Hoshi

I have suspicions here. Can we have a picture of the start of the hamon? Is it suriage or not? We need close up of the Nakago, Hamachi area, and Kissaki. The shape is clearly a callback to the Nambokucho archetypes. There are three phases when these blade shapes were produced: Nambokucho, Kambun Shinto and Shinshinto revival. If I would venture a guess, perhaps Kambun era Chogi Utsushi, like this one. I find the work to be reminiscent of Soden-Bizen. My money is on a weaponized blade with its signature erased to pass of as Koto Chogi school.

Jeremiah, Most will argue that how a theme resonates with the viewer is one of those immanent qualities of art. It is the purely idiosyncratic facet of art which cannot be understood outside of the beholder's experience. This view dominates contemporary art theory, and it is, deeply, deeply wrong. There are universal stories that keep being told and elicit, at least within a sub-sample of the population, a similar aesthetic response because it resonates with something so deep it is in fine, encoded in our genome. This is my epistemic stance on Art. Art encodes through metaphors things which cannot be articulated but resonate as universal truths to the beholder. As a famous poet put it, Truth is Beauty, Beauty is Truth. This is all one needs to know. Our response to Art is not some product of pure subjectivity through socialization, but a very powerful emotion which is universally shared and serves a deep and misunderstood evolutionary purpose in a Darwinian sense. I believe it to be one of the fundamental drivers of meme-gene co-evolution and the reason humanity has evolved stable equilibrium in societies. This is the case for the story of the tiger mum. It's the story of the cursed son who turns to evil in times of dire danger, it's told across cultures in different ways.

Lets get back on track... This is also why I think there is more room for ladder shuffling in Tosogu compared to swords. Some students of the big masters and more obscure Goto lines have been sidelined in my opinion. It would require a tall collection specialized in these underdogs to really make the case, but it's possible and there is much more room to do it than with swords. As an example, Goto Seijo got completely dumpstered by Goto Ichijo and his incredible pupils and had to compete in the time of Natsuo, Ishiguro, Omori and all around unbelievable talent. Meiji and pre-Meiji is just an explosion of artistic talent and its hard to keep track of it all. Unearthing the custom orders he or his students got and making a tall collection out of it could arguably cause some shuffling in the middle tier of that era if high quality work is found. Some of his work in iron especially great and unique design, such as this evil bald dragon. But as it stands it will never go Juyo. Regarding the student work, it's risky. A snowflake tsuba signed by Goto Ichijo is basically a serial production work which doesn't come close in value to his realistic work. While these are designed by Goto Ichijo at a very advanced age, I think the actual execution is student work. While I do find these works to be highly aesthetically enjoyable, it just doesn't come close in value to Ichijo's carved tsuba in his earlier, more realistic style. I think someone called it his Andy Warhol phase and I quite like that. There is also a case to be made that he did make poor work on the occasion. For instance I struggle to believe that this comes from him and that the signature is authentic, I'd take a snowflake tsuba over this one anyday. What are other cases of students working as the master that one needs to watch out for?

18 patents is on the low side to really get the field. Tbh you can't understand Tosogu aesthetic without a PhD in computational neuroscience. It's just the way it is I'm not going to even argue.

Jeremiah, You argue that ratings keep new collectors out. If I understand you correctly, you argue that this is because it affects demands thus driving prices for desirable items upwards because everyone chases the same thing. I would like to propose a different opinion. There already exists explicit ratings for Tosogu. However, these ratings are less known than the ones governing swords such as Fujishiro or the Meikan. If anything, those who keep counts of Juyo, and Juyo to Tokuju pass factor for Tosogu possess knowledge above those who don't in terms of what is deemed desirable and what is deemed less desirable. This is an information advantage because it correlates with the market's willingness to pay. Simply put, having this knowledge, and knowing what work of a given Tosogu artist is the most highly rated gives you an edge in creating a valuable collection and reducing your rent. This logic also applies just as well within-artists as it does between-artist. There is a ladder within the corpus of an artist. Ichiguro hawk themes will go for more than Ichiguro flower them. Top Tomei is millet theme. Goto Ichijo's realist work goes for more than his later serial impressionist work. This is the second ladder that you need to be aware when making purchase decision to rightly appraise, or set a price. All this data can be gleaned from the Juyo and Tokuju volumes. Thus, my argument is that having explicit ratings for Tosogu would in fact serve new collectors by leveling the playing field. In turn, new collectors could then make decisions which are more closely correlated with the market's appreciation which means less rent and less suckers. Now I don't want to be the bad guy here but I will state an unpopular opinion: We pay far too much in the west for average Iron Tsubas and bad Kinko work. These things are so plentiful in Japan they're used as paperweights. Why? Because we got our ladder all wrong. Dealers create the impression of scarcity by setting prices and gating supply. This in turn leads collectors to repeat the process when they sell off their pieces. This is worrisome to me. Because the ladder is not explicit and gated by expert knowledge, dealers can exploit this information asymmetry via arbitrage to impose a higher rent on you. Experts have an incentive is preserving the status-quo. New collectors do not.

Thanks Kyle for the signature comparison. From the samples you provide I clearly agree with you, too many discrepancies. That's a pity because the story of the custom order and the dating seemed to be in line. Steve, I took a closer look at the blade, there are lamination flaws as you say. Naokatsu made close to perfect blades. He would not have had any lamination flaws on a custom order blade. Still worth to have it handled by a local collector or two. Sometimes we have variations in signatures that are not accounted for in the documented examples...

400 pounds for rusty-scratchy wak? My first instinct is to run and take the money. ...except I have a good feeling about this blade. If it's a genuine custom order Naokatsu then you're onto something. Provided it's genuine, without fatal flaws, It is worth the cost of a new polish and habaki (~2K). This is a generally valued shape for short swords, throwback to the old days, and my guesstimate is that after polish, it should be possible to sell it at moderate time horizon at ~5K-7K (A dealer would sell for perhaps 8-10K on the retail market). Add about 1K handling fees and Shinsa process, and you end up positive 2K-4K. With the proper signature homework done and reasonable certainty on its authenticity, I'd venture to say 1-2K, which contains the lowerbound upside price and takes into account all the uncertainties. If the signature is fake then its worth basically zero. Provided I have good reasons to believe the signature is authentic, I'd price it at about 1.5K for the gamblers, all risks considered.

Interesting read. There is a clear hierarchy in desirability in Tosogu makers, just as there is with swords makers. Just as there is with European old master paintings. Things differ in desirability, this is not only an axiom in collecting but also one that we implicitly follow in life. Opening this argument drives us straight onto the philosophy of aesthetics and post-modern anti-aestethics... Basically my point is: to deny the existence of the ladder is nonsense, but to argue on its nature is very much an important question which every collector should consider at some point. Indeed,determining who steps of what level of the ladder and what the ladder is made of is a very valid point of debate. While most agree Ichijo, Natsuo, and Somin sit somewhere in top, its get murkier below with more space for disagreement in debate. For the iron tsuba makers, it's not even clear if they belong in the same ladder. While Kaneye can arguably sit on the same ladder for his impressionist wabi-sabism infused representations, it gets trickier when we look at Nobuie and other workers of old iron as they veer into the purely abstract domains which is less approachable and closer to European modern art. Initially it is quite clear with the Goto line working soft metal, and the Tsubako working old iron in pure functional form as tools. But starting 1800 it gets murky, with Goto makers working in Iron, and once we reach Meiji the lines get completely blurred. The Meiji explosion in artistic innovation is quite spectacular. A priori, it seems that it makes the most sense to outline objective criteria of execution and appraise these works in their separate categories. Just as Soshu school isn't evaluated with the same criteria as Bizen work, we should keep in mind what makes a tosogu of a given aesthetic line top quality versus lower quality. Precision of the carving Quality of the composition (use of space, use of themes) Thematic innovation It's easy to see how Natsuo and Somin dominate when we use these criterion. However it's also interesting to note that pre-1800 Goto makers would score poorly on thematic innovation as they have very codified styles and composition all the way down to the great Goto Yujo. At the end of the day, it's clear that the search for the objective criteria leads us to some problems of comparability between different periods and artistic lines. Old Goto vs Meiji work vs Old Iron is just an example, and I'm sure we can break down these categories even further. While we all agree that there exists a ladder of desirability, the analytical approach to evaluating objective criterion inevitably leads to problems. It's the same with Sword. What makes Top Soshu is different from Top Bizen from Top Yamato. We appraise and value different traits expressed differently for different schools. This is where the Juyo/Tokuju count or Juyo/Tokuju pass factor comes in. Rather than trying to come up with a top-down ranking of things based on dimensions of reality, we can ask the 'market of experts' what they think is best. This comes with the premise that the longer one studies, the more expert his judgement and the more accurate his opinion in determining what is value. The second assumption is that the aggregate judgement is more accurate than the singular judgement, which is something which is defensible given what we know about the wisdom of the crowd and how markets work. Finally one can raise the problem if circularity in this argument. But in my opinion one should consider that artistic production <--> artistic appreciation is something which is locked into a co-evolving loop. What gets highly appraised gets imitated, what gets imitated gets boring thus leading to the valuation of innovative composition, etc. This is one of the big drivers of Art, and there is a thread to be made that this loop has gone into overdrive in the 20th century following the impressionists, but that's a topic for a completely different forum...

Flaws are indeed kantei points. In this discussion I find it useful to break down flaws into their sources to understand how we should value them. Something to keep in mind is that in Koto and Heian, there no such thing as a death sentence. It's all a balancing act and you can think about it as scoring and losing points, without any flaws setting value immediately to zero. This is hard to comprehend and it becomes more true the older the blade and the more desirable the maker. Lamination flaws: Ware, Fukure These flaws can be unearthed by repeated polishing. It's possible that the sword in its original state did not have such flaws. They do not pose a threat to the functional integrity of the blade, and they can be quite well corrected by the best polishers. These become a bigger problem when the sword is very tired and the shingane comes out. Generally, ware are very much disliked in the west, and in Japan that's not so much the case. In my opinion the presence of ware and a tired blade together impinge the value more than the sum of their part. For top koto swords, you can be sure that they've had the beauty treatment to minimize these flaws. Tiredness flaws: Shingane coming out, Kasane too thin, toothpick impression This is the big one. Healthy (kenzen) is a huge factor in getting Tokuju for an old sword. This is what sets aside Juyo from Tokuju on top schools. Study the health of a blade carefully. Beware of shortened 'Kodachi' and other euphemism for toothpicks. Functional flaws: Crack in the cutting edge, interruption in the hamon, chips that interrupts the hamon, no Boshi These hurt the most. Nothing can be done to correct the blade, no amount of polishing, it is what it is. A sword that must be retired because it loses all functional value. Does it make sense nowadays to value swords on the basis of their functional merit is a different question altogether. Does that drop the value of the blade immediately to zero? Absolutely not. Think at minimum that the blade should be worth its equivalent as a shortened mumei wakizachi minus the cost of the restoration. Does this bring the value of great many koto blades to zero? Yeah, it does. Value is Zero for Ko-Mihara, but it remains in the low six figures for a Masamune. Be meticulous in examining the Boshi. This is where makeup can really hurt you. It's possible to make a near indistinguishable thin boshi line with expert polishing. Accidental: Retempered blade That's a tricky one. If it's a retempered by Yasutsugu following the Osaka castle fire or by Naotane's teacher and its been documented then we're talking about very unique pieces with a great value to begin with. there is also one retempered short sword by Awataguchi Yoshimitsu. It's the only non-tanto piece left by him. Now as you go down the ladder of rarity it starts to chip off value exponentially, and to be fair I don't understand it very well but I'd stay away from all the borderline juyo school with risk of rempetered blade (Mihara, Uda, Enju, Tegai, etc). Proper useage: Kirikomi This one is interesting. In my opinion, Kirikomi are neutral in value, and turn positive if the sword has a history and these kirikomi can be attributed to battles fought by its past owner. A Kirikomi is not just a battle mark (like a chip) it's the sign that the sword has been used to properly parry a blow. It denotes skill and increases the value of the item as a historical artifact.

No money issue? A collection that traces the great Soshu experiment. It starts with Gotoba's smiths that went to Kamakura, then goes to Shintogo, then moves to mainline Soshu, before branching out to Shizu in Mino and Chogi in Bizen in Nambokucho and then fades off in the obscurity of Muromachi with its hitatsura death rattle. For me this is the most epic story to tell in Nihonto. All compressed into a hundred and fifty years of peak art and influence, and then dies down in the dark ages never to resurface again. Now realistically. I take what I can get which has high emotional dividends and comparatively low rent. I have the Soshu and Awataguchi bug. Worst of all, I put a big premium on storied pieces with honami attributions and tasteful Koshirae. This ultimately means I need to spend less time on the forum and more time making money. Perhaps my tastes have evolved beyond the point where I will not be able to afford anything anymore in the future. I accept it.

I think there is a fair chance we're still midway through. The customs of the sword world are strange because they come from the warrior's world. An interrupted hamon means a blade no longer suited for battle, as it would pose a great risk of breaking. This is where these 'fatal flaws' come from. It's like a rifle that is are great risk of irreversibly jamming or misfiring. In fact, one could even say these dimensions of valuation should now be completely obsolete, since they come from the Feudal times and nobody would use such a sword in war today. The dice has already been rolled. The polish doesn't throw the dice, it reveals the result. If you prefer certainty, then look at the roll. If you prefer to live with the uncertainty, then keep it hidden. There is no shame in testing the market. In the West fatal flaws are a hard sell, in Japan there is a more balanced view. Who knows what the future holds. You suggest you have time on your hand. You're probably better off investing the 10K into top-class restoration and making the blade discreetly tour the big Japanese collectors for a year or two. The alternative is to wait for offers from Western collectors, who are more timid when it comes to flaws. As Ray says, I hope it survives and gets the best care it can ever hope for.

After careful examination it looks to be a potential Soshu hamon, even though it's a bit strange (gaudy) and seems like it could have been etched in at some point with acid (as it looks on your first thread). I'm assuming it's mumei, the nakago is passable, and there are no fatal flaws hiding in there. High probability: Muromachi Shimada Low probability: Tametsugu It's a decent lottery ticket.

These are quite likely to be Goto dragons but they're slightly subpar quality wise.

It's already TH. It objectively ticks all the boxes. The problem for the western market is that 18K is too expensive for hozon. So Nick is forced to spend 500$ in transportation and shinsa fees just to get the TH paper. It's hassle and its expensive. This sort of thing makes me happy I'm not a nihonto dealer.

The owner must be pulled in each in every direction by a plethora of email-bound 'advice'. I understand the desire to touch base, get the blade back, summon the family members and make a safe, consensus-based decision. Now, trying to put myself in the shoes of the owner: What would my grandfather want for that sword? To keep it as a family heirloom, as a remembrance for acts of bravery past, and perhaps as a symbol of what treasures awaits those who take risk in life. To be kept as a piece of inspiring family history. That is a family heirloom. But in its current state, does it really represent those things? Forgotten in an attic, rusted and left alone for decades without a glance. In its current state, it is not that family heirloom. It deserves to be restored to the highest standard, and placed behind glass alongside the medals and honors of this illustrious warrior. To become something beautiful and inspiring for generations to come. To be that Heirloom. Of course there is some risk in the polishing. Maybe the blade could become too thin in places, perhaps it's monetary value could be dented somewhat from previous ballpark estimates? But this is only a concern if one wishes to sell it as is. It's symbolic value as a heirloom can only grow in Polish. Left in its current state, it will continue to degrade and could be sold off by a descendant who does not know better, or one who knows but needs money now. It's hard to dispose of something beautiful because beauty begets respect. Now, there may be other considerations a play. Life has its lot of bad and expensive surprises, and money could be needed and there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, it makes for a great family story. When things got dire, Grandpa turned up one of his treasures and saved the day. Getting Japan retail price on this sword is going to be a long process and this is where people lose a lot money because they have a short time horizon. Patience is key. If that's the goal then I can only recommend Darcy as the best guy in the western hemisphere to make this happen for your family. In either case, this is a fantastic story and I'm eager to read on about its next chapter. It's the sort of thing which could be turned into a short documentary. I already have a name for it: The Sword of the Beast.

Great to see those numbers, thank you Jussi. The Shinsa policy on Den has shifted over time, which is interesting. With these numbers I think we can safely rule out that 'Den' reflects weakness on a mumei blade for bad sessions. It's likely that as you say, the usual suspects of third tier groups that began to creep in, which drove the devaluation. This means we need to be especially wary of these attributions during the weak sessions and apply very careful scrutiny to these items up for sale.

Tokubetsu hozon should not be a criteria for ascribing value above hozon provided one has the knowledge to understand the conditions under which TH is awarded. Namely, a blade without objectively described key flaws in a given period. This is why 10-20K is the danger zone. It's the middle of the ladder where dealers would make you believe TH sits only to draw a sucker on a "cheap 8K for TH". In this range, you get the bad session bottom barrel fluke Juyo or the overpriced, ladder-theory-infused TH. At 20K we enter the the domain of the Juyo 23 Tegai, Naoe Shizu, Mihara, Uda, Enju and co. Dealers buy these for 10K and sell them at 20K+ and tell you cheap for Juyo, Juyo is 40K, it's a deal! This is the level where the most profit is made from ladder theory arbitrage by drawing on greed, this is why its so dangerous. Now there are some great blades from these makers, but this is the domain where expertise is needed to sort the good from the bad, and where getting burn is exceedingly likely as a beginner. It's a minefield.

Yes, it's not current practice. But given the exceedingly small size of extant signed work by this group, it would make sense to use as as +/- 5% Hosho archetype. The only case in which it wouldn't make sense is if the variance between Hosho smiths is such that +/- 5% gets eclipsed. In which case attributions to this group barely make sense at all. I agree that Tanobe/Kunzan/Some of the early Honami judges > NBTHK. And back to the broader topic, yes: It seems Yamato Taema and Tegai are exit point out of the graph for Soshu. But Hosho is its own thing and it's unique. Kenenaga and and Norinaga could also be singular points.

Stunning. It imitates Japanese painting on silk. It's very refined, I love it.

It's worth its own thread, but the more I think about it the more I think the motto 'Buy the Blade, not the papers' is too ambiguous to be of any value whatsoever as advice. 1. Buy the Blade, not the papers = Don't succumb to ladder theory? (Valid) 2. Buy the Blade, not the papers = Buy what you like? (Mostly Invalid: preferences change over the lifespan) 3. Buy the Blade, not the papers = Trust your judgement? (Mostly Invalid: judgement evolves) The two problematic interpretation only become valid for seasoned collectors and experts (at the asymptotic limit of expertise they become true). For beginner's, it's irresponsible and just sounds wise. In it's less favorable interpretation, I'd be tempted to say this is our version of virtue-signaling. Do it like a pro. I overturn Shinsa judgements for Breakfast. Most people want to lose the minimal amount of money possible by paying rent while enjoying a sword. If anything papers give your a floor guarantee. Because let's face it: when you start, you're clueless. Better to buy something valued by others than what your embryonic aesthetic appreciation of Nihonto tells you. I mean, what do you know? If you're a beginner in a vaccum: Buy the NBTHK attribution, not the blade If you're a beginner with access to knowledgeable people with your best interest in mind: Buy what you're told to buy Does it sound cool? Certainly not. Does it erode your sense of agency? Probably. Will this avoid costly financial mistakes compared to Buy the Blade, not the paper? For sure.

I'd venture to say I would be very, very skeptical of such a specific attribution as Tegai Kanekiyo. First, it doesn't even fit with the standards of conservative snipes on specific smiths. Let's face it: that smith maybe has one tachi extant with his name. Boom. No uncertainty. No Den. This is noise in the flight trajectory when the dart is throne on the board. Den Hosho would have been the better attribution because 1) it acknowledges it's not 100% slam dunk and 2) it's conservative and doesn't snipe on a smith with no data. In fact, I would not trust any specific attributions to smiths, except for Kanenaga, Norinaga and to a lesser extent, Nobuyoshi.

Thank you Jussi, fantastic. And we need to keep in mind Tantos are more likely to be signed than Daito, which would cut our signature counts by a least 1/2. Hosho and Taema are complete darkness. Kanenanga and Norinaga, provided these sign works aren't in their great majority tantos, could have enough work to create a sensible corpus to attribute towards... But this really goes on to show just how little data there is on Yamato...

My thoughts: Worst case Meiji mumei from a nobody. In which case you lose a bit of money but it's not a catastrophic loss either. Easy one to put back into the lottery pot for the next guy hoping Koto Bizen. Not removing the handle looks a bit like a slimy move to me, I would be suspicious of the 'experts' in this auction house. In all likelihood it will not justify the cost of a new polish which is required to appreciate it. Upsides: in my opinion not many. It's not younger than Shinto. The Boshi doesn't follow the Choji pattern, and while this isn't a 100% foolproof sign of Shinto+ it does bod very ill. But this is enough to rule out the Koto Bizen golden goose in my opinion.

I beg to differ. 10K-20K is the danger zone. It's not entry level and it's not treasure level either. This is where big costly mistakes happen. What's the attribution you're looking at? A lot of the danger, as in downward moves, can be explored if we know the attribution. It's also possible to take a few pot shots at the lateral moves. In either case, knowing the attribution is key to discard the 'they didn't like the new result they got' argument that was brought up here. Be careful of downward moves. I do not like the motto of buy the sword not the paper. It reminds me a lot of 'be yourself' and 'follow your heart' which feel right but end up being empty assertions, and in some cases dangerous. It's irresponsible financially as we all try to minimize rental costs on our swords. For some of us, paying an unfortunate rent on a 10-20K sword of 50%+ devaluation over five years will hurt. The name indicated on the paper determines a lot of the attributes of the sword. Sure, there is within-smith variation, and the healthiness of the blade to appraise. But attribution tells you the range of what to expect. Your tastes will change and you will to regret buying what you like. My policy is to buy the sword with the highest emotional dividend + learning dividend ratio'ed over rent costs. So this leads us back to defer to the judgement of experienced scholar as to what we ought to value, which brings us back to Fujishiro and market willingness to pay, which brings us back to the truism etc...

It's not just me. It's also the Shinsa panel. There aren't thousands of signed Yamato school blades. There are a handful of signed Hosho school blades spread across four or five different smiths. That's not enough to build a representation of the variance within and between smiths for the school and probably even less Tegai Kenekiyo. The sampling space is just too small. Now if I'm to differentiate between some Hosho smith who has, say, a grand total of four signed blades, and a Tegai smith who has three, and try to find what's closest to my mumei blade, I might as well toss a coin. If I was training an algorithm to make that call, I would be fitting absolute noise because it is exceedingly probable that the variance within the smith precludes prediction based on the variance between the smiths. My point is that in the presence of so few datapoints, what you do is that you seek out the most highly reputed example, in physical form and across old books. Look at what was valued, make this your tier 1, and then form a ladder downwards where blades with similar attributes that don't quite make the cut get bucketed in. This is attribution by quality levels. In Yamato blades it's particularly acute. This is why Shinsa says your sword is Tegai Kanekiyo, which is a way of saying 'we're not sticking our necks out at Hosho' and why Tanobe says its Hosho. Hosho T1->Tegai Kanekiyo T2. Those are the sorts of relationships I want to parse for the Yamato school.