Hoshi

Bonjour Jacques, *sigh* You have proven time and time again that you do not update your beliefs when faced with evidence. Nonetheless, for silent observers who might be tempted to buy into your unwarranted sense of conviction, here is a shape I call "the prison shiv" - made out of a broken Middle Kamakura period Kodachi, and bearing the signature of the master Sukezane. It passed Juyo. It is a trivially true statement that a mei can push a sword over the Juyo line when its artful qualities and/or condition are otherwise disqualifying. Your "Japanese mentor" is incorrect. Fujishiro is based on the quality of the smith's entire body of work normalized over the average quality of work for the period. In other words,Sai-jo saku in the Kamakura period is superior to Sai-jo Saku in the Muromachi period. You do climatology right? You know how normalization work. In contrast, Dr. Tokuno TTE1 and TTE2 use absolute values based on empirical observations of market transactions. I truly hope you learn to relax your priors and appreciate new evidence. Best, Hoshi

Hi, I can certainly chime in. Regarding your first question: There are a few chu-saku Muromachi and Edo smiths that have a tiny number of Juyo blade. for example, Kiyonori, Ujishige and so on. Less than ten of them. However, all these blades are in absolute mint condition, signed and ubu and critically, these swords pass during the lax years of the 70's, and today they would be mostly considered "Juyo in name only" (JINO, as Darcy used to say). The only chu-saku smith that passed later than than the troubled "phonebook" sessions is the Edo smith Kunimasa, and even then, no chance in today's extremely difficult and competitive sessions. These blades are difficult to sell in Japan. You see a lot of JINO online catering to the foreigner market. In this day and age, no chance. The question is too general to be answerable. In general: fixation on Fujishiro's ratings is a good starting point but inevitably incomplete, and it also requires the understanding that Saijo saku in Kamakura is not the same as Saijo saku in the Muromachi, as he normalizes his rating according to the median of the period. Also, there are many extremely rare and unrated smiths from the Koto period with masterpieces that have J and TJ blades to their names. Typically, from the Ko-Bizen, Ko-Ichimonji, or Ko-Aoe schools. As mentioned, there are also underrated ratings by Fujishiro (Some Sa students, Some Kamakura and Nambokucho Aoe, and especially glaring ones like Kencho, and most egregious of all, Ichimonji Yoshifusa). On passing Juyo and above. It's important to recognize just how correlated things are and, as a result, how easy it is to get confused: great smiths are more overwhelmingly more likely to produce top quality blades, top quality blades in great state of preservation are more likely to have been in important collections (Daimyo, Imperial...), more likely to come with an origami or Kinzogan by a Ko-Honami, more likely to be Meibutsu, more likely to be highly rated by Fujishiro and Dr. Tokuno, more likely to be featured in exhibitions in Japan, more likely to pass Tokubetsu Juyo, and so on. It's easy in this context to think "oh it's juyo because it has denrai to the Tokugawa" - but, at Juyo, this is mistaking correlation for causation. The seed of everything is the quality of the blade in the artful sense. Appraising quality is no trivial matter and requires ample exposure to masterworks until it clicks. There are many classical traits associated with artfulness that are highly appreciated, and were seldom reproduced after the Golden Age. To name a few, these features include a 'wet' looking jigane (uroi), utsuri in its various expressions, a bright and clear nioiguchi (Akaraku saeru), a deep nioiguchi, a sense of unaffectedness, the variety and quality of nie, control over the expression of the nioiguchi, and so on. How these traits are expressed by the three major traditions vary, but they all have a physical basis, they are not "in the eye of the beholder". And yes, there is a component of taste. However, It is not a mere social construct that swords that possess such attributes are considered the best swords. First, there is a biological basis to this in the human brain: it is these very swords that tend to elicit aesthetic emotions in the broadest set of viewers. When steel appears wet like a deeply frozen pond unveiling hidden layers that the mind cannot quite discern, when nie covers the edge like ethereal snow, and when it all appears inevitable and natural, as if the human hand had played no role into bringing this object into existence - It is such encounters that can have profoundly moving effect on the observer. There is a name for the trigger of this emotional response in classical Japanese aesthetics, it is called Yūgen (幽玄), and differs from the Sublime in that it unfolds progressively rather than all at once. When the sword looks flat, the steel grey, the hamon is empty, and the nioiguchi looks drawn with a crayon, it cannot produce such an emotional response in the viewer. And there is an entire continuum in between. Second, it is widely believed that quality in the artful sense correlates positively into the physical reality in the performance sense, and there are very valid metallurgic and historical reasons to believe in this relationship, but this veers into a different conversation. Now, it is important to understand that Juyo means important, it does not mean masterwork, or that it is one of the best blade by the smith. There can be other reasons why a blade is important - for instance, while it may have no boshi and ample hadatachi in the ji, if it is the only extant work by an obscure Ko-Aoe Smith, and on top of it, it was not featured in the Meikan, then it is important by virtue of its scholarly value. The same reasoning on rarity occurs for mei, a signed sword by Norishige is of superior scholarly value than a signed blade by an Edo period smith. The delta knowledge that the sword brings to scholarship affects its Juyo worthiness above and beyond its artful quality. At the highest level, when deciding between keeping a sword Jubun or making it Kokuho, exceptional provenance is also considered over and above its correlation with quality. All else considered, a masterpiece Sukezane owned by Nobunaga is more likely to be elected to Kokuho compared to one exhibiting the same artful qualities and condition but no provenance. Hope this helps, - Hoshi

I much appreciate the enthusiastic response. I am still sifting through my PMs apologies if I can't respond in a timely fashion. Most of these swords are just not bad enough to qualify! It's for education with beginners. The best way to learn is side-by-side comparison.

Hi, I'd like to purchase 2-3 exemplars of very low quality swords. The worst, the better. Examples of what I'm after: - A mass produced Sukesada, showing uneven hada, ware, and nie-kuzure in segments of the nioiguchi. - A bland Shinshinto or Kanbun Shinto work. The steel should be almost muji, without any jinie whatsover, and a hamon that feels hand-drawn without any activity in the ha. Bonus points for tobiyaki that feel like they've been painted on. Chu-saku on a Sake Hangover. - Mino Muromachi, with very rough, grey-looking hada and a gunome that has no coherence. The only constraint is that they must be in good polish and in shirasaya Because a good polish is expensive, I'm willing to pay a good amount commensurate, minimum, to the value of the polish. This is your occasion to recoup your sunk costs. The more terrible the blade and fitting of the archetype I'm looking for, the better. Hagire, ware, lack of boshi, crow's beak, and so forth are welcomed, even encouraged. PM me your swords with a google drive link that contains decent picture. Best, Hoshi

Hello, The intent is late Norishige-inspired Matsukawa hada. However, the result is lacking. Aesthetically, it lacks two key qualities: unaffectedness and profoundness. First, the matsukawa is contrived: the contrast is too pronounced, the structure of the hada lacks the natural feeling we see in the works of Norishige, and of the Ko-Hoki predecessors. In other words, it gives the impression of trying hard, and as a result feels contrived. The chickei is entirely driven by the mixture of steels. It is useful to remember that there exists two forms of chickei: that which forms in the steel as crystalized martensitic formations, and that which is purely the fruit of the mixture of steel. The former is the chickei that is so respected and appreciated. Hence, the work appears flat. It lacks apparent jinie, and the 'seams' of the matsukawa lack the tiny grains of nie in the ji. As for the hamon, the structure of the hada carries all martensitic formations. There are no formations that appear juxtaposed over the flow of the grain, which again contributes to a lack of depth and reveal that this is not a work of the Golden Age. Hankei is an understandable answer. However, the this particular work is far inferior to Hankei's execution of Matsukawa, which is is rich in nie activities that imparts a sense of profoundness to his work, although the unaffectedness is inferior to Norishige - as there is a certain trace of trying that can be felt in his oeuvre. Finally, the curvature of the piece in question is inappropriate in my opinion for a Ko-Wakizashi by Hankei, where I have come to expect musori. The nie appears too weak for Sanekage. Uda? Possibly, but the hada overall lacks an antique quality, and the hamon is inappropriate anyway. My preferred idea is that it is a much more recent blade, 19th century, perhaps Ikkansai Yoshihiro or one of his students: As a disclaimer, there are perils with photos. It is difficult for me to abstract away the photographic style as I am not accustomed to it. Best, Hoshi

Hi Erik, Congratulations on your first purchase. It appears to be a nice, honest first sword. What I can say is that the shape appears sturdy, typical of the Momoyama period where the model that the smiths of the period aimed for were the (now) O-suriage Nambokucho pieces, by the likes of Kanemitsu, Chogi, Shizu, and others. Beyond that, we can't see any details on the blade itself to really comment. The fittings are better than the usual cobbled up koshirae. It's a nice matching theme, executed in iron. I hope it will ignite the passion and serve as a portal into this mysterious world. I remember my first sword. Like yours, it was no masterwork, to say the least - but it made me deeply curious about the field, and it brought me a lot of joy at the time. I wish you much enjoyment, Hoshi

Hi, I am writing a long form article on this topic, which touches at the very core of the field. It will take me much more time than expected, however - as I am very busy lately. In the meantime, It's fantastic to see good contributions! Few more questions, for those who are philosophically-minded. Paul Allman states, at the end of his treaty: Art is that form of human creation which, through beauty, leads consciousness beyond itself. Then what is it, in the process of appraising a Nihonto, that leads consciousness beyond itself? What aesthetic emotions are triggered by the appraisal of a Nihonto in competent viewers? What makes a viewer "competent"? Best, Hoshi

Hello everyone, Many excellent contributions so far. There is much left to be said on the topic, and it would be wonderful to hear from others. Thank you @reinhard especially, the comparison between the Mitsutada and the Ishido blade is excellent, and warrants its own conversation. And @Lukrez for your psychological/philosophical account of the subjective experience of encountering a masterwork. I am also an "emotionalist" when it comes to Art. This really cracked me up. Best, Hoshi

Hello, What makes a sword a masterpiece? What are the features that are, in your view, necessary, sufficient, or ideally both, for a sword to be considered a Meito. A Meito, literally “named sword” or “famed sword” is a term used to describe masterpieces. There has long been a misconception that a Meito is a sword with a name (Go). But this is incorrect. It is because a sword is a Meito that it often comes with extraordinary provenance and in some cases, a Go (name). Let's try to go beyond Ogasawara Nobuo's famous lecture on the topic. My hope is that this question will stimulate some interesting exchanges and create educational value. Best, Hoshi

Compare the hamon structure at the hamachi, and the shape of your boshi, with the oshigata below. Notice the very small tobiyaki, and the repeating patterns (3's, 4's). The only noted discrepancy from prototypical Oei works is the height of your sword's yakiba, the lowest valleys are unusually high, this gives me minor pause. I steer more towards one of the three Mitsu's, than Sanemitsu and the others. Your boshi, in particular, is a near perfect match. Juyo Osafune Yasumitsu

Spending capital to acquire valuable cultural artifacts with the intent to destroy them is categorically unacceptable from a deontological moral standpoint. This is not up for debate—it is a founding principle of this community. This principle underlies our firm stance against practices such as amateur polishing. There is a troubling pattern here, a parochial bias that coalesces into a kind of populist faction, quick to leap to each other’s defense, with very little grace and forethought. It is understandable—tribal solidarity is deeply human, but it is also hampering your progression in this field. Worst, it hampers the progression of others, as this forum is a public good. Now you know, look in the mirror. You just fell for the bait - hard - on the other side of it. With all that said, @Hokke, I sincerely wish you the best, may you find wisdom and growth. Best, Hoshi ... @Rivkin

Hi Marcus, This is an Oei bizen hamon structure, it was first introduced by Chogi and the Soden-Bizen group. You can tell by the groupings of gunome and choji formations. Specifically, notice how they cluster together in series of peaks, before receding? Another sign is the relative quietness of the ha, it is fully rendered in nioi, and there is not much activity within, this is also quite typical of these Oei blades. The three most representative smiths of this group are known as the "Three Mitsu" (Yasumitsu, Morimitsu, Norimitsu). They stewarded the Osafune school into the turbulent Oei period (1394-1428). It is very difficult to distinguish between them. There exists multiple generations that extend into the beginning of the Muromachi, but on the basis of the conspicuous utsuri, I would place it with the first generation, and Yasumitsu as the most likely candidate. There are other candidates in Oei: Iesuke, Iemori, and Tsuneie. Here is a masterpiece by Chogi ranked Tokubetsu Juyo, where you can see the origins of the hamon of your blade: https://eu.zonerama.com/Nihonto/Album/11057812 The standout midare utsuri is lovely, and indicates that the blade is in good health. Once upon a time, this was likely a proud tachi with a Kamakura-inspired sugata that Yasumitsu was fond of emulating. Best, Hoshi

Hi Dee, I know this is ragebait, but it's not healthy for the community and should still be called out. It is profoundly unwise to post such a take on a forum devoted to the preservation and study of Nihonto. * edit admin * I trust you'll get back on your feet and grow a thicker skin. Get better soon, Hoshi

It depends on so many factors, there is not a "fair" formula that can be applied to all cases. It is a matter of supply and demand, and the IRR (internal rate of return on capital) that the dealer can generate on his investment on his predicted timeline to sale. A collection comprised of a single of one of the top 100 Tokuju blades will yield a profit with a cash upfront offer from a variety of large dealers and parties. Everyone will want it, and there is room for the dealer to sell it as a unicorn for top price. It will be the dealer's pride, and a story to be told. Auction houses will fight for it, prepare a tailored sale event via private treaty, and court you will reduced fees. Competition drives better offers. Paul Davidson's Mikazuki Kanemitsu is an example, and sold for 200 million yen+ in private treaty. You can be sure that the family was inundated by unsolicited offers, and could choose as it pleased. A disjointed chu-saku wakizashi collection, while worth on paper ~100'000$, will be so hard to move that the cash offer will be in the 10% to 20% range, at best. Nobody wants to deal with this. It's 100 descriptions to write, a 100 posts, a 1000 conversations - it is a multiyear pursuit to realize the profit of this invested capital. There is, of course, a vast continuum between these two examples. A Small but excellent thematic/specialized collection that is "more than the sum of its parts" and is a once in a lifetime opportunity for acquisition may also yield a good profit, but arrangement must be made prior. Creating such a collection is very difficult to pull-off. For example, a full set of Ko-Goto Menuki in dragon theme, beginning with Goto Yujo, with old origami accompanying each item, showing the specific evolution introduced by each master, and presented in a custom-fitted lacquer box will yield more together than each individual items, and will be sold as a complete set. At the end, try to put yourself into the shoes of the dealer, and simulate in your mind his IRR given his client base and market segment. For you and the dealer, 10-15% IRR is fair dealmaking territory. Best, Hoshi

Hi, It is a trait most often associated with Go Yoshihiro, as other have said. However, it extends to the broader Soshu movement, all the way to the Muromachi. Then into Edo, with smiths who were striving to emulate Go and Norishige. It is not frequently encountered, and if you see it - you can rule out traditions, schools, and makers. It's a "negative trait" in the sense that it's presence allows you to eliminate rather than pin-point. It is less discriminant than for instance, the san-saku boshi of the early Osafune school. I wish it was that easy, but it is not. For blades without Ko-Kiwame (This is very important to control for, as a Ko-Kiwame automatically removes the "Den"), the presence of the Ichimai Boshi (~25% of all Go) is spread between the "Den Go" and the "Go" rather equally. For Go, it is not the Ichimai boshi per se that is determinant (all else equal, supreme quality of nie, clarity of the Jiba, etc) - but the tendency of the Yakiba to be both high to begin with without much higher-frequency variation in height, and to rise gently over the entire course of the blade, culminating in a higher yakiba at the crossing of the yokote compared to the average height of the lower section of the blade). With this trait present, even if the boshi is not rendered fully in ichimai, the blade will tend to be placed with Go, unless contradicted by a Ko-Kiwame, rather than say, to Masamune. From a deki perspective, the quality expected from Go is on par with Masamune. Besides Go, the other maker from the Soshu-Joko line that occasionally rendered an Ichimai Boshi is Norishige, and these tend to be exquisite Tokuju. Outside the Soshu Joko, we see it also with blades attributed to Tametsugu, Naotsuna, Ujifusa, Uda Kunifusa, Sanekage, and Muramasa, and and very rarely with the Sa Ichimon. What we can tell from this pattern is that there is a rather clean lineage of praxis that begins with Norishige and Go (who, according to tradition, worked together at some point in their career), up to the Northern provinces with Tametsugu, Sanekage, and the Uda line. There is also a bit of inconsistency in the nomenclature between widely hardened boshi and Ichimai boshi - the line between both can be thin. Edo-period makers that were following into Go's footstep tend also to exhibit an ichimai boshi. Prime examples are Hankei (emulating Norishige), Inouie Shinkai, Nagasone Kotetsu, and Nanki Shigekuni (all three had phases emulating Go). Hope this helps, Hoshi Go illustration:

Hello, The answer to this question really depends on which segment you operate in. The best strategy depends on your personal circumstances: the level of your collection, the tax policies of your country, and the family dynamics between the heirs. S Tier collection: At this level, items remain locked up post-death. Purchases are most often realized through a foundation, and items are preserved in a museum. The attrition rate on top items is driven by these types of Japanese collectors with a focus on legacy and creating persistent cultural institutions. See Sano Museum, or the more recent Token Museum of Nagoya. A tier collection: Top auction houses like Sotheby's and Christies are generally tasked with disposing of the collection (e.g., Paul Davidson, Compton collection) , but not always. Often, there are pre-agreements with the owner on the post-death sale of specific items. This is one of the only ways to access truly outstanding items, and some of the most formidable collections have been formed by placing these sort of "dibs" on items that owners would otherwise never sell. Another strategy is progressive dispersion: some owners will start trimming their collection from the bottom up early on, keeping only a few but extremely exclusive pieces for which there is ample demand, and have post-death sales or consignment agreements in place for what remains. If consigned, these truly exclusive items will be sold discreetly and without fanfare through trusted relationships with the dealer to his absolute top clients. B Tier collection: Items are usually triaged between first tier auction houses as part of a general "Samurai Art" sales and second tier auction houses for lower tier items. For example, promising items go to Bonhams, other less promising items go to Zacks. Consignments of entire collection with dealers are not uncommon here. C Tier collection: Consignments with dealers becomes the norm here. There is bargaining involved, as usually the dealers are unwilling to consign items of lower value. There can be quite some wait involved for heirs to "see the money" and this is where it becomes tempting to sell it all as a large discount for cash upfront. Partial cash and partial consignment arrangements are also possible, and should be planned ahead of time. D Tier collection: Ebay listings by family or friends, listing on the board here, and so forth. There are also major cultural differences, some of which are driven by tax policies across countries, suffice to say I won't elaborate. Family circumstances also play a major role, as sometimes heirs are distrustful of each other and auction houses act as "neutral arbiters" to pre-empt potential conflicts. Hope this helps, -Hoshi

Hello, Glad I could help. Hokkoku mono is a great vibe. If you're into wild rings of jinie and chickei with bold nie activity, they're for you. What's wonderful about Hokkoku-mono is that they're about as far away as Shinto / Shinshinto / Gendai that you can be. If you're new with Koto, these swords offer a wonderful contrast with their conspicuous jihada and activity. While certainly rustic to some extant, they exude a sense of power that is unmistakable, and along with the dark steel luster, project an ancient, fearsome presence Go Yoshihiro and Norishige, who are first class grandmaster, and are both connected to these areas as well. Difficult to tell apart based on the photos. There is a certain quality gradient at play here. For Sanekage, you want to see Norishige-style "almost" Matsukawa hada. Personally, one of the first swords that really struck a cord with me was a Sanekage. I wrote about it here. Best, Hoshi

Heed my words, They were though. Real luminaries, the heights of which would never be reached again. It may sound dramatic, but it is by no means a poetic exaggeration. We have 600 years of trying up to today, continuing to this day with the Masamune prize and the new sword competitions. It has always been about recreating the lost marvels of a Golden Age that lasted a mere 150 years. In their quest, some came very close to the Soshu-den ideals (Nanki Shigekuni with Go, Hankei with Norishige, Yasutsugu with Sadamune), one has arguably exceeded his model (Kyomaro with Shizu), but most never even got to fly close the sun no matter how hard they tried. As for Bizen-den, Naotane and others did make some progress in resurfacing this lost art, but the gap remains even wider. But to realize this you must handle masterpieces of the Golden Age in-hand, and for this you must go to Japan, with open eyes and open mind. Hoshi

Dear all, A little grace and understanding goes a long way. When I first posted on NMB, years ago, I had purchased a mumei shinshinto blade, a humble beginning. I was greeted in the replies by Darcy who generously spent his time explaining attributions to me, he was graceful in his every words. He could have sneered and said it was a paperweight. After all, he was dealing in Koto masterpieces. There was nothing for him in this sword to appreciate. But he wasn’t dismissive - instead, he saw rightly that this was an entry into the world of Nihonto. Over the years, I came to the conclusion that there is truly no point in lecturing on what “ought to be collected” - the reality is set by the market participants, there is no central planning committee that sets prices. It is all supply and demand. What matters is honesty. Honest description of the items, genuine effort to depict reality as it is. Markets require information to function correctly. Whatever the level one collects at, there is always a bigger fish who - in comparison - will make one’s entire collection fit into the “paperweight” category. Tokubetsu Juyo grandmaster sword? Well, there is a Jubun one that is longer, with a more complete nakago, and a single mekugi ana that belonged to the Emperor. The Jubun collectors can look down on the Tokuju collectors. The Tokuju collectors can look down on the Juyo collectors, and the Juyo collectors can take it out on the Hozon collectors, and so on. Trivially true statement. But there is no point to it. Live and let live, learn and respect others, fight for truth, and don’t fall for delusions. Best, Hoshi

Hi Nick, Very interesting case. Were you able to read the obscured kanji? They appear discernible. It is slightly odd that one of the characters overlaps with the cutting test character. If the cutting test was done before, I could imagine it was left as is to indicate "no longer the case" while giving it a certain sabi aesthetics. Like crossing out a name. If it was done after the cutting test, I could imagine that removing it completely was impossible without damaging the precious (and expensive to inlay!) cutting test. A fine mystery. Best, Hoshi

After reflecting, I believe it is wiser to turn this into a board prize. (if you're feeling 'rugged' by this rule change, started working ardently, and you need the money, shoot me a PM). 1000$ donated to NMB. Thank you so much to everyone who has started to help so far! let's make it a community effort.

Oh my, thank you! That is wonderful to hear! I must have ended in the spam folder, I will make another attempt. If someone knows...he knows.

Unfortunately I was just made aware of Jim's obituary by a kind member. https://www.tpwhite.com/obituaries/james-jim-dawson RIP Jim, thank you for your scholarship. In my experience, collectors value discovering new information on their treasured "precious" - precisely what I bring to table. Not to mention, connecting with like-minded and knowledgeable people is always a blessing.

For information leading to the successful establishment of contact with the current owner. Is Jim Dawson still of this world? I have failed to contact him so far. Hope this helps, - Hoshi

Hello dear militaria collectors, I am looking to pin down a certain war gunto that has been eluding me to supplement my research. I have decided to try something new. The piece in question was once photographed (owned?) by Jim Dawson, I have not been able to contact him. Back in the days, it was bearing one of his tags: You can find it on Omura's website In every community, there are usually a few elders who just "know where things are" - if someone could be so kind as to ring one of these grey beards to figure this out, I would be incredibly grateful and will issue a generous reward. Here is the automated translation of Omura's relevant section: Has it been repatriated? as in, sold back in Japan - or did the (presumably US-based) owner send it in for papers back in 2011? Any information that leads to establishing successful contact with the owner, I will pay a bounty reward of 1000$. Please be mindful of privacy, and write to me in PM. Who doesn't love a good treasure hunt? Happy hunting! -Hoshi