Rivkin

Kasane measurement could be helpful in cases like this one. Its one of those cases where sugata has the most likely interpretation, but there are less likely but legitimate possibilities, I guess.

Mid Muromachi tanto. Regarding the school, it would difficult to be precise. For example, Ryokai. Nobukuni. Bungo. etc. etc.

.... ..... Thy shall not overbid mine.

Its rusted and not much is seen but from what is available its in Ichimonji style and boshi appears to be sugu. That can limit it either to mid-Kamakura or shinto, probably Ishido. Kamakura you would expect substantially lesser beefy blade, and the shape is a bit of a stick with some curvature, so my very preliminary guess given the condition would be 1640s, Ishido. Would be interesting to check if boshi is really suguha. If its not, then the options are shinshinto or some koto....

It looks very much legit.

Well by the time I am finishing it, I am ending up echoing the previous statement. its ubu (sort of) which is unusual for the period. Otherwise jigane is very rough, it reeks of Muromachi spirit rather than Kamakura. Hamon is good, but nothing one would not expect from any shikkake out there.

Unfortunately I don't know what are the topics for this or following months, and its unfortunately a long drive. Satsuma is such a wide definition - does it include the objects from the sale, Naminohira or just the late smiths etc.

I can't be sure, but: I think the shape was popularized by Kotetsu so you don't really see it before him (there is related late Momoyama shape, but quite different still), Inoue Shinkai did his usual waki-sticks... Maybe he wanted to disproof everyone believing that the first sign of great sword is great sugata. After Kotetsu it was practiced quite often by Satsuma (maybe since they were effectively the only conistantly competent smiths in the 18th century) and through them got to Suishinshi Masahide who produced a lot of works in this sugata.

It's Mondonosho Masakiyo. I bought it without papers but obviously I saw the signature... which is btw not the most typical for him, so I was happy it papered - and possibly despite couple of kanji being a bit off... well, he did change the writing somewhat over the years and right before he went to the Shogun, so probably its from this time My take is that there are couple of things here. First there are well defined "gaps" in nie right in the middle of hamon. This is something popularized by Inoue Shinkai and after him a lot of Soshu style works tried to do this. But Shinkai would have dense, Osaka-style jigane. Here the jigane has almost koto feeling, with wide elements, somewhat rough and darkish, with ara nie. We'll see this jigane a lot in shinshinto but with much more ara nie... Its Satsuma. So its a top quality shinto work in Soshu style with Satsuma jigane.... Masakiyo.

Negative.

Negative on timeline and it is a relatively big (well shinto considered) name. Not Kotetsu.

Inoue Shinkai would have been almost my guess, but the jigane is wrong. Very similar hamon - different jigane.

Unfortunately no, but its shinto.

Yes, it can definitely be shinto or shinshinto. Probably the only example with such combination of sugata and kasane, but it can be. Can also be Hasebe. Jigane is wrong, kasane is wrong, nakago is wrong, kaeri is wrong. But it can be. That's why you definitely need papers. Because otherwise it can be like anything. And with papers you read them and you definitely know what it is.

I think what was being suggested is that Etchu Tametsugu today is a default attribution for anything Soshu circa 1355-1385 which does not fit the other big busket blob - Shizu+ (Shizu, Kinju,Kanenobu). Here both jigane is atypical for Etchu while hamon is not typical Etchu.

Nagasa 39.5cm Signed, I photoshopped the signature out. Ubu.

Sorry the pictures are bad. Can't see kaeri, can't see boshi, can't see hamon - its all there, but blurry, shaky etc. For example, it can be Daido. He did straight blades with o-kissaki and long kaeri. A lot of possibilities here. The most desirable is obviously Nambokucho Soshu, but...

Well, I've been proven wrong many times before...

Thanks! Always glad for an opportunity to make prediction for a blade being submitted. Feels like mid Momoyama to 1650, likely the early portion of the interval. Regarding the school - so many similar ones. Can be along the lines of Fujiwara Nobutaka. Can be Fuyuhiro.

I saw blades declined on the basis of polish, but my personal guess would be this one will paper. With boshi photographed more can be said about the likely attribution.

Yes, very Houju-ish, yes its consistent with early Gassan. Still think its Muromachi. Something a lot of people frown at as provincial - random patches of noticably blacker steel, very wide and often rough bands of masame.

Come on David, we are in serious and repeated violation of the Nihonto Code here. An opinion can only be expressed as: I was instructed by O-Sensei to relay the following: Those who see Kambun in this sugata are men of but half truths. As it is written by Daiso Tadamichi: they grasp but do not breath, they fish, but do not smoke. For a fresher fire lies within this steel. Seek the path between the stone and the monkey.

Well, it feels like a stick with some tapering, so probably Kambun. Judging by whatever we can see in the hamon its probably one of the period's Mino schools. Re: polishers etc, it does not feel particularly valuable, though there is uncertainty due to condition etc.

Judging from the photographs its very nice and I personally would have it polished. Very many would rightly frawn upon kantei by photo, but that's how I buy my blades, so I risk (precision of the method is admittedly inadequate) my own money on the method. I am also not a specialist on Gassan. But. The style of hada is old - its ayasugi (not too periodic one) mixed with wide stripes, its very similar to Houju and to the lesser extent Naminohira. This is very much what you expect from the earliest Gassan work. The signature is in the right place, and its executed in the right style. So in my mind there is no doubt its a very early Gassan and in good condition. Now the sugata can be read twofold - either Oei (slightly before or after is ok) or something very old like mid Kamakura. Could you please measure the width and the height of kissaki (by yokote)? For a while existence of Heian-mid Kamakura Gassan was accepted and you do find reference to those in all books. There are however almost no examples which are papered as such today. Typically the earliest you see in modern papers is from 1350-1370 period. They are exceptionally rare - 85% of koto Gassan is roughly between 1504 and 1535, 10% from between 1535 and 1575, and 5% is the rest. The signature suggests somewhat early date, the way strokes are, and yes "saku" comes and goes in Gassan, and there is an opinion that between 1504 and 1530 it was not used as "Gassan Saku". I think realistically the chances of this blade being accepted as pre-Nambokucho are very slim. Realistically you are looking between 1360 and 1430. NBTHK will unlikely indicate the exact date. They'll just say its ko Gassan. Unfortunately I don't think there is much here to guarantee its pre-Muromachi. Thus people will be conservative and Oei might come as a default attribution. Will it be very expensive sword once it polishes and papers? Unfortunately I am tempted to say "no". There is 5% chance it will be accepted as specifically pre-Muromachi and then its more expensive. There is 10% chance it will turn out to be "dud". 35% chance they'll say its later into Muromachi. etc. etc. But its a rare, early blade and I think it will be very good looking in polish. I think you will get your polish and papers money back, though sort of barely so. Unless there is a person who will really like this kind of style. This is one of the cases where the blade is rare, collectible, important, nice and in the long term I hope this gets recognized more and more, but today's market is not very forgiving to anything suspected of Oei-ness. I personally like such blades a lot; to me ubu Houju from Nambokucho or even Oei is a prized sword. To most collectors and books its however sort of provincial sidetrack to real collecting. Just my 2c.

Being even more arrogant I would argue its shoshin!!! There is heavy Yamato flavor in the hamon, with large angle hotsure together with what little we can see in hada - might be ayasugi. Judging by the sugata its probably also among the earlier ones. Nice.