Jump to content

Valric

Members
  • Posts

    627
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Valric

  1. Oh my. Let's not throw the baby with the bathwater. Remember that in Kantei the right answer is to nail down the archetype. Whatever obscure look-alike smith comes from under the rug is of little importance for scoring the Atari. Next. Agreed that for a beginner these types of kantei are not useful. One must master the basics firsts. That said, Kantei with obscure look-like smiths are not "useless" after a certain level of ability. Once you know all the classics, you need to become aware of the exceptions to the rule. Even if these are not distinguishable, you will build a deeper understanding of what an attribution to a certain smith or school could mean. For example, great many smiths have been lost to history and their extent zaimei work are nill or very few. Hata Chogi, Soshu Kaneshige ...many early soshu disciples of Kamakura and beyond, and the list goes on. Fukuoka Ichimonji had a substantial amount of mastersmiths whose zai work are lost or extremely rare. Attributions to masters like Rai Kunimitsu, Shintogo or Nagamitsu can be product of their respective "corporations" or student work and vary wildly in quality (and price) - there are simply too many extant to be the creation of a single smith. All of these nuances require experience, and being confronted to atypical kantei can help in acquiring it. Finally the idea that internet kantei is pointless is no good. In this day and age there are beautiful videos being produced, or photos with description to fill in the gap. While these do not replace the real in hand experience, they do come close and will improve your knowledge. And these will keep getting better:
  2. Go for quality. Some gimei blades are of high-quality. This is rather the exception than the rule, but one can typically find Shinshinto stunners with gimei throwbacks to Nanbokucho top smiths, along with all sorts of deceptive elements such as artificially aged nakago, extra mekugi-ana, etc. I would take a beautiful Shinshinto gimei to Kanemitsu over a run-of-the-mill soshin muromachi sukesada any day. Shinto and Shinshinto high quality swords get their value literally obliterated down 80-90% when they are mumei or gimei. So if you're hunting for top quality and on a strict budget, this is where to look for. You'll never know who made it as attributions in the latter periods on mumei blades are (mostly) statements of quality. But one needs to train the eye...it's an ongoing process. The blade above doesn't fit in this category. These dress-up packages on YJP, you need to think of all the elements as recently cobbled-up together, including boxes, fake Kinzogan or Kinpun, fake honami docs, fake sayagaki etc fake (and ugly) habaki...These guys run a business of turning low-grade shinto-to-gendai blades into national treasures. It's an investment for them to get the dress-up "done right" - so expect to pay for it. Much much cheaper to get an "honest gimei"
  3. Tametsugu is one of the high variability Soshu attributions. "Den Tametsugu" broadens up the possibilities even further. In context this can be understood as some smiths working in the Nanbokucho period up in the northern parts (Echizen, Etchu, etc...). What we know for sure is that this is Soshu Nanbokucho. If we go a little further, it's very likely to be Soshu Nanbokucho from a smith working in the Northern parts in this tradition. And I agree with both comments above, the blade shares characteristics with both Sanekage and Hasebe.
  4. Nagatsune and Ishiguro, can't judge if soshin but the workmanship is good. Unusual theme. Reveal more, I am most curious what comes next!
  5. We cannot agree to disagree to misconceptions of this magnitude. The idea that Tanobe-sensei would lie and fabricate some nonsense to please a gaijin by stating a notion that goes against the surface level understanding is beyond preposterous. Where to start... And also the ubu zai ichimonji in suguha being the “majority” is plainly wrong. Early ko-bizen phase work of its founders may be found in suguha. Such works are less than 10% of extant ubu zaimei ichimonji. Mumei they would have gone to Ko-Bizen. May Hachiman give us the strength.
  6. Market value will not increase here with papers once you account for the cost of the process. Better off to keep it as is or move it on.
  7. Excellently put. Next level: think of attributions as a global maxima on multidimensional probability density distribution. Rarely is a mumei sword a slam dunk. You often have multiple good ideas coexisting together, with one taking over the others as more likely which then constitutes your attribution. In reality you need to accept uncertainty and part of studying the sword is to understand where it fits in the great interconnected web of plausible candidates. Think of all the smiths as an interconnected web - a graph - where the thickness of the links represents proximity in their work. If you end up right in between two or three nods you'll have a case for "Den" Attributions also capture uncertainty, and not just via Den. When you go down the less reputed schools and the work lacks differentiability, attribution to these schools on a mumei sword may be an admittance of uncertainty in the judgement. More important than the top idea that comes up on the paper is all the other ideas that have been put aside with high certainty. A sword that comes back as Bungo Takeda or Ko-Udo can be a number of things around these waters, but Ichimonji it is not, etc. On less highly rated school, these attributions are the fruit of a process of elimination when you go down quality ladders.
  8. Helicopter Rabbit is awesome!
  9. NBTHK does not attribute to Nagamaki-Naoshi. It's a Naginata-Naoshi, and the Nagamaki is to be considered a subtype of Naginata, which furthermore finds itself defined by its mounting. That said, katana-sized naginata Naoshi of the koto period, probabilistically were used at some point in their lives as Nagamaki.
  10. I would think Chinese too if you didn't tell me it was a prize-winning Shinsakudo. Nioideki on Muji hada... The difference in visual quality of a modern Hitatsura sword compared by one by Akihiro/Hiromitsu/Hasebe/Yozozaemon is simply astonishing. Has anyone in the Shinshinto realm of gifted smiths try re-creating Hitatsura? Naotane school perhaps? It would be interesting to compare results.
  11. One of the best thread of the NMB. Keep 'em coming. I'll revive it with this image, which I found on the old archives of the forum. The most epic Higo lineup ever to have graced a table in Europe since Alfred Baur.
  12. Lovely. Reminds me of an Ishiguro design by Masaaki if I am not mistaken.
  13. Looks like the Chinese are into bad imitations of Hitatsura. Always innovating looking for the next treasure hunter.
  14. Agree with Rivkin here. Likely dressed-up Shinto to look Koto, or some offshoot Koto Yamashiro if you're very lucky. It's the king of sword where faking O-suriage gives the seller a chance at pitching Rai kunimitsu to the unsuspecting buyer.
  15. Run away Carl. That's going to turn into a regret buy real quick. Set aside the funds towards something beautiful which will bring you joy for a long time.
  16. You did get burned. The Nakago is artificially aged, those pitting marks are in fact hammer punch marks to make it appear pitted. The blade looks gendai. It's been dressed up to make it look old and attract the treasure bargain hunter. For 950$ you could have done much better looking for sales on the board. The seller did well here.
  17. Valric

    Real or Fake?

    These sorts of shape existed in the late kamakura to nanbokucho period and later in the Momoyama when the smiths tried to emulate the old masters, a few more were made. And then again in Shinshinto time certainly. This here reeks of made in china. Like all of Komonjo's stock. Just like John I don't buy the poor apprentice theory, but it's a theory that sells well.
  18. Great job documenting the discovery. I do wonder how many swords of extraordinary histories have found themselves disconnected from their stories.
  19. Oh so many things in this thread, where to begin. So much nuance is lost between strong statements. Attribution first and foremost reflects quality. Higher quality blades will move up and get attributed to the founder. Beyond quality, this depends on the level of feature distinctiveness between generations. Osafune Mainline has highly distinctive differences between Mitsutada, Nagamitsu, Kagemitsu, and Kanemitsu. While there is slippage from student to master, it presumably resides mostly with early work of the student before he took the head of the school. All these masters are highly rated, and highly distinctive between each other. If we go to Soden Bizen: Chogi / Kencho. Big powerful blades by Kencho likely end up with Chogi, and slender Chogi work will go to Kencho. Here it's not about quality per se (There is a strong case to be made that Kencho is just as, if not more skilled than Chogi, especially in his hamon) - but due to a specific dimension, namely how the shape maps onto the archetype of Chogi. It could be further argued that due to the very small number of signed blade by Kencho - which all feature extreme Soshu features - that the Kencho attribution is somewhat of a construct and could map onto many of the Soden-Bizen smiths working during these times whose names may have been lost. Norishige/Soshu. Some the top Soshu works such as the mysterious but extremely skilled Hata Chogi (See attached image. Zaimei Tanto) made work of such beauty that, had they been mumei, they would be attributed to Norishige. Such as this tanto below, in this case even towards the upper tier of Norishige's work. Highly probable that the cream of the crop of Sanekage likewise ends up lumped with Norishige. These movements are due to the masterful execution of elements of Norishige's work. Such as the regular and brilliant matsukawa, the nie swirls jumping through the hamon which will let these blades of other smiths carry the master's name. Same story occuring with Tametsugu to Go. The process is somewhat poetic, I find. Masamune is a big topic. From the thousands of blades dubiously attributed to him in the late Edo period, we are now left with about 60 blades (~40 Katana). Out of these 60 blades, about a third have uncertainties cited clearly in the Setsumei. It's important to read the Zufu records carefully because the NBHTK - while beholden to some of the old attributions from the top Honami or the famous Meibutsu-sho - will express doubts when doubts are warranted. "Soshu Joko No Saku" "To Mei ga aru" "Nanbokucho top Soshu work" are all ways of expressing doubt, the Japanese way. And there are blades with no provenance at all that have been attributed to Masamune by the NBHTK. They do exist, and one of them recently passed Tokuju. Finally, the usage of "Den" for Masamune is different than for other smiths. All blades are "Den" by default - except those with Kinzogan mei by one of the top judges which are confirmed to be Masamune. A Masamune with a Kinzogan mei from a top judge which features "Den" is a rejection of the old attribution. So, to sum up, the NBHTK goes to great length to explain its reasoning in the Setsumei and is extremely conservative with its attributions to Masamune - a studious lecture of these volumes will provide much clarity. Let us contemplate for a moment that out of ~1600 or so Soshu Koto blades of Juyo or higher ranking ~30 have an attribution to Masamune with a supporting Setsumei (less than 2%). What I'm trying to convy here is that a case-by-case analysis is necessary to contextualize this (generally true) assertion. At the end, an attribution on a mumei blade reflects a probability field where multiple answers coexists, some better than others. The higher-level the blade, the more one of those answers tend to overtake the others (because the blade is highly distinctive in its masterfulness). Sometimes we are left floating between two or three guesses equally likely, this is where "Den" comes in (in most cases, again see above). This is why the NBHTK rarely slam dunks a Naoe Shizu or Yamato smith, because distinctiveness is lost, same with Sue-Bizen, Sue-most-things. Ko-Uda, Ko-Senjuin, Takeda, Bungo, Ko-provincial school and many more, all very difficult to pin-point. We must live with this uncertainty. We must also live with attributional constructs which act as convenient parking spots to lump blade via a process of elimination. The more we drift away from mainline masters, the more attributions should be read as a statement containing a list of eliminated candidates with high certainty. What I mean by this is that even something like "Den Ko-Uda" contains a lot of information about what it is not. It's no surprise finally that here in the west, we have the impression that founders or famous smiths are overrated compared to their students. Look at those beaters on AOI art - shadows of their former selves, disfigured by time. It's a minuscule market, and the blades that made the founders famous will be sold discreetly on the Japanese market. What we get here are the "value buys" and the "cheap for Rai" kind of deals. Survivorship bias at play. Hell if I was scrolling AOIart and YJP! I would think Shinto just owns, especially second and third-gen students.
  20. What a beauty, thanks for sharing here. The sort of sublime work that makes me want to dip into Tosogu. We should create a new thread and post a best-off from the old one, along with new pieces and links. It was one of my favorite threads too.
  21. Time to put the brakes on the swindle. Get it polished, send it for paper, maybe you get a nice attribution. Sell it or consign it with a dealer. Take your money and buy bitcoin.
  22. Good old sword show swindle. Burning newcomers like this is just vile. Now you paid your due, you paid the protection money. Next step is to setup your stand and pass this swindle onto the next guy. Rinse and repeat until everyone gets burned. Harder to pull off these days because reputation tends to be sticky with the advent of the internet.
  23. Valric

    Kantei challenge

    Kantei is about matching traits to a maker, not to guess the signature per se. The more archetypal the blade the more these things should converge, and by extension the more applicable the lesson. Now I don't think there is anything wrong with atypical ones interspersed between typical ones, because it goes to shows either the limit of our knowledge and system, or the fact that there was unexpected variation or versatility in the work of a particular smith. Would be good to have more Kantei exercises on the board, these are often the best kind of threads.
  24. Valric

    Kantei challenge

    Strange one. Hizento would have been my kantei. Nosada possible, versatile guy, could do almost anything. Now with Bizen in mind. There is not a single element on this blade which would be in line with anything before Sue-Bizen to me and the hada is not what we see in Oei. So this leave late Muromachi, Offshoot of Yozozaemon? These guys did do some Suguha with fine hada (here for example). Shape isn't the typical late muromachi blade though. Perhaps a special order.
×
×
  • Create New...