Rivkin

Its a short, late Muromachi tanto. The work seems ok match to how Izumi craft is described in Meikan, though they also practised Mino-Soshu style quite often with which I am more familiar. The only thing that surprises me is the nakago. The point is not too sharp, but still without the signature I would give Kongobyoe some consideration, the work sort of matches it too. Still quite likely this is authentic Izumi Masakiyo from lets say Tembun or about.

It is typically altered just like the old format papers with submitter's name when the family in question pawns or sells a sword. Many things, avoiding feeling like something personal that was left to you by parents is now someone else's property and people know this, avoiding advertising you are selling your inheritance etc.. For the same reason sayagaki can be buffed off or have only very basic information to begin with. The consequence is that probably 1% of Daimyo swords today are still identifiable as such. Masamune and Tomonari did not come out from thin air but we have usually even at this level no idea who owned them.

I would delegate to people like Stephen who knows the process infinitely better but my impression was that in the end you are facing real people who make a decision whether the sword needs to be preserved or destroyed. In my (weird) case there was government support vouching that non-Japanese swords are being temporary imported for cultural purposes and the torokusho was issued. This being said, after I am more aware what the system is - I would not try it again for my own blades.

Overall shot is needed. I will be talking quite a bit off the cuff: On shinto side there are tons of closely related things which have midare-gunome in some nie, but the nakago is overall shorter and there might be some non-sugi elements in boshi or its just a photograph. If that's true then end of Muromachi is a possibility, and there are not tons of really wide base midare gunome hamon in nie in Muromachi. Typically Mino-Bizen would not have a particularly wide base. And yet, saing this - gunome with wide sugu base was a rather typical hamon for those who wanted to revive Higo Dotanuki all the way till the end of shinshinto. To the point such periodicity would actually be rather rare on Muromachi examples. So it still might be Edo period.

Unfortunately I can't add much except its a relatively modern steel and with extended kissaki, shin-shinto or about is a possibility. Its unlikely to be a high quality blade. But it looks authentic.

The extra thickness might hint Tosa, but Tosa Yoshimitsu tends to long kaeri or in rare cases if I remember correctly yakitsume with kaen, this one has simply a very short, well formed kaeri. Tosa tends to have more subdued nioi-guchi. Tosa tends to be pure suguha based with very little variation, maybe a bit of notare - this one actually has well defined gunome-like elements. I personally would investigate one of the schools known for non-distinct midare hamon and sometimes has short kaeri. Fuyuhiro, for example. Then again yasurime is also quite distinctive.

It could be 1470s, for example. Not the mainstream schools unfortunately. It has pronounced nioi-guchi which is not very well controlled, reasonably tight forging, but then again in couple of places it can open up with polish. What happens with the kaeri? Its almost like there is none on one side, which torpedoes a lot of attributions. So boshi-kaeri on both sides would be of interest.

I am not sure this is 1351 document per se. Unfortunately its not made as a formal sword publication, it seems just a piece of paper that someone at some point authored among other monastery writings.

Bakufu government overall produced very little paper trail, unless one counts its representation in Kyoto as part of the government. Bushi law functioned differently - basically the offended party had to take issue in its own hands and the only question was whether the offence was considered real and serious enough, so much of the disputes were settled through simple assassination. An average temple from the top ten generated more paperwork than Bakufu. What is problematic with Soshu is that Ashikaga did much to catalogize and categorize Kamakura art and they did institute large scale sword exchange through gifts and did much for formal sword collecting. There is little evidence of Masamune or Go or quite a few other names being considered important. Neither Hojo nor Ashikaga donated those to any temples or bestowed on someone, or wrote about owning such etc. etc. Now, one defensive argument is that Edo period scholarship believed Masamune worked for exceptional long time and started rather early and had enormous standing among the smiths in entire Japan - none of which I think is remotely close to the truth. Norishige worked for most of the time in the north, so actually Kamakura branch of Soshu might have not been that large at all - Yukimitsu, "Sadamune", maybe a few others; there is actually considerable evidence of Hiromitsu and Masahiro, and it all suggests they were poor and struggling in the region which physically lost connection to Kinai (Tokaido did not function until 1490-1500) and much of its resources.

They don't show the work itself. It looks like nakago acquired unusual curvature compared to rather straight the rest of the sword, which might indicate it was exposed to flame rather than entire sword. However, what the blade is remains uncertain. Nakago to me felt more Muromachi, but it could be later.

Mostly just details of work, high resolution nakage - well lit, even if its just photoshop correction, what kind of mune - it feels like it has think kasane. The ana look koto, so here is some promise here.

Unforutnately this is very likely a fire damage and a severe one though surprisingly it did not affect patination much so maybe long time ago... More pictures of the work itself would be helpful. By default this is Muromachi.

Nice end of Edo to Meiji mounts and actually interesting blades. Taking quite a few more pictures would help. details of work, mune etc.

If the cutting test signature is guaranteed (it was modern paper that were lost?) I would not worry much about anything else. Muromachi Osafune tends to look different, but if it gets papers chances it will be just Den Omiya without any specific period. Which is Nambokucho by default.

Yes and no. It seems to have narrow mihaba, extended kissaki with uniform curvature, but I am not sure it goes all the way to a classic 1360s shape you so often see with Soden Bizen. Its hard to kantei by photo, but of all Soden Bizen it can possibly reach Yoshikage. Much more likely it will be Omiya if submitted. Or Kozori. The judgement will not be based on sugata first and foremost - hamon in Bizen tends to be rather distinctive between Kamakura and Muromachi and serves as the key kantei metric.

I am bad with keeping stats or researching sales, but kantei-wise it is not quite unusual. Or for that Mino Kanenobu shooting into Naotsuna,

Funny thing the work by this smith came up. I collect various sword-related texts - appraisals, bills, advertisement, permits, recommendations. Among those always on a lookout for genealogies, since those were copied by craftsmen themselves before they would begin to practice independently and signified their standing within the family. Here is in words of Markus Sesko "It is the genealogy of the Iga no Kami Kinmichi lineage from the perspective of their Sendai-based student Katsumichi. It is signed by Mishina Iga no Kami Kanemichi and is dated Shōtoku three (1713). "

Tensho to Kanei, provincial work.

More pictures of the work itself would be very helpful. Otherwise sugata suggests Tensho.

? I would guess about the same 70-150k usd depending on length, quality, other factors. Its really hard to buy Go below that "because its TH". This one is purely for major Daimyo - major paperwork security afficianados. They did Tanobe sayagaki because Kanzan's with Daimyo attribution are either often "misleading" or faked or both depending on how you read the situation.

Gentlemen, if you take Russian Special Forces course, and the same goes for the Ukrainian one which is pretty similar... There is an interview close to the end. An officer tells you that your group operates deep behind the enemy lines from a hideout in a forest. One day a grandma and her kid walk right into it. Or they walk right into you on the way back from a mission. What to do? To finish the course you must say you'll kill them. An officer will ask how. He will ask how you strangle a ten year old girl. Chances are the first time you describe it, you miss couple of technical details. The purpose is not only to make sure you'll do that, but also bring a sense that whatever you do, you are responsible for many people who are not part of your team. If you don't want to kill random people, its not enough to feel proud about such stance. It also means putting a lot of effort. Nevertheless, some of the most heroic people are actually those that drop out of class because they refuse to say they'll strangle the girl. One well known guy, Dadin, was apparently like that, and he died after accomplishing numerous heroics in literally a month. So if a warrior steals a porcelain vase we have a problem. If he "steals" a sword or gun... I can't quite call it stealing. The enemy's weapon belongs to you. If its 800 years old, well, seal it inside salt mines if you don't want it to be taken. The only issue is when some countries like USSR do not have open antiques market and are not very transparent/ a bit guilty about the stolen stuff. So instead of brining Klimt to antique store and selling it a soldier does something inventive and the object gets destroyed. If there is no guilt involved - there are not that many good swords left in the US, certainly compared to Japan. Free market adjusts for people's desires and collectibles end up with people who respect and love them. As it should be. And if these are not the people who would have inherited these swords before the war... Maybe the war did a good thing shaking up the society.

As strange as it sounds, even this type of rough jigane looks shinto to me. It has Mino-esque hamon with a few gunome-togari without any notion of periodicity, I suspect Osaka or more likely Edo type yakidashi. There is no choji or suguha work here of Yokoyama style.

Why someone's right to anything should be based solely on the fact that his distant ancestor somehow managed to acquire it? Few would argue for restoration of XVIth century fiefs. One of the good things about War, it asks everyone what are they ready to die for. And if you are not ready to die for something - maybe its not in your heart, not in your mind, and should not be in your future, no matter what your great-grand-grand-father thought about it. And in the same manner, the great sacrifice and aspiration... In the very least they give you a right to experience things you never even dreamed about. . Would 100% of historic Japanese swords remaining in Japan enrich the Japanese culture? I doubt it. A Japanese dealer who needs to fight to buy such blade is not only brings honor to his name, but also develops kantei and other skills which would not appear if the blade was just "inherited" goods stashed in a warehouse. I toast to War, Gentlemen. And to a stash of out of polish blades in my suitcase which I will need to kantei within next month.

Thanks to Tom and Fred for organizing this as always! The catch was ok I guess. The signature non withstanding.

I called it "nei utsuri like" because with respect to Aoe this type of utsuri is dan utsuri and specific portion of it as a rule is not referred to as "nie utsuri", though its appearance is similar to "nie utsuri". This sentence is awkward but decades of kantei by text created a situation when "nie utsuri" is supposed to push the reader to, for example, Rai. This type of work in Aoe is very uniform and very good, but it also means there are quite a few blades like that.