Gakusee

Lots of condition issues on that one but that’s all factored in the price. If you can live with the ware, if this gets repolished to brighten up the condition a bit (as the current polish is old) you will have a big name in koshirae and with Hozon paper. Not a bad place at all. For a top-condition nice-quality Norishige at TH you are looking at 5-6m yen+ minimum if you are lucky.

Just an inspiration is probably not doing it a service, A lot of work goes into Nakamura san’s work. He keeps experimenting and innovating.

Good thread, HB! Thank you for the efforts to document the collection and for sharing your images here. Indeed, a lot of big names mentioned by you and on the sayagaki….I am also not sure how one can draw conclusions looking at unclear steel covered by a congealed oil layer….anyway. Kudos!

Do I see the signature of Miyochin Yoshihisa on the menpo? And the sword is signed Koyama Munetsugu, a renowned smith... worthwhile checking the signature to published sources.

Sori of 2.5cm is always deep sori for “normal” blades (ie not excessively long odachi). There is little point dwelling about what Aoi meant. They are just using machine translations without checking those too thoroughly. Sometimes, they even copy and paste parts of descriptions from other swords onto another and create confusion and so on. Rely on your eyes looking at the sugata in the full-size photos to evaluate sori.

Chris, I do not agree that AI will just yet stop us from thinking. Quite the opposite, we need to carefully read what it has written, analyse it, dissect and question it to ensure we agree with what is has written and whether it is true. The software models sometimes invent statements, which look very credible and persuasive, but are in fact figments of its creativity. It should be viewed as a good librarian which can point us to good sources of information and summarise these at a high level of abstraction. it is not substitute for own experience and knowledge but often produces much more thorough and informative results than a Google or Bing request. The important thing is that you can modulate the interaction and specify how it should give it the answer: verbatim, summarised or with interpretation of what it might mean. I have used all of these as sometimes it summarises things while I need the full, precise detail. it could remove mundane and laborious tasks of looking up kanji or esoteric meanings but is not there yet. I think it needs another 3-5 years to be more useful.

A few of us have been training ChatGPT on Nihonto translations for the last couple of years. The results are very good. What people need to realise is that this is not AI as in autonomous thinking entity. These are just linguistic models with some inference and summarisation ability, but that is it. They can crunch through publications and summarise them eloquently for less esoteric subjects. However for arcane subjects like Nihonto, your best bet is only translations for now. ChatGPT still gets smith and location names wrong but the basic terms it has mastered pretty well now.

Well, I cannot blame Eddy for taking a break. An enormous amount of work goes in putting these together and, despite various exhortations, the European cohorts from the U.K., France, Germany etc are not turning up. There are probably 500-600 serious students across these countries and we cannot seem to muster them. Even the Netherlands can do better in summoning more attendees…. It is a pity “Lewis” that you started late with all of this and missed the first two events. They were stronger, especially the first one, with the stupendously good exhibition of members’ TokuJu and Juyo blades and Tosogu which far outshone the items for sale back then. it is a real pity as this event had the potential to be a great mini DTI, but it is our fault - the collectors, members etc who are very vocal on NMB but cannot be perturbed to go to Utrecht. And our colleagues in the US traverse a whole continent to attend their gun and militaria shows…. We just don’t have it in us to travel for the hobby. A few hardcore fans do it, but a show like that is not sustainable with only 50 regulars.

Well essentially because I don’t have the time or inclination to be digging my raw images… I think this is plenty. I also have videos of the blade etc etc etc but keeping them. Various considerations and size limits etc.

Franco So, are you going to be referring to my verbal explanation or your eyes ?? Come on - the images are very clear. It of course has yubashiri but much more than yubashiri - as I said, it has the traits of hitatsura. The thick streaks you see are pure ara nie in the jigane and layered so thick that it is difficult to comprehend. The quenching temperature must have been rather high and he must have kept it there longer than usual. The nagasa is in the photo. However, to make all this more educational and easy, in my original post above I added an approximate translation of the museum plaque.

Yes, it is a real blade indeed and rather striking in real life. Not to everyone’s liking but shows that Yukimitsu could do the Shintogo subtle elegance and then the more flamboyant later hitatsura. I was so surprised by the workmanship that I had to document it…. Plus it is probably the rarest Yukimitsu blade in existence in terms of inscription too. AI translation of the text Short Sword Signed Kamakura [Jū] [Ie] Yukimitsu / Genten Second Year, Third Month (元享二年三月) (March 1322) Blade Length: 23.9 cm Slight curvature inward Late Kamakura Period (Genten 2, 1322) Private Collection In ancient sword manuscripts from the Muromachi period, Yukimitsu is noted for a variety of hamon (blade patterns), including straight lines, small and large waves, and irregular patterns. His work demonstrates diverse techniques. The present blade is mainly straight with shallow irregularities, and larger irregular patterns are not attributed to Yukimitsu’s usual style. This particular sword stands out as a rare example among his works, featuring a thick, layered hamon that mostly shows the notare (wavy) pattern. It also displays kinsuji (bright streaks of hard steel) and nie (crystal-like grains of steel), with yubashiri (a pattern resembling small islands of hard steel) and tobiyaki (areas of the blade hardened by tempering) interwoven, creating a complex and lively appearance. This work is consistent with descriptions in ancient manuscripts, making it an important example when studying Yukimitsu’s legacy. The fact that it is signed and dated further increases its historical value, making it indispensable for research on his school and style.

The exclusion of Go in the kantei thread was not only or not even primarily due to the boshi. Let us not confuse Go with the blade there, as Go Yoshihiro made much more subtle and more refined blades than that. His quality is generally higher than that kantei blade which had too too much hadaka nie, ara nie etc.

And finally, Jacques, (as I really do not need to adduce any more evidence beyond the Taikan, the Facts & Fundamentals and this), here is an extract, together with the English translation put together for your convenience, of the Fujishiro Koto volume. And a master polisher such as Fujishiro will know what he is talking about…. So, please let us put this to bed and move on with life.

I like Nagayama a lot and often also quote him. However in this particular instance I do not think he is right about the dating of layered methodology. The English source I quoted was Nakahara, from Facts & Fundamentals. The Japanese (Taikan) in general has negative overtones on the Rai hada showing through. If it were a good thing it would not be called “weak”.

Yes thank you; that is the hadadachi indeed, but what about the sentence immediately below on the same page saying that here and there there is weak hada showing through , ie effectively another layer showing through? And page 54 specifically calls out the Rai hada and calls it weak layer? We can also just make this easier and have some sources in English, which are very straightforward.

Jacques, apologies for the confusion: it is not the Meikan but the Taikan. The Nihonto Taikan , Koto Volume 1 the section about Rai school. One could refer for instance to pages 40-55. While they do not explicitly mention the terms shingane or kawagane, some of the pages talk of the “weak skin” of the Kunitoshi when running some comparisons to Kunimitsu or less of the weak skin in Kunimitsu and comparing against Awataguchi Yoshimitsu vs the other, and reference the Raihada in there as the weak skin. The way I interpret this is they infer a surface or top layer that is sometimes weak and sometimes differential steel shows.

Jacques, you used to quote the D-K effect a lot in the past and even had it in your signature before you saw the errors in your ways and much more appropriately have included an environmentalist one. Kudos for that. Always found that initial approach aggressive and unwarranted, but….please do not base your conclusions on the 300 Kamakura swords you have held. Even if you doubt the veracity of what Peter has written about lamination and multilayered techniques in his text, there are some notable citations describing shingane and kawagane • “Nihonto Meikan” (日本刀名鑑): Describes the evolution of Japanese sword forging methods and highlights the importance of lamination techniques developed in the Kamakura period. It mentions how the use of different steel types (shingane for the core and kawagane for the outer surface) became standard during this time. • “Kokon Kaji Biko” (古今鍛冶備考): A swordsmithing text that documents the methods used by ancient Japanese blacksmiths, including the introduction of multi-layered steel forging, specifically mentioning the use of shingane and kawagane to create blades with a balance of hardness and flexibility. • “Token Bijutsu” (刀剣美術): A publication on Japanese swords that describes how the introduction of folding steel and lamination techniques, which include shingane and kawagane, can be traced back to the late Nara and Heian periods. However, it emphasizes that the techniques became more sophisticated and widespread during the Kamakura period. According to records, folding techniques likely developed through interaction with Chinese and Korean blacksmithing practices during this time, evolving into the multi-steel structure that included inner and outer layers. and so on

Same quoted article clearly mentions that some Koto swords have core steel….. Earlier swords indeed did not have core + jacket but eventually they started having this multilayered structure.

Got it, thanks!

Thanks for this illustration, Jacques. I cannot see the text well - where does the Rai Kinmichi sayagaki say that it is with excellent workmanship? But even if we disagree on evaluations of excellent / very good / good/ adequate / poor as these are qualitative evaluations, we are somewhat deviating from the view expressed earlier of attribution objectivity. Sometimes, I also do not understand how certain swords are evaluated as excellent, when I see jigane that stands out and rough hada. But the NBTHK and Tanobe sensei say excellent workmanship etc. I take it as a lesson that perhaps that smith could have hadatachi or whatever, or the “brightness of the jiba” is more important than tightness of jihada, or the “clarity of the hamon and consistency of nioiguchi” are more significant than what I perceive to be an exciting hamon (ie niesuji and hataraki within) etc etc etc and that I need to learn more. This has happened also at various times when I have visited the TokuJu shinsa and seen some of the swords elevated to that level and scratch my head. However, this has nothing to do with Tanobe sensei. Also you raised the issue of sayagaki being paid and I am raising a parallel example - Juyo shinsa also being paid. The NBTHK has also made a way of “making ends meet” by charging fees for their shinsa. In fact, some sceptics are being increasingly concerned by the very varied and bewildering behaviour of the last few shinsa, with rejections of swords which are far superior to those actually being passed at Juyo or Tokubetsu Juyo level. But that’s a discussion for another time and I am not sure I wish to go into that on this public forum and disseminate speculations or inside knowledge. In principle, I agree that we should not idolise individuals and seek several opinions and do our own homework. Also, it is normal for retired people to also undertake “consultancy” services the world over. So, taking as many educated opinions as possible is always the best approach.

Jacques, That is not a valid statement in reference to Tanobe sensei writing a sayagaki for a gimei sword. He does not do that. At minimum, he would recommend gimei removal. Jacques - how do I know that? Well, I have been there personally in that situation…..If you have not experienced it first-hand and have no evidence, why are you making allegations? Firstly, he does not often disagree with the NBTHK. Quite the opposite, in the vast majority of cases, he agrees with them and his sayagaki supports the NBTHK certificate. Secondly, sometimes he goes a step beyond the NBTHK and attributes the sword to a specific smith within the school the NBTHK has appraised. Thirdly, the NBTHK itself changes its mind (between polishes, between separate shinsa) so why would Tanobe sensei not be allowed to have a different view to what is stipulated at that particular time on that specific certificate? Yes, occasionally, often privately, he might have a slightly differing view. Finally, as we know well, even experts disagree. There are swords which receive different attributions when submitted to the NBTHK and NTHK or even the same sword which went to different hands (eg Nisshu, Honma, later NBTHK certificate etc). Yes, sayagaki work is paid for but that does not impinge on its objectivity. Juyo certificates are also paid for. Private medical care is also paid for, etc etc. Please let us not contaminate this valuable thread with accusations of monetary benefit outweighing objectivity or whatever insinuation is being made. Thesis, antithesis, synthesis.

Excellent responses from Jussi and Jacques. The reality is that some schools and some makers command premium prices due to inherent quality or historic reputation/associations. That is where the connections you imply (older=higher price, longer = higher price, higher paper = higher price) very often break. I will also add other factors influencing price apart from maker, quality, condition and modern papers: - historic provenance (especially to important figures and if supported with some evidence) - Honami certificates and valuations (particularly early Honami such as Kochu, Kojo etc - later the origami lose a lot of their credibility) - kinzogan/ginzogan or saidanmei (describing tameshigiri) - again by reputable appraisers/testers - often, excellent koshirae, particularly if paired with the sword in the Edo period (as opposed to modern match)

Not the blade I had in mind as the one I am thinking about is nearly 80cm in length. The long blade is Juyo-ed to mid Kamakura as Fukuoka Ichimonji Norinawa, even though Tanobe sensei has sayagaki-ed to an earlier time saying no later than early Kamakura and refers to a KoBizen smith of similar workmanship and similar but different name (Yasunawa/Yasutsuna, with a very similar second kanji). Juyo paper to Norinawa, but could also be pronounced Noritsuna and that smith is not in the meikan, so some confusion thereof. The workmanship is definitely early-ish Kamakura Bizen and here the speculation starts: too flamboyant for KoIchimonji, some traits of KoBizen (some jifu, very heavy nie), some elements of Fukuoka (gorgeous choji) but sugata of an earlier time (early Kamakura). So, overall confusing blade but one of those smiths that one could argue is late KoBizen or early Fukuoka smith. Overall a very desirable piece of my favourite flamboyant Bizen style and 78cm ubu zaimei sugata. I am not sure which shortish blade of KoIchimonji workmanship in the Berlin Museum collection that could be…. I have seen the top blades and am blanking at a “short KoIchimonji” one.

By the way, was that the Ichimonji / ko-Ichimonji ubu zaimei blade? I did not attend, so not sure which one you mean. If you remember the school, we can speculate…