn’t read “could’ve”, but “couldn’t have” 😅, so I thought to myself “s..t, is it THAT bad?!”.

Yes, those two small kitae-ware are located in the shinogi-ji, one close to the mune. The hira-ji is really clean, as is the hamon and the ha itself. The cutting edge appears to be flawless, even under high magnification. Sharpness? I guess I’ll never find that out… 
So far, I didn’t have the chance to read nearly enough about jihada, so I’ll concentrate on that next. I want to be able to identify those specific elements on my blade.

I’ll also try to do some more digging into the sword’s age and origins. I’ll probably write to Tsuruta-san about this, as he was the one to come up with the mid-Muromachi estimation. Maybe he’ll find time to write back…

[Rivkin]

I think its circa 1520. It does have some koshi zori which tends to be earlier, but this sugata has been used well into 1500s. 

The forging is coarse and rough. Few laminations, which very much stand out. By contrast early Muromachi Uda smiths were very careful with jigane, one line opting for tight itame and overall rather refined appearance, another having more Soshu-Yamato feeling but still being very careful about their forging. Even Sanekage-like work from Oei period tends to have more "smooth" appearance.

This in no way a precise statement, but the tendency is observable.

Good thing is that it looks like the work is relatively clean compared to other period examples, its a bright work which is easy to appreciate. Photographs taken from above greatly exaggerate the roughness of masame laminations making them all look like ware.

 

[Laurian]

Thanks Kirill! Excellent piece of information. It helps me a lot. Being pre-Sengoku, it might still have seen some action in battle. This is really exciting. 

[Laurian]

I’ll try to snap a few more pictures showing jihada in good light, at different angles. But that’s a weekend job…

[Laurian]

Correction: when I wrote “pre-Sengoku”, I actually meant “before the end of the Sengoku period wars”. Sorry!

[Laurian]

There you go. Some pics. After taking them, in macro mode, I noticed I hadn't removed all the oil on the blade. Some lint is also visible. Sorry for all that. I hope those pictures are still relevant to some extent.

[Laurian]

And some more...

[Laurian]

Last three.

[Rivkin]

Nice! Much nicer than in Aoi images. Usually they are good, but their light is more to a side which exaggerates "roughness". It has much more classic Yamato feeling... Can be earlier.

[Laurian]

Great! Thank you! Actually, assuming this katana is O-Suriage, I was wondering why would a longer blade be forged in the 1500s (in an era where the regular nagasa was under 70 cm, if I'm not mistaken), just to be then shortened, in order to fit the tendencies of the period.    

[Jussi Ekholm]

While bit difficult to say from pictures alone, I would think the sword is ubu, original length. To me it just looks like the most logical thing, I would feel it is a Muromachi period sword, I cannot pinpoint mid, late etc as even the experts at NBTHK gave Uda attribution, which in my books puts it to mid-late Muromachi.

 

I think swords are very often stated to be ō-suriage by dealers, however I am having hard time wrapping my head how some of those swords would be ō-suriage. Even though Nobuo Nakahara might have some bit controversial thoughts I like that he points out how ubu vs. ō-suriage should be studied as some are made to look like they were shortened. That however is not problem with your sword. I do think it is an honest sword in original form. Of course I could be wrong and the dealers correct but I would feel this is original shape. No faking or shady business going, I would just feel there was misinformation by dealers.

[Tohagi]

Congratulations ! 

It's very nice first sword in very decent koshirae with papers!

Far best than my first sword.

Like Jussi above, it looks ubu to me.

 

It's a fine opportunity to study Uda school.

 

Best regards, 

 

Éric VD 

[Laurian]

Thanks again! The idea of the sword being ubu never crossed my mind. This is a completely new lead for me. But I guess it makes sense. I'll have to take a closer look at the way the nakago meets the polished blade. Again, correct me if I'm wrong: the concept of an ubu sword would imply it was koshi-zori from the beginning, right? Instead, if it were o-suriage, the blade could have actually been torii-zori, originally?

Sorry for all these questions, but I'm trying to learn as much as I can here... Except for Kokan Nagayama's book and the articles I found online, I currently have no literature to study. Could you recommend some more books, please? "Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords: A Collector's Guide" looks good, but it seems to be impossible to buy for a decent price, these days...  

 

[Toryu2020]

The NTHK Novice Course was recently re-edited and is available now. FREE with any new membership to the NCJSC...

 

Publications (ncjsc.org)

 

-tch

[oli]

4 minutes ago, Laurian said:

Thanks again! The idea of the sword being ubu never crossed my mind. This is a completely new lead for me. But I guess it makes sense. I'll have to take a closer look at the way the nakago meets the polished blade. Again, correct me if I'm wrong: the concept of an ubu sword would imply it was koshi-zori from the beginning, right? Instead, if it were o-suriage, the blade could have actually been torii-zori, originally?

Sorry for all these questions, but I'm trying to learn as much as I can here... Except for Kokan Nagayama's book and the articles I found online, I currently have no literature to study. Could you recommend some more books, please? "Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords: A Collector's Guide" looks good, but it seems to be impossible to buy for a decent price, these days...  

 

Ich like koto-shi from Honma Junji and Koto Kantei from Markus Sesko. Both available as ebook at lulu.com. Koto-shi is about the history of the schools over time, and Koto-kantei are shown swords about most schools of the time. 

 

Regards

Oli

[Laurian]

Thank you all!