Rivkin

Its difficult to make such analysis, because coins were devalued, prices fluctuated, 1710-1790 no one was buying any swords, koku stipends experienced both inflation and deflation, but I don't think two ryo stipend is something that was actually meant in the text. Generally a very good stipend was 150 koku. Top administrator for a top clan could make 500. The least stipend was often in 25-40 koku range, and in clans like Uesugi you were expected to have a side trade at this level. Hatamoto were more or less equivalent to a lesser clan serving a major Daimyo, so they are not one to one comparable to samurai. The main question was how much spare cash existed after expenditures, especially since the system typically aimed for "zero" as the answer. The system was also "Pareto" designed, with sharp boundaries between the classes without "in between" steps like 120 or 225 koku. Honami valuations are more or less fantastic rather than market based. Very few clans which could more or less consistently acquire swords at high level. Probably most exchanges involving such swords were not purchases, but gifts. In which case Honami valuation suggests the gift's value... Very good modern sword would more often than not be under 10 Ryo, quite affordable for the upper administration. Then again the real market prices (i.e. pawn shops) constantly fluctuated and what would be taken as collateral at 100 Ryo in 1700 and in 1740 would be very-very different amount of material.

Its a bit like buying something inside a big black bag, but I would say yes even at 800 there is some potential. At 500 the chances of this being a bad deal are not too significant. I personally would be interested in looking at better pictures if you buy them...

Anything stellar? More likely not rather than yes. But I would also consider second from the left. It has a certain cool factor to it.

Does look like the early shinto Kanemoto.

Not being a tosogu specialist, but to me FK looks more like late Hamano Nara rather than Mito per se. Would love to have the first tsuba though....

Deep, well spaced yasurime can be shinshinto. Boshi is not seen, its another thing to check. Ofcoarse its possible to try to guess the signature.

I'll hedge not being a tsuba guy, but the first two look like late pieces (clean thick profile, very flat surface without much forging or variation), cut and then artificially aged and purposefully chiseled in a rather rough manner. Datewise... Late Edo to Meiji? Probably.

They are not junk. First row are well known old designs, but the execution even in such pictures feels late. XIXth century? Needs to be studied though. The one in the center to me might be the oldiest. The next on the right I would say both particularly late and sloppy. Overall its real tsubas from not the most expensive pile...

MFA blades look much better in oshigata than in real life. Unfortunately it is a disappointment.

Both, though Sukesada does look like a good blade just not something commonly making Juyo. Kiyomitsu feels more like a typical quality work of the smith rather than his best of the best.

Having very little idea what guarantees Juyo... passing this one would be a bit of a surprise.

A lower grade hamamono with exaggerated expressions and very simplistic execution in most places, except essentially for one figure. I don't think its modern (not being tsuba specialist) because such uneven execution is very typical for lesser hamamono.

Probably Kaga (nakago, suguha) and I would guess later Muromachi one.

By the way a very good example: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0DuWnGr4pt2ChaYLf78neA1GxvTSRSijfmk8X9AxF8ZvWstPJS5DRM6k3U4em7Cipl&id=100064812335888 Classic late groupings, but top mainline Sukesada work predictably shows much stronger nie. Midare utsuri though very seldom encountered past 1500. It still feels in regards to the mumei blade shown the very well defined, uniform groupings might be suggestive of later than Oei attribution. I don't think its as late as Sukesada or Kiyomitsu, but it might be post Oei generation.

Hard to be sure. Sugata can be anything, but its not kodachi and then 22-24 inch blades generally would not be earlier than Muromachi. Hamon starts flat. Uncommon for Muromachi. Relatively dense jigane, but with some coloration. Very strong, harsh patchy nie. Generally in Soshu-Hitatsura you see strong nie during early Muromachi and then again during the Edo period. The writing with distinctive, deep triangular strikes, its more late than early in style, irrespective of whether its gimei or not. If its early Muromachi it does not look like Masahiro or related Soshu, long nie lines are like Uda. But Uda usually does not go into hitatsura. I would lean towards Edo period.

Again my apologies for misdirection. I am at fault for not even looking at the original signature besides its overall style. After investing quite some time in AI tools (diffusion based photo enhancer, kantei tool, and chatgpt sdk auto-translate) I had very good success with them for a while... and then ofcoarse they fail miserably without warning. Another challenge of our days, but first and foremost definitely my fault.

Thank you very much! And I should not hope chatgpt does the work for me.... I've been running it on auto-translate for the images for a while though....

Double post... I would say though with Muromachi Bizen its important to show entire nakago since there are quite a few clues to whether its original or not.

Signatures of this level ChatGPT translates with 90% accuracy. Bishu Osafune ju Sukesada. Its a lower grade signature which is somewhat roughly executed, but can be real and the blade sort of looks like late Muromachi. P.S. Chatgpt more often than not does good job on papers, sayagaki and books as well.

This sword has provenance, gold inlayed nijimei "Mitsutada", has been published in at least one book; probably more, but there was only one I could find right away by searching for "Osafune Mitsutada". Its polishing has been sponsored by Japanese government, the whole process has been covered in the journal of Nara Museum of Buddhist Art. Meito? Masterpiece?

Can't fool me. Its chikei.

I would say as common as midare utsuri. They go well together, while indeed mokume is quite common, but utsuri will typically be more simple. On Mino... I can finance the sword going to NBTHK for shinsa and I'll put 5,000 USD as wager. If it gets Bizen to one of Muromachi generations (simply because I can't guarantee they'll put a specific generation or period on the papers, its a bit random), I win 5,000$. If it gets Mino I lose 5000$ wager. If it gets neither I do not get compensated for the shinsa.

I would prefer higher res photo to see whats hadori and whats not, otherwise it might end up being Ichimonji or something [embarassing]. But it does have considerable "Go feel". I did not study many of his blades but there is this reocurring type widening above nakago, widening next to kissaki, ichimai. Exhibit is in matsumoto, probably Japanese based members know more, it has some nice items.

Looks like a particularly nice one... They have some sexy plastic sword stands for sale for the exhibit as well...

Looks like hakkikake or actually kaen with a bit of nijuba in the boshi.