Jump to content

Jussi Ekholm

Gold Tier
  • Posts

    1,771
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

Posts posted by Jussi Ekholm

  1. I am having really hard time letting go of my books. I understood that when I was thinking what I can sell as I will have some new books coming in fairly soon. I will list prices for each and postages will be added on (Finnish Post aint the cheapest one and some of these are heavy books). I prefer bank transfer but can of course do Paypal and perhaps some other payment methods too.

     

    I am having duplicate copies of these books from Markus Sesko as they are amazing. I will list each individually but I think getting all of them together would be a good purchase for someone looking to start with books. Priced quite cheaply as I checked how affordable getting brand new ones from Lulu is, Markus provides amazing stuff.

     

    Markus Sesko - Swordsmiths of Japan (this is the new 3 book edition), condition is very good to excellent as I haven't read this copy of the set much at all. SOLD

     

    20240106_154310p.thumb.jpg.49019eb8519ffc3a4d5b374a19d14e82.jpg

     

    Markus Sesko - Kantei-Zenshū set (Both Kotō and Shintō & Shinshintō books), condition is very good for these. 200€

     

    20240106_154236p.thumb.jpg.b37cf9b1a41c6ea94f89f0c02842c28a.jpg

     

    Markus Sesko - Meikan set (3 books), condition is very good for these. 150€

     

    20240106_154348p.thumb.jpg.d64a6f18e7ce78af2fdb2a29eef8f6bd.jpg

     

    And as I said I can cut a small deal for all Sesko books combined for 400€ +shipping. It is c. 140€ cheaper than getting all of these brand new from Lulu.

     

    Roald & Patricia Knutsen - Japanese Spears, Polearms and Their Use in Old Japan, this one is in very good condition. It is my only copy of the book but I have all the info in my Japanese language spear books. SOLD

     

    20240106_154203p.thumb.jpg.b9ae307ab8ac66aa3a430effa36e04ae.jpg

     

    Swords and Accessories - Treasures From The Tokugawa Art Museum No.6. This features 100 swords and 80 accessories from the Tokugawa Art Museum collection. It is my only copy of the book but I have 3 other books from Tokugawa Art Museum, so I have all the items in this book in other books. Great book with amazing items. This is in good condition, soft cover book with small corner bump. 50€

     

    20240106_154148p.thumb.jpg.caf74c041d5ec2ab4c3fc052e71540ea.jpg

     

    Tokubetsu Jūyō books 2-10. Number 2 has some staining on cover and few first pages. Other than that I think books are in good condition. I think these are pretty rare to find outside Japan. As these are my duplicates I can cut a sweet deal 50€ per book or all 9 books for 350€

    TJ 2 - 32 items

    TJ 3 - 26 items

    TJ 4 - 42 items

    TJ 5 - 51 items

    TJ 6 - 65 items

    TJ 7 - 65 items

    TJ 8 - 37 items

    TJ 9 - 36 items

    TJ 10 - 41 items

     

    20240106_154004p.thumb.jpg.84819e3f690e89a81266d0433d3a6a62.jpg

     

    • Like 2
  2. Thanks Paul and Robert for doing great collaboration with Matsumoto-san. I have greatly enjoyed your presentation as Tōken Matsumoto always has very interesting items. Hopefully you will continue working together in 2024 too. :thumbsup:

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  3. I took a look into my books and the smith lineage seems to be lesser known one. I am lucky to have "Bungo Taikan" so there was some info in there. I think there are 2 generations of Bungo Nagahide. 1st died in 1845 at the age of 72. 2nd gen died in 1881 at the age of 68.

     

    I have seen 延竜 (Enryū) in Nagahide signatures but never 延竜子 (Enryūshi) those that know the language better can probably explain the difference.

     

    Here are few more authenticated examples found online

    https://aucview.aucf...m/yahoo/m1079015330/

    https://www.samuraim...u-hozon-certificate/

    https://aucview.com/yahoo/n221631552/

     

    One thing that seems to be in common on all few examples with Nagahide mei I have references on if the signature is with 豊後国 (Bungo no Kuni) then the original hole is around 国 (Kuni) character.

     

    I think it is an interesting item to research :thumbsup:

    • Like 4
  4. I think one problem is that people are possibly talking about different things. I have the Tokyo National Museum book - Uchigatana Koshirae, which is amazing resource in this particular field. However it is important to choose if you are talking about Kamakura or Nanbokuchō or Muromachi period uchigatana. And there are variances even within the periods.

     

    Now for the later Muromachi period I personally see 3 different variations of long sword being utilized. I am leaving shorter swords and my loved big swords out of this.

    1. 50 - 65 cm blade length - very common to see

    2. 65 - 75 cm blade length - extremely common size

    3. 75 - 85 cm blade length - quite rare to find especially 80+ cm in original length

     

    The TNM book has examples that are among the best remaining in Japan many which were owned by reknown historical persons, and even though many of them have extremely remarkable older blades within the koshirae, you can find historical koshirae examples of all 3 of the above categories in the book.

     

    And I have to agree with Michael about the mesmerising effect of the sword, the quality of it is stunning. Now I am not the person usually looking for extreme high quality as I prefer obscure stuff of huge size but seeing that sword at Tokyo National Museum definately left a mark.

    • Thanks 2
  5. The Kanesada smith who made this sword is quite unknown smith. He seems to often use the signature 野田五郎藤原金定 - Noda Gorō Fujiwara Kanesada, and working late 1600's to early 1700's. Worked in Mino and possibly in Owari too. Markus has also following mentioned in his index "he focused mainly on the production of kogatana".

     

    I am having difficulties in finding reference items from this smith, here are couple

    Wakizashi: https://www.seiyudo.com/wa-070123.htm

    Katana: https://buyee.jp/ite.../auction/g1087538057

    • Like 3
  6. They were not that common (and some of course got shortened) and maybe as I am researching big sword I have just noted them more than usual collector. Swords of this length often command a premium as they are pretty rare finds. And of course it doesn't really make any difference if it is tachi or katana as they can be practically identical size.

     

    I am not home at my references so here are few that I dug up online from top of my memory.

    Motochika 83,4 cm

    Kanesada 80,4 cm

    Fuyuhiro (mumei) 80,2 cm

    Chiyozuru (mumei) 77,7 cm

     

    I had few more that were online in my mind but I cannot find them online anymore so the dealers must have taken the pages off. And few I remembered incorrectly and were signed tachi but were still later Muromachi items.

    • Like 1
  7. I think it is ok sword but I don't agree with the price. I would make a offer for lot less and seeing how far apart I would be with the dealer, I wouldn't even make it as it would perhaps offend him/her.

     

    I think it fits for a Sukesada blade from early 1500's. Size would fit it well. Perhaps possibly some water damage/corrosion somewhere along the history would explain the dents on nakago. At least I've heard similar explanations for dents.

     

    To me it seems koshirae is just cobbled together and made to fit this sword.

     

    • Like 2
  8. Hello Jon!

     

    Screenshot_20231224_221040_AdobeAcrobat.thumb.jpg.c7c25da14158135e63939fa9d1799e26.jpg

     

    I think many of us have spent so many years looking at signatures that they kinda flow naturally. Sometimes the characters are not exactly as their official character form. Here borrowed screenshot from Markus Seskos Nihontō Compedium that shows few variations of Kane character.

     

    I am limited to my phone during Christmas time so posting images is bit difficult.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  9. Here circled

     

     

     

    I cannot understand why the picture just uploads as black screen. I just drew a circle on my phone to it.

     

    The third picture on your opening post has easy to see Kanemitsu.

     

     

    • Like 1
  10. Are you looking specifically Mihara items or what type of criteria do you have?

     

    It is bit unfortunate but I think Sue-Mihara as mumei attribution is bit undesirable, as it is kind of low end bucket group. I don't think attributions in the "low end" matter that much and in my eyes they are going towards the potential option. When you have something like Sue-Bizen, Uda, Sue-Mihara, Sue-Seki etc. It would in my eyes be common lower level item. In my opinion there is nothing wrong in collecting such items, and they offer an affordable variety. However as was said above you need to be quite careful with the prices. Of course in the end many antique items are worth what someone is willing to pay for them.

     

    Here you can see a Ko-Mihara tantō from Nanbokuchō period, it comes with quite nice koshirae and Hozon paper for 500,000 yen (c.5200 AUD), so it is cheaper than the eBay Sue-Mihara. Unfortunately this blade isn't top notch either but I think it is fairly attractive package.

     

    To me the best Mihara work I have seen is the Masaie Ōdachi at Yasukuni Jinja, spectacular and huge sword. There are also many good signed and also attributed Mihara works, some even late Muromachi work.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  11. I have been reading books this evening and by chance I encountered this Nagamitsu tachi in few books that will fit what Ray was saying above about various rankings by different organizations overlapping.

     

    20231215_225810.thumb.jpg.adec154ef424fdc2215d9065e5968553.jpg

     

    Sword was originally Jūyō Bijutsuhin, then apparently it was in the US and found it's way back to Japan and passed Jūyō 22 shinsa. It is amazing ubu tachi of 80,5 cm by one of the top smiths... but apparently bōshi is almost completely lost.

     

    Another example would be overlap between NBTHK & NTHK, so far I only have 1 NTHK Yushu book but I intend to get rest of them some day in the future too... From that 1 Yushu book I have been able to match following NBTHK ranks for old swords 3 Tokubetsu Jūyō, 5 Jūyō and 2 Tokubetsu Hozon.

     

    I think perhaps also one reason for the change of view in papering is the ease of seeing things due to the internet. As many Japanese dealers and sites (yahoo auctions, museums etc.) are accessible now, I feel that I keep seeing so many Tokubetsu Hozon items every week as I browse the sites weekly I don't even note them too much, unless I see them as special towards my own intrests. As crazy as it seems I have noticed personally I even start to be bit oversaturated on Jūyō swords, and some of them don't evoke too much feelings. There are so many average sized high quality mumei swords by X makers. Yes very high quality items but for me they are just that... I have noticed I get hyped about lesser quality historical items more and getting info on swords from shrines & temples for example is super exciting for me. I think most of them don't even have any "official" designations, while some top items will be Kokuhō, Bunkazai, Bijutsuhin etc.

    • Like 4
  12. Steve is giving some amazing advice as usual :thumbsup:

     

    I do think Kongōbyōe school might be a reasonable direction to look towards to. Unfortunately it is minor school with not too much information. I do think the "contrasting layers" on the blade would fit well within the craftmanship of the school. Also good to note that smiths of the school often signed Mori X

    However I think the signature itself might not be of the common style of the school. Kongōbyōe signatures are often quite large in size. Unfortunately I don't have Kongōbyōe Moritsuna swords on record.

     

    Here are some reference swords

    Moritaka: https://toyuukai.jp/products/金剛兵衛盛高作-特別保存刀剣鑑定書-katana-kongou-hyoue-moritaka-saku-品番-ka

    Moritaka: https://buyee.jp/ite.../auction/h1107353776

    Moritoshi: https://www.token-ne.../juyo-moritoshi.html

    Morikiyo: https://ginza.choshu...rikiyo_kongobyoe.htm

    Morishige: https://hyozaemon.jp...ct/minamotomorisige/

     

    • Like 3
    • Love 2
  13. This is extremely interesting subject, and I am having difficulties in gathering my thoughts in somewhat readable form that is not flowing randomly. As some may know I do have bit OCD style data gathering tendencies for pre-mid Muromachi swords. And of course NBTHK papered swords play a huge deal in that, especially their attributions. As I am classifying the items by attributions.

     

    Now as a collector I am starting to have the opposite view :D I don't really care what the (mumei) sword has been attributed to if I like it. At the level collecting possible to me it does not really make a difference what the attribution is as the very high quality stuff will be beyond my reach. And I must admit I am not the greatest fan of Japanese style super specific attributions, although I understand there are many layers into the attributions.

     

    I think it used to be possible to send a sword for Hozon & Tokubetsu Hozon at the same time (I have never sent a sword to NBTHK or any organization). However I did not even know that this has changed, here is the current information

     

    Quote

    SUBMISSIONS FOR SHINSA

     

    Items which qualify for the October Juyo Token Shinsa should have received a Tokubetsu Hozon classification by June. Toso (koshirae) and toshingu (tosogu) should have received a Tokubetsu Hozon classification by May. Please note these requirements.  

     

    From March, 2022, requirements were changed. Items submitted for Tokubetsu Hozon Shinsa must have passed a Hozon Shinsa a month or more before the the Tokubetsu Hozon shinsa application. If the item has already passed an earlier shinsa, please submit a reservation number and certificate for the items.

     

    As my specific data is for very old swords (that are generally highly appreciated), the data for Hozon vs. Tokubetsu Hozon is totally skewed. As I just checked I have at the moment record for 819 Hozon swords and 1772 Tokubetsu Hozon swords. That shows that for pre-mid Muromachi getting Tokubetsu Hozon is very common for swords compared to item being "just" Hozon.

     

    I remember some years ago I tried to figure out the NBTHK submission numbers etc. and discussed it with Darcy. There were of course some incompleteness in my logic & numbers as I don't have access to all of the data. However now we know that current limitation is 1,600 swords per Hozon/Tokubetsu Hozon shinsa session.

    Using my logic and calculations there would be currently 120,000+ swords passed Hozon and 75,000+ swords passed Tokubetsu Hozon, these lower levels are bit speculative. Now these high levels are 100% factual as I counted the items myself :laughing: There are currently (Jūyō 69) 12,217 Jūyō swords (the actual number is tad higher as I didn't count daishō as 2 swords and did not count swords attached to koshirae). At Tokubetsu Jūyō level there are currently (Tokubetsu Jūyō 27) 1,200 swords.

     

    I like what Kirill is saying above that we shouldn't focus on the "level" of the sword as much as the rarity of the item. Of course that agrees with my historical view, so it is easy for me to side with it. Even though Jūyō swords are of very high quality there are 12,000+ of them and plenty of mumei X attributions, or signed items by popular smiths. Where as you could have historically important items with just Hozon papers for example having one of very few signed items by smith X.

    • Like 9
    • Love 1
    • Thanks 1
  14. Few days ago a friend noted that NBTHK had released Jūyō 69 results on their website Now as I always do, here are the results translittered to partly English following the format I am using on the index.

     

    All possible errors are most likely mine, I am not well versed in fittings so there I might have incorrect readings of lesser known makers etc. and as usual I avoid translating fitting / koshirae themes as it is often very difficult to get correct.

     

    Here is the link to the original PDF at NBTHK site: https://www.touken.or.jp/Portals/0/第69回重要刀剣等指定品発表.pdf

     

    Jūyō 69 – 84 Items – NBTHK Web page

     

    1. Katana – Gojō Kuninaga – Mumei [五条国永]

    2. Tachi – Ko-Kyōmono – Mumei [古京物]

    3. Tachi – Awataguchi – Mumei [粟田口]

    4. Katana – Niji Kunitoshi – Mumei [二字国俊]

    5. Naoshi – Rai Kunitsugu – Mumei [来国次]

    6. Tachi – Mitsumasa (den Senju’in) - 光正 [伝千手院]

    7. Tachi – Senju’in – Mumei [千手院]

    8. Katana – Senju’in – Mumei [千手院]

    9. Katana – Taima – Mumei [当麻]

    10. Katana – Hoshō – Mumei [保昌]

    11. Katana – Shikkake Norinaga – Mumei [尻縣則長]

    12. Tantō – Shintōgo Kunimitsu (1322) - 国光 / 元享二年六月日 [新藤五]

    13. Katana – Yukimitsu – Mumei [行光]

    14. Katana – den Yukimitsu – Mumei [伝行光]

    15. Tantō – Sadamune – [Shumei 貞宗]

    16. Katana – den Shizu – Mumei [伝志津]

    17. Tantō – Shizu – Mumei [志津]

    18. Katana – Kaneaki (1592) - 生駒雅楽頭公依御意兼明造之 / 文禄元歳二月吉日谷出羽守二胴切

    19. Tantō – Asago-Taima Nobunaga - 信長 [浅古当麻]

    20. Katana – den Gō – [Shumei Fumei] [伝江]

    21. Katana – Norishige – Mumei [則重]

    22. Tachi – Ko-Hōki Sanekage – Mumei [古伯耆真景]

    23. Katana – Sekishū Naotsuna – Mumei [石州直綱]

    24. Katana – Sukemura (Ko-Bizen) – Orikaeshi 備前[古備前]

    25. Tachi – Norinari (Ko-Ichimonji) - 則成 [古一文字]

    26. Tachi – Sukekane (Ichimonji) - 助包 [一文字]

    27. Katana – Yoshioka Ichimonji – Mumei [吉岡一文字]

    28. Tachi – Norifusa - 則房

    29. Katana – Iwato Ichimonji – Mumei [岩戸一文字]

    30. Tachi – Nagamitsu - □□□□ [長光]

    31. Katana – Nagamitsu – [Kinpun 長光]

    32. Tachi – Kagemitsu (1331) - 備州長船住景光 / 元徳三年三月日

    33. Naoshi - Unjū – Mumei [雲重]

    34. Katana – Kanemitsu – Mumei [兼光]

    35. Katana – Kanemitsu – Mumei [兼光]

    36. Katana – Yoshimitsu – Mumei [義光]

    37. Katana – Motomitsu – Mumei [基光]

    38. Tachi – Masamitsu - □州長船政光

    39. Tachi – Shigeyoshi (1392) - 備州長船重吉 / 明徳三年十月日 (Attachment – Tachi Koshirae - 金梨子地青山菊紋散金貝鞘糸巻太刀拵)

    40. Tachi – Shigezane - 備州長船住重真

    41. Katana – Nagashige – Mumei [長重]

    42. Katana – Ōmiya Morikage – Mumei [盛景]

    43. Katana – den Ōmiya Morikage – Mumei [伝盛景] (Attachment – Tachi Koshirae - 金梨子地三條花角紋散蒔絵鞘糸巻太刀拵)

    44. Wakizashi – Yasumitsu (1439) - 備州長船康光 / 永享十一年八月日

    45. Katana – Aoe – Mumei [青江]

    46. Katana – Aoe – Mumei [青江]

    47. Katana – den Aoe – Mumei [伝青江]

    48. Katana – Sairen – Mumei [西蓮]

    49. Katana – den Samonji – Mumei [伝左文字]

    50. Katana – Enju Kunitoki – [Kinzōgan 国時 / 光遜 (花押)] [延寿]

    51. Katana – Horikawa Kuniyasu - 国安 [堀川]

    52. Katana – Shinkai Kunisada (1670) - 井上和泉守国貞 / (菊紋) 寛文十年八月日

    53. Katana – Echizen Yasutsugu (Nidai) - 於武州江戸越前康継 / 諸越所持 [二代]

    54. Katana – Kaneshige - 上総介藤原兼重

    55. Katana – Taikei Naotane (1831) - 荘司筑前大掾大慶藤直胤 (花押) / 天保二年仲春

    56. Katana – Hizen Masahiro - 肥前国河内大掾藤原正広

    57. Naginata Koshirae - 黒漆塗鞘朱塗柄薙刀拵

    58. Tachi Koshirae - 黒漆塗紋散蒔絵鞘糸巻太刀拵

    59. Tachi Koshirae - 金梨子地桐違鷹羽檜扇紋散鞘糸巻太刀拵

    60. Tantō Koshirae - 朱塗陰陽藤花文鞘合口短刀拵

    61. Tantō Koshirae - 黒石目曲竹断文散腰刻鞘合口短刀拵 (中邨春寛一作金具) Nakamura Haruhiro Issaku – Fuchi – Haruhiro - 中邨春寛 (花押) Kozuka – Haruhiro - 春寛 (花押) Kōgai – Haruhiro - 中邨

    62. Tantō Koshirae - 黒蠟色桜花散蒔絵鞘合口短刀拵 Menuki – Sasayama Tokuoki - / Kozuka – Sasayama Tokuoki – (棟銘) 篤興作 Wari-Kōgai & Semegane – Sasayama Tokuoki - 一行斎 Saya Lacquer - 平安篤興画 梶川 (壺印)

    63. Menuki (歳寒二雅図目貫) – Ko-Kinko – Mumei [古金工]

    64. Kozuka (引手金具図小柄) – Gotō Yūjō & Gotō Kenjō & Gotō Teijō - 祐乗作 顕乗 (花押) 光昌 (花押)

    65. Kōgai (樋定規図笄) – Gotō Sōjō & Gotō Teijō - 宗乗作 程乗 (花押)

    66. Menuki (牛馬図目貫) – Gotō Kōjō – Mumei [光乗] (Attachment – Gotō Origami (1739) - 元文四年代百五捨貫光理折紙) (Attachment – Letter - 後藤三郎左衛門書状)

    67. Mitokoromono (枝菊図三所物) Kozuka & Kōgai – Gotō Tsujō - 後藤通乗 (花押) Menuki – Gotō Tsujō – Mumei [通乗]

    68. Mitokoromono (竹雀図三所物) Kozuka & Kōgai – Gotō Hōjō- 後藤四郎兵衛藤原光晃 (花押) Menuki – Gotō Hōjō – (割際端銘) /

    69. Tsuba (雲出八橋透鐔) – Hayashi Shigemitsu - / 重光

    70. Tsuba (武蔵野透鐔) – Yasuchika - 安親

    71. Kozuka (木賊刈図小柄) – Yasuchika - 安親

    72. Kozuka (猿猴耳掻に刷子図小柄) – Yasuchika - 安親

    73. Tsuba (雪花透唐子雪遊図鐔) – Issando Joi – (金印) 一蝅堂乗意 (金印 永春)

    74. Fuchi & Kashira (親子獅子図縁頭) – Konkan - 岩本昆寛 (花押)

    75. Daishō Fuchi & Kashira (猛禽図大小縁頭) – Ishiguro Masayoshi – Daishō mei - 行年七十七歳 寿翁政美作

    76. Kozuka (富嶽図小柄) – Hirata Dōnin – Mumei [平田道仁]

    77. Tsuba (山水図鐔) – Tomonobu - 染谷知信 (金印)

    78. Menuki (海の幸図目貫) – Nagatsune – (割際端銘) 長常 (花押) / 長常

    79. Fuchi & Kashira (風神雷神図縁頭) – Minayama Oki - 皆山応起 (花押)

    80. Tsuba (雷神図鐔) – Kawabarayashi Hidekuni - 天光堂秀国

    81. Mitokoromono (粟穂図三所物) Kozuka & Kōgai – Araki Tomei - 吟松亭東明 (花押) Menuki – Araki Tomei – (割短冊銘) 吟松亭 / 東明

    82. Kanagu (福禄寿図揃金具) Tsuba – Imai Nagatake (1858) - 安政戊午孟今井永武 (花押) Kozuka – Imai Nagatake (1857) - 安政丁巳孟秋今井永武 (花押) Kōgai – Imai Nagatake (1857) - 安政丁巳孟秋今井享斎 (花押) Menuki – Imai Nagatake – Mumei [永武]

    83. Tsuba (追儺図鐔) – Tanaka Kiyotoshi - 東龍斎 / 丁未歳製 清寿法眼 (花押)

    84. Kozuka (雀海中蛤図小柄) – Natsuo - 夏雄 (印 古意)

    • Like 14
    • Love 2
    • Thanks 6
  15. Not really regarding the cutting test but that particular sword in general. High papered swords are super easy to track down as I do follow old swords perhaps way too much. Now Jūyō 64 session was only in 2018. Yet this is the 4th time I see this particular sword being sold online. 3 times were by 2 Japanese dealers and now it is with Fred. Also the sword has gotten a koshirae in 2023, as when it was sold in late 2022 in Japan it was only in shirasaya. So while the koshirae is most likely old from Edo period as mentioned, it was not made for this particular sword, it is good to look at the tsuka for more information.

     

    Fred knows his stuff and way more than me, he has great knowledge. Not wanting anyone think negatively about him, just wanting to point out some background of the item. I admit I am personally bit puzzled when swords get sold over and over in short time span but people are aiming to make profit.

    • Like 3
  16. Unfortunately I don't have accurate info on the dates when Kunimura tachi mei was removed. Jūyō 22 which is the first time I have info on it was 1974. Then when I got the Jūyō 49 book year of that session was 2003. So somewhere during that time the mei was inserted on to the tang. I tried to look into the item descriptions on both books but they just mention that original signature was lost when sword was shortened but the piece remained. I remember Darcy possibly talked about this particular sword many years ago, perhaps his posts might have had more info on the item.

     

    I am not that well versed in newer swords but I was reading the end of Shinshintō book of Nihontō Kōza (it is fairly old book), where there is long discussion about gimei with examples and references. I must admit it goes well beyond my understanding... For example just for Shinshintō gimei there are 3 different categories in the book. 1. Period gimei, made around the time the sword was made 2. Recent gimei, made c. 1935 when appreciation for newer swords started to boom 3. Present day gimei, made after WWII. I must admit I am often banging my head when I read the Japanese descriptions on fine details as they are so "adjective" and hard to understand for my brain. For example, cut boldly, with strength very skilled tagane movement etc. To me this is very difficult to understand as I am not artistic person in general.

     

    There are of course the really bad signature fakes but I think they are not really that dangerous as they would be quite obvious to spot. Still I think in overall it could be fun research subject. There must be people who really know a lot about these, as just reading the gimei section of Kōza kinda blew my mind...

     

    I think one kind of fun and "problematic for profit" items that have NBTHK (or other) papers, are the ones where Kuni fumei is mentioned in the brackets, mostly combined with approximate age of the item. As that indicates that they were unable to put it towards known smiths but they acknowledge the signature and the date of the item.

     

    • Like 7
  17. I think finding the actual smiths is going to be bit tricky, as not too many signed old Uda works are remaining. While in comparison you will see that Ko-Uda seems to be somewhat common attribution for mumei items. I have tried to gather all authenticated works by smiths I have been able to find. As Kirill said above the difficulty comes when there are multiple generations using the same name.

     

    Kunimitsu - I believe there are 2 tachi that are seen as late Kamakura period work, and 1 tanto that is dated 1321 but only shumei, no signature on it. Then there few signed tachi and tanto that are seen as late Nanbokuchō - early Muromachi work. So they would be 2 different generations.

    Kunifusa - I have 22 signed blades, that are from Nanbokuchō - early Muromachi, I believe sources state there were 2 generations working during this but personally I couldn't differentiate. There is the famous 1405 dated tanto, it is very fine work as it was at display at NBTHK when I visited this summer. There is also 1389 dated blade, although Jūyō 16 book has it as 康正元年 1455 but other sources have it as 康応元年 1389. So NBTHK sees it as 3rd gen work and even state so in item description, where as Kunzan described this as Ko-Uda work. I cannot really say which is correct as both are expert opinions.

    Kunimune - I believe I only have 1 signed Nanbokuchō tachi, rest of the signed items I have for Kunimune seems to be early Muromachi onwards.

    Kunihisa - There are few signed items that are possibly late Nanbokuchō - early Muromachi work, and there is 1400 dated tanto. Otherwise signed works seem to be early Muromachi onwards.

    Kunitsugu - There seems to be 1 tachi that is seen as Nanbokuchō, and rest of the signed items seem to be early Muromachi.

    Tomonori - 7 signed tachi & kodachi, late Nanbokuchō - early Muromachi work.

    Tomotsugu - 10 signed works, late Nanbokuchō - early Muromachi work.

    Tomohisa - 2 signed tanto, late Nanbokuchō - early Muromachi work.

    Tomomitsu - 1 tanto, possibly early Muromachi

    Tomoshige - 1 tanto, late Nanbokuchō

    Tomohiro - 1 tachi, early Muromachi

     

    In total I counted I have so far found 87 signed items that I think are work of early Uda school. However to note few of these are only described as Muromachi period in general, so they could be going into mid-Muromachi. It is always very fun to dive into stuff like this. :)

     

     

     

    • Like 7
    • Thanks 1
  18. I am on the side of extreme preservation, and I am leaning even more and more towards that as the years go by. I know money talks and people will do many things for swords with profit in mind. I would advice caution even with restoration and extreme caution with removal of certain things.

     

    I cannot really comment on NBTHK stance on things and why they issue the papers as they do. However as Moriyama-san pointed out earlier they have just put an upper number limitation to blades accepted to Hozon/TH shinsa. I am not sure of the number of their staff but I am under the assumption that they are not a huge organization staff wise. I remember we tried to estimate submission number with Darcy some years ago and how much time they could spend per blade, and the amount of time is not that big.

     

    I think it could be a good option to possibly authenticate gimei swords but not sure if NBTHK would currently have resources to start doing it as they seem to already be at their limit with current staff as they need to limit amount of blades sent in. However I feel that it could amount to even more shady dealing, as some sellers could push them as legitimate signed items. Yes I understand in the idea there would be clear mentions of gimei but there will be people who do not read Japanese and would trust sellers.

     

    To make a judgement that something is gimei can be problematic. As for some smiths (especially the old ones) there are not that many references. I know that many later time smiths are well documented but as I am fascinated by the old ones, there are many where examples are extremely rare. Now for mumei blades the attributions give a "range" being the educated guess, where are for signatures it is quite rough 50/50 genuine / fake. There is also maybe less known phrase to XX ga aru, that can apply to mei, kiritsuke-mei, kinzōgan etc. I know there are multiple ways of seeing this phrase but personally I see it just as, there is XX. It is bit of a neutral stance in my opinion, and more research could be made in the future on it. I find this very interesting but again it is problematic (and probably headache for dealers looking for profit).

     

    Sometimes with more research the to XX ga aru is switched to fully legitimate. I think the opposite is not really documented if that proves to be fake it would not been updated in NBTHK papers for example.

     

    As I mentioned being extra careful in removing things, here is a heartbreaking example (I have read about other mei removals too but don't have picture documentation of them)

     

    20231204_165137.thumb.jpg.523c4d7a08d49facc3f3906899135540.jpg20231204_165248.thumb.jpg.86697e8cb3c78de0f314b24cf4a3e665.jpg

     

    This tachi by Enju Kunimura has had the signature removed (luckily the piece was preserved). It first passed Jūyō shinsa 22. Then mei was inserted as gaku-mei and it was updated in Jūyō 49 session. Then after that it has passed Tokubetsu Jūyō session 18. Now here is the fact that makes it so bad in my eyes, as I am bit obsessed in finding old work, I have so far found only 8 authenticated signed tachi by Enju Kunimura... Instead of highly precious historical tachi it is now "just a katana" instead, fortunately this has been documented and signature preserved as gaku-mei but in my eyes it is not nearly the same as it would have been preserved as a tachi.

     

    As Mark asked about mei of original smith being added after shortening, there are examples but they are quite rare. Added mei in general is called kiritsuke-mei. There are also examples with to kiritsuke-mei ga aru, meaning the presence of kiritsuke-mei is noted but it's authencity is not yet 100%. For 100% authentic and where smith is noted this JūBi Kanemitsu is one that comes in my mind, it is famous sword Omachi Kanemitsu, it was shortened in 1442. It was owned by Uesugi Family and is now in private collection in Japan.

    20231204_171317.thumb.jpg.9b1ee9257fba8a9d093d9a9f10bf6f84.jpg

     

     

     

    • Like 5
    • Love 3
  19. Congratulations on the sword and thank you for posting it. :thumbsup:

     

    I must confess I was wishing I could have afforded that particular sword, as I felt it was a great deal. :laughing: Back then it was with Hozon paper to den Senjuin (伝千手院) and no sayagaki. So it is super interesting to see Tanobe mentioning Tegai features. I had put it on my files as Kamakura without more specifications, I know the Japanese seller mentioned Late Heian - Early Kamakura but I have found the datings by the dealer being bit optimistic in many cases.

     

    Signed and ubu Yamato tachi from Kamakura period is in my books a super find. Yes the smith is unknown and length is short but you can't have everything. I am happy this went to a good home of fellow NMB member. :)

    • Like 5
  20. I got bit caught up on researching as I also found out very interesting ōdachi by accident (that I didn't know about before) while searching correct info on Shinsoku (神息) blades I have info on. Here are the legitimate Shinsoku blades I am aware of, however none of these are by the ancient smith but more likely followers of the lineage. I am lucky to have collected amazing books that have a lot of info and doing research is so fun. :)

     

    Tachi signed Shinsoku (神息), Jūyō Bijutsuhin, Oita Prefecture Bunkazai, in the collection of Usa Jingū. I believe this one is seen as Early Kamakura period work.

    20231128_190837.thumb.jpg.304881b270142f4bd58ff194e3be31c2.jpg

     

    Tachi signed Shinsoku (神息), the origin of this one is bit of unclear to me but it was discussed by Honma Junji in Tōken Bijutsu 381 in his series. If I understood correctly this could be Aizu Matsudaira provenance but I believe it was said more research is needed. I believe this one is seen as Kamakura period work.

     

    20231128_190847.thumb.jpg.4b7e40ea29ee4fdcb4744f85384e9006.jpg

     

    Tanto signed Shinsoku (神息), Jūyō 14, in the collection of Sano Art Museum. This one is seen as Late Kamakura period work.

     

    20231128_190917.thumb.jpg.d89f8edb1bf9f2ebbbd8dce056f7b95b.jpg

     

    Katana orikaeshi-mei Shinki (神気), Jūyō 52, Nagasaki Prefecture Bunkazai, Matsudaira Provenance, Owned by Shimabara City. I believe this one is seen as Middle Kamakura period work.

     

    20231128_190940.thumb.jpg.738dc56989f045ff1c89c5c3a6161078.jpg

     

    Then there is Shinsoku tachi that was in the collection of Sumiyoshi Taisha, I have only found reference from an old book and I believe it's current location is unknown.

     

    SumiyoshiTaisha.thumb.jpg.c68ee6e43b2abfcbd30d92041cba7383.jpg

     

    • Like 6
    • Love 3
    • Thanks 1
  21. I think the papered tsuba is the one that is on the koshirae and the one in picture with the papers is just an addon.

     

    I understand how community often sees the old papers as worthless, however I am giving them some credit. Regardless, when you have something like mumei attribution to Mizuta it is not a very high praise in my eyes.

    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...