Leaderboard

Hello all, I’d like to share the latest addition to my collection, which recently arrived. Exhibited at the NBTHK Museum in 2014 and published in the exhibition book "Kurogane no Hana."

Excellent blogs by other people, first and foremost Markus, have inspired me to being releasing a newsletter. Three topics each issue, each something not well covered by books. In this one you can find articles about: Kyushu nihonto Saiha and yakinaoshi - same of different? The true meaning of NTHK scores https://www.historyswords.com/news1.pdf

Folks, an interesting but undocumented Seki swordsmith. Be good to find out who he was. I have compiled what I could find and tried to make some sense of it. Would welcome comments, corrections and ideas. Following are my notes and pics. UNJOSAI KATSUNAGA 雲上斎 勝永 An apparent mystery with wartime Seki swordsmiths is Unjosai KATSUNAGA, who produced a wide range of blades, but for whom no records were found (so he is reported as “undocumented”). He is not in the 1940 Seki City lists and is not in the Seki swordsmith registration list from 1939. His blades look to be both Showato and gendaito, most are mounted as Army shingunto in various fittings, there are some Naval kaigunto and at least one in wartime civilian mounts. A number are in post-war shirasaya or have been mounted for iaido. He has a number of mei, which may reflect types of swords produced. Katsunaga 勝永 (H, O) Unjosai Katsunaga 雲上斎勝永 (B, C, D?, E, F, G, M) Seki Unjosai Katsunaga 関雲上斎勝永 (A, J, K) Unjosai Katsunaga saku 雲上斎勝永作 (L) Unjosai Katsunaga kitaeru kore 雲上斎勝永鍛之 (I, P) Katsunaga saku 勝永作 (N) In regard to his mei, “Katsunaga” is his swordsmith name, however, “Unjosai” is probably not a family name and more likely is a “go” or pseuydonym/penname. “Katsunaga” is said to be a masculine name and there were several noted samurai of the Edo period with it. There was also a samurai in the 1800’s, Sagae Chuzaemon Katsunaga (1806-1864) who became a swordsmith in Edo Tokyo and was of the Mito Domain, Ibaraki. So what would be this Katsunaga’s family name? He signs as katana mei, but with variations. Showato blades are signed on the shinogi-ji with a “chippy” cut style (nakirishi mei) that reflects mass production work. Those with well cut mei reflect custom work and are larger characters and centrally located over the nakago shinogi. Mei on custom blades have both a neat formal style, and an artistic cursive style; one variation is of vertical “squarish” characters that are deeply cut using “interpretive” kanji (N and O). Possibly the custom blades are signed by the tosho (shoshi mei). Only one blade (J) of the examples found has a stamp reported, which is the large “Seki”. One example (A), has a bohi-hi kaki-toshi groove through the nakago; this blade is both neatly finished and signed and could be semi-traditional. The shape of the nakago also varies, with different amounts of taper and several styles of kiri tip; some with ha-agari Seki type, others slightly angular. The yasurime filing is angled sujikai, with varying degrees of neatness; on some blades there is a criss-cross hagaki section (but possibly just rough work). Differing hamon were found. The Showato examples tend to be more of a Seki style midare-gunome (A, D, F, H, J, M) some are slightly notare. It appears that the better made and custom blades have suguha hamon (G, I) some with nie-deki (I). No images were found of the other custom made blades. The typical blade has an average nagasa of 63.0 cm (61.7 to 64.5 cm) and small sori of 1.0 to 1.2 cm. Several blades vary from this: C: this is a custom blade of 67.4 cm length and sori of 1.8 cm. D: this is a longer blade which is shortened around 10 cm to 52.7 cm (wakizashi length) with the mune moved and a new nakago ana drilled; the mei is also shortened. The blade has been remounted in shorter shingunto koshirae. I: this blade has a nagasa of 64.3 cm, however, it has two mekugi ana and is probably shortened by around 7-8 cm. The mei is below the lower hole and kiri nakago tip indicates the shortening. The suguha hamon on this sug-gests water quenching. Of note, it is in wartime civilian mounts. Basically there appears to be three types of swords: (a) Showato oil quenched Seki work suggesting some form of mass production. (b) quality Seki work possibly semi-traditional with hand forging/folding and neat finish. (c) top end custom orders, traditionally made and on request with name of client. Of interest is sword K which has a label on the saya of “The Seki Cutlery Manufacturers’ Association” and “Seki Gifu Japan”. The label shows “Passed” presumably approved for sale. The nakago of sword K is a little rough, no stamp is obvious; these labels look to be used mid to late war, however, are mostly found on “budget” swords with basic wooden saya. The mei of sword J is the same as that of K, both stating “Seki”, and possibly has a similar hamon. Nagasa for these are K of 61 cm and J of 62.8 cm. Overall, production of Katsunaga blades suggests a smaller workshop, or several workshops, linked to a sales outlet, with a number of craftsmen involved; the various styles of mei are likely by different people. The examples here show Katsunaga was a Seki smith, and he does look to have some training as a tosho, however, he is not in the Seki registration list. But who was he and what was his name. There must be a record somewhere. Malcolm Cox, 2025

If you ever wondered how many swords you would have been able to study if you had attended every single monthly NBTHK main branch meeting the last 25 years, here you go: https://markussesko.com/2025/05/12/nbthk-kanshokantei-blades-analysis/

Hi everyone, I wanted to share a book I’ve written — Samurai and Shōguns. Some of you may know me as a long-time collector, especially of pre-Edo tsuba, and I’ve had the pleasure of corresponding with a number of fellow enthusiasts over the years. This book grew out of that lifelong interest. It’s not an academic monograph, and I don’t pretend it’s breaking new ground for specialists. But I’ve done my best to go beyond the usual pop-culture image of the samurai, and to bring out the complexity, contradictions, and lesser-known sides of their world — things I found fascinating and thought others might, too. The book is written for a general audience, but with care for accuracy and detail. It’s also richly illustrated with woodblock prints and historical photographs — something I personally value in a good history book. If you’re curious, I’d love for you to take a look. And if you do, I’d be grateful for your honest thoughts — whether you spot something insightful, or something that makes you wince. Here’s the link: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DHPD39RM?ref_=cm_sw_r_cp_ud_dp_9Z7P2NDJ0ZK83R9E7RWX Thank you for looking PS: This dramatic layout of the book against the backdrop of a poem and scrolls is pure marketing, not to be taken seriously. I just thought it looks nice

Part 2: After the sword successfully passed THozon i was elated and my wife more so, so then I thought, Juyo next maybe? I asked Paul what he thought " No comments on Juyo, you want to try then I will submit but I make no comments" this was the professional thing to do, every sword enters at its own merit and on top of that it was a Muromachi sword. 8 years ago passing Muromachi was slim at best. We submitted and the sword failed, oh no! Ultimately I was having a conversation with Darcy and mentioned the failure to which he asked to see the images of the blade. That night at 2AM ( Darcy and I shared the fact we never sleep much) he sent me a message saying that the sword should be polished by Saito sensei in sashikomi style and try for Juyo one more time. I agreed and Paul sent the sword in with Saito sensei (the polish was in 5k USD range) The sword was submitted again and passed! And is now my wifes' sword.

Hello Rayhan, Beware your forays into such arcane knowledge... A good amount has been written by Darcy on this topic over the years, most notably here. It is a good primer before engaging in more advanced discussions. But, to cut the chase - these sessions are called in Japan the "phone book" sessions, because the Zufu volumes are simply enormous owing to the number of blades that pass. The data, however, indicates that it isn't average quality per se that is lower, but that the variance is greater. This is evidenced by a greater proportion of blades from these "phone book" sessions ascending to Tokubetsu Juyo, compared to later, harsher modern sessions. At the other end, we see a lot of JINO (Juyo in name only), blades which today could never make it to Juyo. These sessions also coincide with the rise in popularity of the hobby in Japan. For better or worst, It is my understanding that the trend stops more or less after Kanzan passes away, and the leadership takes a strong policy shift in favor of increasing the baseline-level quality needed for a blade to pass Juyo. In these policy shifts, I believe that the personalities the judges is reflected - Kanzan Sato was the true "man of the people", foremostly concerned about making the hobby accessible, whereas Honma Junji was "Daimyo blade" person, who believed in stricter standards to keep the Juyo designation meaningful. Both approach have their pro's and con's, and it is debatable who, in the end, is right. JINO are obvious arbitrage targets for the western market, which is due to a lack of in-hand experience, and hence relies on ladder theory to build its pricing model of what constitutes a 'good deal' - For this reason, the effect you observe on price is due to a selection bias that puts JINO on the market, blades that often can't be sold to Japanese collectors. How to recognize a JINO? These heuristics are useful: - Unusual length and mumei status (e.g., mumei Yamato Wakizashi...) - Unusual period (e.g., muromachi-era blade...) - Unusual smith (e.g., a smith that never passed Juyo before, or after...) And there is more, of course, but it becomes complicated. As is often the case in Nihonto, there are exceptions to the heuristics above, these are not rules, but merely clues. Always consider the entire picture and beware of shortcuts. EXHIBIT A: A JINO. A mumei, 48cm Shikkake Naginata-Naoshi from a "phone book" session: EXHIBIT B: NOT A JINO. A zaimei Awataguchi Yoshimitsu from one of the "phone book" sessions. The blade is Meibutsu. Best, Hoshi

Hi everyone. I have been away from the hobby and this forum or a long time, and by accident bumped into the news that Ford had passed last year. That certainly did not do my mood any favors. I've seen his Utsushi-video so many times and often watch it when I want just to chill out and see something beautiful. While downbeat from the news, I opened my cabinet and took out one of his tsuba, an early piece. I will leave it here if someone is making a catalogue of his works, and for general appreciation. The theme is a flamingo and its wing. It feels a bit out of place just lying in my inactive collection, so if you need measurements or more photos let me know.

Dear All The NMB (via great efforts from @Brian) have been given permission to share the Bushido Magazines. Since we have the opportunity I will place the WeTransfer links here and anyone can download them, I will keep the links infinite without expiry till Brian can place them in the downloads section for everyone to enjoy and learn from. Bushido Magazines link: https://we.tl/t-YfdWhQTQA1 Aprox 500MB Thanks to Brian and Bob Benson, I hope the community appreciates this

There has been solid advice there above by every member. My love in Japanese swords are ōdachi and big naginata. However even after all the years of focusing on them I still think it can often be very difficult to say how much a sword has been altered. Sometimes it is easy to say that a sword has been shortened or it has been shaved down from the top part. However there are times when I often am left scratching my head when trying to figure out the original shape of the item. The tricky thing is that there are lots of variations in naginata. In order to fully understand the variations and their specific features you will need to devote quite a bit of time into researching naginata. However people in general do not appreciate them, and common reference books do not have info on them, as they are not thought highly of in Japanese sword appreciation circle. Some forms of naginata require quite extreme measures to be cut down to be used as sword (sometimes it might not even be feasible) while some forms require very little adjusting. Here I present 2 items by Dewa Daijō Kunimichi (an excellent smith), both items are Tokubetsu Hozon. Left one has been judged as wakizashi by NBTHK, I think originally it was similar to the polearm on the right. The picture is in scale, I just photoshopped the items side by side for my own fun. Of course I might be wrong in my assumption but I am fairly confident in my belief on this particular piece. I think not many might have seen this type of naginata blade before, as this variation is bit different compared to more common surviving intact naginata.

I think it's important to acknowledge what many of us come to realize over time: not all Juyo sessions are created equal—but great swords are great swords, regardless of when they passed. That’s really the heart of what Darcy Brockbank tried to convey consistently in his writings. A masterpiece in Session 22 is still a masterpiece, just as a weak sword that slipped through in Session 48 is still a weak sword, regardless of the paper or session. The problem is, markets are driven by perception, and the “ladder fallacy” isn’t going away anytime soon. I’ve seen some collectors—well-meaning but only partially informed—declare they’d “never touch a sword from Sessions 20–28,” as if the entirety of a session can be discredited. In reality, the criticism was always about the marginal swords that got a generous nod, not the standouts. But because many collectors aren’t equipped to evaluate nuance—especially through photos or oshigata—the default becomes blanket dismissal. On the flip side, we also hear: “Oh, that’s from Session XX, which was a hard session—so it must be good.” Maybe. Maybe not. It still comes down to the individual sword: its workmanship, condition, and how it stands against the best examples of that smith or tradition. Another overlooked complication is that the meaning of certain terms and designations has changed over the years—den, Sue-Sa, and others have shifted subtly (or not so subtly), without much formal explanation. So even the terminology isn’t a static yardstick. I’m not anti-paper—far from it. Papers serve a vital role, especially in establishing market trust and valuation. If a top-tier Japanese dealer offered me an unpapered piece, I might trust their word based on reputation. But the sword doesn’t become “real” to the market until the papers catch up. Just look at Darcy’s own experience buying that Kanemitsu: no matter how good his eye, the validation didn't arrive until the hozon came through. At the end of the day, your name only goes so far unless it’s backed by credentials or recognition. I could call a sword “Juyo quality,” and even if I’m right, it’s just my opinion—until the NBTHK agrees, it doesn’t move the needle for most buyers. So yes, papers matter. And yes, the Juyo sessions are uneven. But in the end, it always—always—comes down to the sword itself.

The show seemed to go very well. Thanks to the NBTHK-AB The Otsuki fittings exhibit was excellent, a chance to see treasures in person, with experts there to explain and answer questions, much better that books. Matt Jarrell's presentation on the changing shape of blades was a chance to learn and hold great blades from the past 1000 years. The tariff uncertainty was a negative but i was surprised to see attendance on Saturday was the most we have ever had (even shinsa years). I get a bit busy with show details but managed a few pictures when things were slow. Thanks for the support See you next year

I do think Jacques does have a good point, and what he says is true in general. Of course I do think Jacques often is very extreme in his views and I tend to think there is a lot of grey area. When talking about naginata I personally include all the bladed single edged polearms into this. I think the more terminology we add in the more complicated it can get. I have followed some discussions about details in blades and it often seems people understand the things differently. Just want to point this out that when I talk and about naginata this is what I mean. Of course it is also very thin line between some ōdachi types and naginata. You can see some very large flaring of the tip on the Tadatsuna naginata Jacques presented and the Sukesada naginata that me & Piers posted. Personally I am not a big fan of that naginata blade style. However it is of course a historical blade style proven to be effective as it has been used for long time. Remodeling naginata of this style would be tricky as Jacques has explained. Now I spent probably close to 2 hours creating this following image. This has 10 different naginata from Kamakura & Nanbokuchō periods, with 1 75 cm tachi by Awataguchi Kuniyoshi and 70 cm katana by Hizen Tadahiro as reference items to show how massive some of these polearms are. I have seen 5 of the naginata in this picture (marked with X) and the true size of the big ones if difficult to explain in picture. The original image I have is about 21MB so I downsized this one. I was counting the scaling roughly by pixels, it is not 100% correct but I would say something like at least 90% accurate. 1. 51,5 cm - Kagemitsu (1322) (Tokyo National Museum) X 2. 52,4 cm - Norishige (1325) (Ōyamazumi Jinja) X 3. 95,7 cm - Katayama Ichimonji (Uesugi Jinja) 4. 75,5 cm - Awataguchi Kuniyoshi tachi (TJ 15) 5. 83,1 cm - Shikkake (TJ 26) (Jacques posted this earlier) 6. 42,8 cm - Ryō Hisanobu (1308) (Tokugawa Art Museum) 7. 80,6 cm - Hōjōji (Ōtaki Castle Museum) [this one actually has 131 cm tang but I have not got a picture anywhere that would show it in full length] 8. 70,5 cm - Hizen Tadahiro Katana (TJ 14) 9. 98,0 cm - Kanemitsu or Yoshimitsu (Futarasan Jinja) X 10. 80,1 cm - By legend Tomoe Gozen naginata, in reality Nanbokuchō naginata (Ōyamazumi Jinja) X [nakago was cut off a bit in photo] 11. 44,2 cm - Nagamitsu (Sano Art Museum) 12. 101,4 cm - By legend Benkei naginata, in reality Kamakura - Nanbokuchō naginata (Ōyamazumi Jinja) X [Nakago was cut off in photo]

Hello All In this thread I will be dropping random Oshigata and their translations by @Markus Sesko (having taken his permission of course). I would like to thank Markus for his gracious permission. Those that know how valuable his work is and his willingness to always translate the documents we seek to have their secrets revealed. Thank you for everything Markus as always. The first will be a sword that has had quite the journey: Presenting Tokubetsu Juyo Aoe with translations for the Juyo and the TJ side by side. This sword went from Hozon- THozon- Juyo and TJ. The various translations shed interesting light on how the NBTHK approached this sword at 2 levels. Happy to discuss. Aoe Juyo paper-1.pdf Aoe Juyo Zufu paper-2.pdf Aoe Sayagaki.pdf Aoe Tokuju Paper (1).pdf Aoe Tokuju Zufu.pdf

The Naotane kagarasumaru daisho weas so bad-ass that they were displayed even with sub-par polishes...

Yep. Helps when they are signed. Sometimes the signature is faint, like on this Yamakichibei below. I was excited to finally land a signed Saotome the other week. It is probably the last thing I will buy out of Japan for a while, until the tariff and related shipping issues get minimized. Will post an image of the signed Saotome when I get it.

I'm leaving for Berlin tormorrow to bring the blade to the NBTHK-EB meeting on Saturday. For the non NBHTK-EB members and those that can't make it to the meeting, there is a written (borrowing) agreement that my blade will at the Samurai Museum Berlin. It is planned to be put up on display starting 23rd May 2025, and approximately one year. Hope that this will allow fellow members to get to look at it in person. And keen to hear what you mayever think of it, if you manage to see it, either at Museum or at Saturday's NBTHK-EB meeting!

Here are the amount of swords NBTHK has had passing through each phase of their shinsa. The numbers are not 100% correct but in the quite close neighbourhood and they will hopefully give you lot of insight. Starting from highest tier to lowest Tokubetsu Jūyō - c. 1,200 swords Jūyō - c. 12,000 swords Tokubetsu Hozon - c. 80,000 swords Hozon - c. 125,000 swords I am quite sure there are 2,000,000+ swords in Japan. I made a post about license numbers as it is a running system and you can see it here: https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/52155-naginata-naoshi/page/4/#comment-545277 The problem with running systems is that if the sword leaves the system (for example advances to tier above in NBTHK system) it just remains in the system as number even though the actual sword would not be Hozon papered anymore. Similarily if the sword returns to the system it gets issued a new number (sword gets a new license number when it returns to Japanese system, or for NBTHK shinsa the sword gets resent for Hozon and it gets a new paper and different attribution). Unfortunately these are the closest numbers that I can get. About the pass factor, I chose 2 sessions slightly randomly as they have pretty much the same number of swords sent in. And I do own books for both of the sessions so I have data on every sword passed. Jūyō 68 shinsa had 817 swords sent in to the evaluation. Out of them 66 swords passed. With my math that would be 8,1% pass rate Jūyō 25 shinsa had 819 swords sent in to the evaluation. Out of them 341 swords passed. Using the same math it would be 41,6% pass rate Pretty big difference... In the 2000's I think the pass rate has mostly fluctuated between 10-20%. There are some below that and some above that. It seems like the most recent ones 68,69,70 have all have been judged very stricly with very small amount of swords passing through.

Just did an English translation of FRANÇOIS PONCETTON's book "LES GARDES DE SABRE JAPONAISES." Published in Paris by Albert Morance, 1924. With a few more modern images and a lot more descriptions and provenance. Around a hundred pages - images alongside the descriptions unlike the original book that had a series of plates at the back of the book. You can find the original French PDF here - https://www.tobunken.go.jp/archives/PDF/library-books/9000AB4950.pdf It is a very large 178 MB.

It was many years ago, and I am sure I have missed a bit of meaning with my poor memory, but at a Chicago Show presentation of blades, Bob Benson once said something like “a smith had to put extra care into making a tanto because you can see the quality or flaws all in a single glance. A long blade may vary a bit along its length, but a tanto must be perfect.”

I primarily collect sword-makers tsuba. The aim being to own work by sword-makers whose blades I would otherwise not be able to afford. The only boundaries are age, health and pocket book. I suppose I am the soul of my collection. I have two pieces at the heart of my collection of which I am very proud; a Juyo Bizen Morisuke tachi that is ubu signed and dated to 1335, and a juyo tosogu daisho set of tsuba by Chikanori custom made by order of Mito Rekko. More than this I cannot hope for so am very content with what I have achieved thus far...

Hello All this is the link to download the Art of the Samurai book. This is publicly available also https://www.metmuseum.org/met-publications/art-of-the-samurai-Japanese-arms-and-armor-1156-1868 Download link: https://we.tl/t-sTi9gGRpAX

It has been many years but I think there is a disconnect in information and important translated information that is held quietly between a select few. I am one of those guilty parties, if @Brian was open to it i would very much like to pass all my translated Juyo documents, edo period documents and many other acquired articles for him to post on the site but we are talking many gigabytes of data... no idea how to make that work and there is a time consuming element to it. @Brian let me know.

Left: Yasumitsu Middle: Yasuhiro Right: Yasuoki

Yasumitsu tachi from 1938 with early '98 pattern koshirae

Attic junk. Up in the loft (attic) of a Japanese farmhouse I found the remains of two dusty old lanterns. The owner said she didn't want them, so reckoning I could fix them up I asked her not to trash them. Nothing really special: one was a simple box frame, unpapered, with a central spatula or tongue for a candle. The other was better, with three papered but torn windows, a door with a little catch, and a shrine-like roof. Being an earthquake prone country, with houses made of wood and paper, you can understand the traditional nervousness around the danger of fires. Off the scale, what I came across when first living here. I do not plan to put real candles in them, unless following the golden rule of never leaving a room empty with a burning light unattended. Take the light with you (to the 'habakari' for example), or light a small carrying lantern and extinguish the main light. If you are the cause of a house fire, the whole village will probably hate you forever. With these two as a temporary fix, I have simply fitted Buddhist altar lights, candle look-a-likes with batteries! As to age, they probably do not go back to the Edo period, but who can date such country traditions? The loft was once used for silkworm culture, but that must have been way before WW2. Photos to follow. (Both lamps strengthened and rebuilt.) 1. The box frame. Maybe I will paper the facets. 2. The roofed shrine lantern.

I thought I’d show my recent acquisition. A special order tanto by Horii Hideaki

Hello All I am opening up a topic that older collectors will no doubt roll their eyes at because it has been discussed to death in the past. Full disclaimers: 1) This is for newer collectors 2) I owned a blade from Juyo 22 so I am also in the shite there when this concept is brought up. Needless to say money was lost on a sale. 3) Knowledge is power and I am just repeating the wisdom of the past. Ok! So, when we see the Juyo blades listed on dealers sites and catalogues we also see that the Juyo session is mentioned more often than not. This is a very valuable piece of information that goes under the radar in many cases. There is also a price parity associated with some Juyo sessions and for good reason. Attached you will find analytical information on each and every sword and item that has passed Juyo over some 70 sessions, all thanks to @Jussi Ekholm and his amazing skills in collating this data. Thank you Jussi, I hope everyone understands what a gift this information is in time. I would like to draw attention to how many swords and items pass in each consecutive session. Readers will notice that in sessions from 20 to around 26 there are an unusually high number of swords that passed Juyo, not a good sign. It is an accepted fact that we see inferior swords in these sessions that have passed Juyo and as collectors you must apply great scrutiny to swords from these sessions before thinking of a purchase. I myself, owned a sword from Juyo 22 but it was purchased in hand and after the translated Zufu was given consideration. The swords from sessions where we see high passes are usually not held in high regard and so they are priced accordingly. The other way this list is so invaluable is to see what passes and at what rates. How many Hizen Tadahiro for example or how many Naotane, is Soshu the high flying segment or is it Bizen? Rarity, availability in the market and in private. If you go after a sword at Hozon how can you determine the chance at Juyo? So much can be gained from this list. Please download it and give it an analytical overview. Thank you @Jussi Ekholm Juyo Index 70p.pdf

Rayhan has made so many interesting topics lately. I have spent a lot of time going through the Jūyō items and I quite recently started what is my probably 4th time going through all the books that I have. With the amount spent I think I should be able to make some guesses what would pass but to be honest I am pretty much clueless. Part of it is my own mentality for sword appreciation being different and huge part of course is not seeing the items in person. There are of course some what I would think as "slam dunk" items yet I have heard that some of the amazing Tokubetsu Hozon items have been sent to Jūyō and they failed, and that I cannot understand as you get so many X ō-suriage mumei swords passing while genuinely rare item would be failed. As a long time NBTHK member I am still not a fan of their tiered shinsa system but it is what it is. For ō-suriage mumei items I would think the most important thing at Tokubetsu Hozon would be the attribution it gets from NBTHK. It is bit sad to say but rather than item quality itself I would be more focused on the attribution if I would think about Jūyō submission (now I have to state I have never sent an item to NBTHK shinsa at any level and not sure if I will). So as a mind game you have a nice ō-suriage mumei sword that you think is from Nanbokuchō period and you send to shinsa - then it returns as Echizen Rai (越前来). You are bit unlucky as there is only 1 mumei Echizen Rai that has passed Jūyō shinsa, so I would think you could try Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon again and see if you will get a better attribution next time. Now lets say you will get Nakajima Rai (中島来) as an attribution, then there are 64 that have passed Jūyō. There is even one Nakajima Rai that has passed the prestigeous Tokubetsu Jūyō, Nagoya Tōken World has it in their collection, I saw it there last year and it seemed to be a fine sword. https://www.touken-world.jp/search-noted-sword/tokubetsujuyotoken-meito/17432/ Then as 3rd spot in the game you might get Rai Kunimitsu (来国光) attribution you can give a big thumbs up, there are 114 ō-suriage mumei katana with attribution to Rai Kunimitsu that have passed Jūyō (yes few of them have kinzōgan etc. but that is often a form of attribution too and I don't see that relevant to prove the point). And 21 of them have went on to pass Tokubetsu Jūyō. I have been very lucky to see in hand the amazing Tokubetsu Jūyō Kunimitsu of Samurai Museum Berlin and also a very stunning Jūyō Kunimitsu last summer in Kawagoe sword meet where multiple NMB members were attending. Yet I have seen few in museums that to me don't seem all that impressive. Now those specialized in fine details in swords might say that there is no way that attributions would vary so much. I think yes and no, as the fine details are not really my thing. Sometimes I just find myself wondering why something gets an attribution it gets, and wondering if trying the process again would change the outcome. I also believe that people in Japan and even internationally who are "in the circle" for Jūyō and Tokubetsu Jūyō swords know if certain items have been sent for example Tokubetsu Jūyō before. Unfortunately I am not and will not be as those swords are beyond my means and also not often the main type of swords I try to focus my research on. The fact is that once the sword has passed Jūyō shinsa it is a Jūyō sword. Of course all of them are not equal. I would personally think that the only Jūyō sword of a smith Y would be more important piece than 1 out of 100 mumei attributed swords to smith X. However I think the vast majority will think the opposite way, and people want to get more and more items by these same prestigeous smiths. As some may know I have tendency to track swords at bit obsessive level. Now I looked and I have documented 19 swords for sale at Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon level that have since passed Jūyō (one has also passed Tokubetsu Jūyō). Here is one example by Kanemitsu. I personally like the shape and size but that is my thing. I remember discussing this back then with several people and nobody was that impressed about the sword. https://web.archive.org/web/20201031200433/https://www.nipponto.co.jp/swords6/KT332646.htm https://www.nipponto.co.jp/swords6/KT332646.htm Here is pretty nice one, rare Bungo smith and dated to 1451. It passed in Jūyō 67, I just don't feel like taking out books and taking pictures of them as it has already taken so much time to think and type this post. https://www.sanmei.com/contents/media/A21591_S1283_PUP_E.html This Uda Kunifusa attributed one also passed session 67. https://web.archive.org/web/20210621170603/https://www.samurai-nippon.net/SHOP/N-564.html This Hatakeda Sanemori attributed one passed Jūyō session 65 and Tokubetsu Jūyō 26 https://www.aoijapan.net/katana：kinpun-mei-gold-powder-hatakeda-sanemori/

I just visited the NBTHK museum exhibit showcasing works from Kiyomaro, Naotane, and Suishinshi Masahide. There were 2 daisho from Suishinshi Masahide that were sublime, and an exquisite kogarasumaru daisho from Naotane. Pictures below...

All, So just to re-cap the show. As always, Mark and crew put on a WONDERFUL show. Great seeing old friends/acquaintances, shaking hands, sharing new acquisitions, and just catching up a bit. Unfortunately, as I age, leaning over the table and looking down at items can take its toll on the old back… but it is a risk I am willing to take! The presentations on Saturday were top notch and we got to look at/hold fittings and blades that may rarely come around again. Matt Jarrell’s presentation highlighting the change in shape of swords over time was very informative. You know that ‘pictorial chart’ in books of blades showing that information? Well, you got to look at and hold that chart in person! From Heian to Shinshinto. How many opportunities like that come along? It was mentioned that some of the fittings from that presentation may be posted on-line for viewing, but I will have to let those associated with that comment. Please… if you have the opportunity to go to this show or any others in the future, make every attempt. You will NOT be disappointed and they really need our support. Once again, thank you to Mark and all!

Nice display mate! Here's my mounting solution...used the old attic sliding ladder i've had laying around forever and it works pretty damn good.

Not a collector? Really not? Don't you collect knowledge, and perhaps literature too? I don't mean that in a bad way. I simply ask myself whether it is not simply an oppositional attitude towards the owners of many swords to say that you are not a collector because you “only” study the subject matter. Of course, someone who is only interested in knowledge and not in the physical possession of the objects being studied is not a collector in the traditional sense. But the student who owns nothing must be aware that he cannot exist without being a collector in the conventional sense. He is dependent on being able to study the objects in the possession of a traditional collector or the collection of a museum in order to increase his knowledge. Conversely, the traditional collector with less knowledge may also be dependent on the knowledge of the student in order to better assess his collection. So there is a symbiosis from which everyone can benefit! Nobody is better or worse because they have more or less, or know more or less. The famous collector's disease “emotions” affects the conventional collector just as much as the collector of knowledge. Emotions are basically a good thing, otherwise we would all be zombies. But greed, envy, impatience, superficiality and arrogance cloud our vision and impair our judgment. You should never forget that. I can understand that. I also claim to have a good memory. Nevertheless, I'm often surprised to see a particular blade again after a long time. You often see it "with different eyes," which is also part of the learning process. I would rewrite the Jo, Jojo, and Saijo Saku swordsmiths as: works that would be described as Jo, Jojo, or Saijo Saku. Yes, I know that this is explicitly a designation for the value of swordsmiths according to the Fujishiro system. But it excludes very good works by lesser-rated or not-at-all-rated smiths. And it reinforces the fact that collectors tend to focus on the name of a swordsmith rather than the quality of a particular blade. What I mean by that is that I've often seen works signed by Jo or Jojo swordsmiths and thought, oh God, he must have had a really bad day. The blade is mediocre at best, if not poor. On the other hand, there are notable works by Chujo-Saku swordsmiths, or swordsmiths outside this system.

Popped another one out, just sent to the printers. - A bit bigger book of some 390 pages, single side view images with limited information. It will take some time to be released after I get to proof check the print quality. https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/tsuba-in-the-national-museum-of-norway-spartancrest/1147268270?ean=9798349985782 https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-national-museum-in-warsaw-tsuba-collection-spartancrest/1147268269 https://www.thriftbooks.com/browse/?b.search=tsuba#b.s=mostPopular-desc&b.p=1&b.pp=50&b.oos&b.tile Cheaper than Amazon!

Unbelievable triple coincidence. Just arrived at the museum in town to listen to a lecture on special order swords. Guess what the very first one I am looking at is… had no idea it was here!

Rayhans Hirotsugu story is amazing one and it highlights many things that go into submission and collecting at high level. Things that I and I suspect many others have not even thought about. I would have been perfectly happy with the sword in the original polish but more experienced eye saw how it would benefit from top class polish and the end result is most likely wonderful. I hate the business side talk about monetary values etc. but as this hobby is so connected to dealing items and various papering tiers it is unfortunate part of it. To me it just makes wonderful historical items feel bit commecialized like they are more common goods that are just traded over and over. However the talk and discussion about Jūyō items is relevant in the sense that it gives bit of "common ground" for everyone to the discussion. Of course we all have varying understanding about them. Many might have never seen one in hand, some might get to occasionally view them in hand (I admit for me even after 20+years in the hobby it is always a rare and exciting chance whenever I get to hold a Jūyō level sword in my own hands [and a fun fact they have all been wonderful swords, even though we might talk bit negatively about some Jūyō swords to a very average collector like me they are always very good quality swords]), and yes we do have collectors in the forum that are at the top level and for them these are the types of swords they are accustomed to. I think the best fact in NBTHK Jūyō is that the swords get documented to be used as a reference. Of course limited number of people will have access to the information but it is still one of the best resources towards high end items. It is also a good way to get the discussion going as people will at least have some experience of them. Trying to build up discussion about some shrine swords would prove most likely much more difficult as maybe only an handful of members would be aware of those particular swords. Still online access to Japanese dealer sites, lots of international people visiting DTI, many things like that make Jūyō swords appear to be more common than they actually are. I know I have done some calculations lately about total number of swords in Japan, as well as I should have fairly accurate guess on the number of Hozon and Tokubetsu Hozon passed items. Jūyō and Tokubetsu Jūyō you can just actually count as they are in the references. Jūyō item % is very tiny when you compare it to the number of Japanese swords in Japan. When thinking about Jūyō sessions one thing to look at is also the pass factor. I know few forum members excel in stuff like this, and have made amazing research on this. There is huge variance between the sessions in percentage of submitted items that pass. NBTHK does not hide this information at all, numbers of sent items and passed items are published in their Tōken Bijutsu magazines. Of course magazine is only sent to members, however recently NBTHK has published the results on their website too so everyone interested could have viewed them there. Like Franco and Colin wrote above it is extremely complicated with so many factors it goes way over my head. I have only fairly recently understood how important historical provenance also is. Of course it makes sense in the way that swords owned by high ranking people and families back in the day were quite often very high quality items.

This will be quite a lengthy post, so please bear with me. Yesterday, I finally decided to give DeepSeek a try, just to see if it offered a different experience compared to ChatGPT, for instance. Not that I use any AI very often. I was simply curious. Having bought a TH Hokke blade which is to be delivered soon, I guessed it would be a good idea to ask DeepSeek about that particular school. The details the AI engine came up with were pretty ample and interesting, so I wrote back “thank you”, but, out of some kind of instinctive courtesy (silly me – I was talking to a machine, after all), this time my message was in Chinese (Google-translated, of course, as I don’t speak the language). To my surprise, DS then switched to Mandarin too, posting a rather long message. Amused, I asked for a translation. So, the AI apologised politely (and in a very witty, even self-ironic way, also jokingly blaming its programmers for the apparent glitch that made DeepSeek think I was able to communicate in Mandarin). And here comes the sudden twist I was blown away by: one of the funny apologies DS decided to make read: “I’ll throttle back the random multilingual outbursts… unless you request a haiku about tanto polishing”. Well, I couldn’t miss that opportunity. A haiku about tanto polishing?! Come on! And, of course, please keep in mind that I hadn’t previously include in that chat any reference to certain blade types or other Japanese cultural topics. It was entirely the AI’s idea, solely based on my interest in a Japanese swordsmithing school (and on the fact that DS assumed I’d probably appreciate related things). A few seconds later, there it was, my own personal (unrequested but very welcome) haiku, talking of a craft that very few people (if any) would think a poem should be written about. Judge it for yourselves. And remember that my “conversation” with DeepSeek began with a pretty niche topic of my choosing, that could not possibly have caused, IMHO, the AI to somehow decide I would enjoy a Japanese fixed form piece of poetry about an imaginary togishi, his work and his philosophical, metaphorical or literary inclinations. I was sooooo wrong… That totally unexpected haiku goes like this (of course, it sticks to the 3 lines, 5-7-5 syllables form, which makes it even more remarkable): Stone meets steel at dawn, Oil whispers on folded light – Perfection’s first scratch. (…I regret nothing).

More precisely for the place name, 下水内郡常盤村小沼 – Shimominochi-gun, Tokiwa-mura, Onuma Ref. Shimominochi District, Nagano - Wikipedia

I was doing some work on the Poncetton collection [1924] and noticed an Onin tsuba that twigged a memory back to the Hayashi Tadamasa collection of 1902. [yes I do live in the past! ] I found the images and tried to do a visual comparison. Both collections only showed one side view and of course they were not the same view! However the older Hayashi collection had a brief description which included its catalogue number from that time [1902] - The Poncetton image had even less by way of descriptions except for a tiny number at the top of the nakago-ana no. 49 - - the same collection number as the Hayashi description. Bingo!! That allows me to push the provenance of the piece back beyond what the Poncetton collection knew. The Poncetton collection cites H. Vever. as the previous owner and Henri Vever has an interesting Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Vever Which in part states "By the 1880s, Vever became one of the earliest Europeans to formally collect Japanese ukiyo-e woodblock prints, purchasing extensively from dealers such as Hayashi Tadamasa." He must also have collected tsuba, at least the one that was still in Hayashi's collection in 1902 (Tsuba are not mentioned in the article but other collectors of the same, such as Gonse & Migeon are listed) I guess the point is if you have any old collection numbers on your tsuba, please, please leave them in place - they may come in handy!

Dropping an interesting old text for everyone to download and read. Before the copyright police jump on me, this book is free to download from JSTOR as well and was published first in 1905. Light reading for fun. Not sure if it is in the downloads section already? The Japanese Book of the Ancient Sword.pdf

The soul of my collection are the memories associated with each sword. From the first sword, the journey that brought me to it. To the people involved, the good memories and the bad, the best lessons and the worst (which are actually the most essential) to the friends and loved ones now part of those memories.

Chicago sow...Friday setup

So I recently acquired a pretty high quality wave fuchigashira that I wanted to get the forums opinions on. This one is papered and signed Seisendo Kashino Naonobu (Kao). I am interested in anything you can tell me about the artist or any other mei and kao examples you might be able to provide for this artisan to help me ascertain the authenticity of the signature. Whilst I believe the mei is likely authentic, I only have one other example at present to compare it to. The fact that it is certified certainly helps also. I've only just won this piece in auction and it is still over in Japan so I can't take any new photographs at the moment. Picture from the original auction listing below: Picture of a tsuba by the same artist in the Walters Art Museum: https://art.thewalters.org/object/51.292/ Anything you could tell me about the artist, or any opinions about how this new piece in my collection compares in quality to other Mito and Omori wave fuchigashira would be greatly appreciated.

The blade is a Nanbokucho period Esshu Kuniyuki. There is an increasing degree of forgiveness on shinsa outcomes as you go further back in time. Older swords by respected old masters can receive Tokubetsu Hozon or higher even with varying degrees of flaws and condition issues. I am away from home at the moment, but perhaps someone can post photos of the Compton collection Ko-Bizen Hiromitsu, which had a quite severe and extended kitae-ware in the monouchi, but received juyo being a long, ubu, zaimei example by that very rare Ko-Bizen smith. Perhaps that particular sword would not have received juyo today, I'm no longer I'm comfortable speculating on the ability of a particular sword to pass Juyo, but I'm only sharing as an example of the leeway that can be given based on age and historical importance (among other factors).

I would like to take a moment to apologise to the JSSUS for not verifying and doing my research properly before posting one of their magazines (taken down long ago). If I had been more clinical I would have found this link https://www.jssus.org/Japanese_Sword_Society_Archive.html That has a full host of valuble materials and made available for free. Ladies and gentlemen of the JSSUS please forgive my oversight and arrogance. And for those students please check the link to see great material for beginners and seasoned collectors alike. Rayhan

You're right, Jacques, it is very clear. Which is probably why the NBTHK, Mr. Tanobe, and Kanzan Sato all agree with each other. And don't agree with you. First, Sato writes that "nagamaki" refers to the way these swords were mounted. Followed by "Therefore, nagamaki should properly be called naginata." Which blows the copies claim theory out of the water. Why? Because despite the marked differences in shape, they are still "naginata." Further, anyone reading Sato's article should realize that Sato is talking about blades made over multiple time periods encompassing a number of different shapes. To that point, when being reconfigured to other uses, katana, wakizashi, modifications would be adapted and customized to the individual sword. It was not a one cut fits all. Which accounts for the differences we now see in the boshi between the different types of naginata-naoshi. On the subject of "impossible to know." Again, Jacques, you are mistaken. When naginata-naoshi underwent a shape change there was a narrowing. That narrowing changed the appearance of the sword. When properly restored by today's polishers, excellent polishers will recognize this distortion and reconfigure the shinogi to give the sword more of the original appearance, as the maker intended. When it comes to nihonto, it's just when you begin to think you know something that you find out how little you know.

I confirm that Mr Benson has given us permission to share these with the NMB. In his words.. ".... I am always interested in seeing all Japanese Sword information disseminated...." I think that is an amazing gesture from someone considered one of the pillars of the Nihonto community in the West, and my thanks go out to him and also to Rayhan for facilitating this. Bushido magazine contains some amazing info, and everyone should grab this opportunity. I'll upload them in a day or 2 in individual editions for those who battle with the above transfer. We are awaiting response from other organizations to see if they will allow sharing of vintage (not recent or current) newsletters, many of which come from before the internet. Enjoy all.

1. 渡部盛継 – Watanabe Moritsugu 2. 白井□笑 – Shirai … 3. 山崎昭 – Yamazaki Akira 4. 川本□志 – Kawamoto … 5. 江口綜瞋 – Eguchi Soshin 6. 吉川皎園 – Yoshikawa Koen

Thomas above said something that caught my eye. “I suppose I am the soul of my collection.” This is probably true for me too. I have several ‘collections’ of things, mostly of what I like, with no conscious philosophy behind, things that resonate with me, or call me. Generally background education and artistic sensibility help funnel or channel the inflow of these. As to Nihontō specifically, there is admittedly a little more of the brain involved, shaped by what I have ingested over the years, but not enough yet. This must come from lack of serious study and lack of funds. Serendipity is part of it: a slow way to collect, but gentler on the bank. I am still able to forget, not constantly on the boil. Each of the few blades I have is a pleasure to recall whenever I happen think of them. Actually, I do not even think of them as a ‘collection’.