Jussi Ekholm

I think one complicated thing would be deciding on what would be considered as a fair pricing. There are also amazing very high quality items in collections of various European collectors. Also while I understand "rating" dealers, it can sometimes be tricky as they can have invetory outside their regular "rating". Some top dealers will have some cheaper items and some cheaper dealers can have very high quality items. Judging the particular item would be more important. Also as someone obsessed with old items it is also important to know that some items can change ownership quite fast. There are items that have even popped up online at 4-5 different dealers over the years, and might have even had offline sales too. In those cases of course the actual item remains the same but it can be listed by variously "rated" dealers. It is possible to find good deals at 5k, 15k, 50k, 100k+€, however perception might vary. What I personally might consider for example a good deal for 10,000€, someone else might think it would be overpriced and vice versa. People value different things like Erik wrote above. Do you have some specific direction you are looking for future purchases? Building business relations would be awesome and I will highly recommend that if it is possible for you. For someone like myself it is just not possible because I can make purchases very rarely. So possibly waiting for several and several years between purchases, I would not stress about the dealer relationship but would rather focus on specific item regardless on who is the dealer that has it.

Here are the oldest swords with horimono that I have in references, in no particular order as I cannot really say exactly how old they are but I believe all of these date to late Heian period. 三条宗近 - Sanjō Munechika 五条国永 - Gojō Kuninaga 正恒 - Ko-Bizen Masatsune 友成 - Ko-Bizen Tomonari 大原真守 - Ōhara Sanemori However there are multiple chokutō that are much older and feature carvings. I did not include those. There are swords with horimono that were made in Early Kamakura period but they are not as old as the blades from makers above. Then of course I will include 5 oldest dated swords with horimono I am currently aware of. 国綱 - Awataguchi Kunitsuna 1253 (I believe this mei might need more research) [an interesting sidenote it is an ōdachi] 守家 - Hatakeda Moriie 1280 来国俊 - Rai Kunitoshi 1292 了戒 - Ryōkai 1293 国光 - Shintōgo Kunimitsu 1294

Thank you for giving your experiences! The amount of top quality items for sale must be mind boggling. The TJ28 results can be found in here: https://www.touken.or.jp/Portals/0/pdf/news/第28回特別重要刀剣等指定品発表.pdf

Yes it is Paul Chen/Hanwei and I believe from 1999 - signature would be 中国大連陈朝波己卯年 If your friend has pictures of the fittings it will be very easy to identify the model as Hanwei only makes specific models and not custom pieces.

Sometimes even small things like this can lead into great discussion and lots of thinking. Now as ōdachi are my passion, I decided to do this same look into historical ōdachi that I have in my resources. Actually I will do some more digging into them on another matter so this was good preparation dig. For this I will only use Kamakura-Nanbokuchō-Muromachi ōdachi and I was super happy to count that I currently have 86 of these. I will leave out the Edo period ōdachi from this but I was bit surprised to see that I have 43 of them in resources too. 33 of the old ōdachi have normal hi termination 24 of them do not feature hi at all 10 have horimono of various type 3 of them have hi termination well short of yokote (as was the topic of the thread) 2 of them only feature a short hi 14 I do not have a clear picture of kissaki area, some of these have hi but I cannot see hi well enough from tiny picture of a massive sword Even I have to admit that some of the most massive ōdachi were not used in battlefield (however there are actual records of some huge ones been used in battles) but the super massive are few in total number. Still I would think that if there would be a really practical purpose to terminate hi well short of yokote it would have been done more often. As majority of these are indeed battlefield weapons. I do think my choice of words might have been bit incorrect, perhaps I should have maybe used spritual instead of aesthetical. For example I don't think horimono in general have functional purpose for practical use but they most likely have extremely strong spiritual meaning which could have very well been psychologically much more important than some tiny functional factor. I think I will some day try to do this same with a smith or 2 who have been noted of having used this type of termination, and from whom I have lots of signed tachi examples to provide data.

It is tricky piece. Personally I might see it as a tachi. However NBTHK has judged it as a katana and I respect their authority. Also one important thing in their attribution is that the sword is judged as 後代宝寿 (Later Hōju). Now while it might feel like a minor remark it actually has a dramatical effect to the appreciation value and financial value of the sword. I am personally super interested in Hōju school, and their work goes from Kamakura and Nanbokuchō up to Muromachi. When there is mumei attribution 宝寿 (Hōju) is used to cover Kamakura & Nanbokuchō works and 後代宝寿 (Later Hōju) is used for Muromachi period work. If someone would show me that sword my first guess might be Muromachi period tachi without looking at NBTHK judgement paper.

In general it is bit difficult to find an old tachi that would be really desirable from online sources for under 1,000,000 yen. With the current exchange rate it would be c. 6,500$ in Japan. You'll need to add shipping possible taxes etc. on top of that. When a decent tachi in this price bracket pops up at online dealers they will usually sell quite fast. My recommendation would be perhaps try to resist buying urge and try to save up to 1,5-2 million yen, as in that range there are lots of fairly good ones to choose from but of course the price is quite a bit higher. Here are 2 cheap signed tachi that are currently for sale in Japan but I would personally skip both of these. Uda Tomotsugu, 580,000 yen : https://www.toukenko...i&katanaA071223.html Masanobu (Unknown province) 550,000 yen : https://nihontou.jp/...gu/tachi/094/00.html

I admit I am sometimes going way too deep into things. I have been actually quite curious as some things like these hi endings are sometimes quoted as being features of some smiths. Likewise I have read the kissaki repair theory from multiple sources. Now I had some free time today and I did some digging, and indeed this type of hi ending can happen on Nanbokuchō period swords. However the ones stopping a lot short of yokote I would personally see as aesthetic choices rather that allowing extra space for kissaki repair. I also searched every Gō attributed sword I have in my references (as this has been in several sources suggested as feature of his style). I currently have info on 64 swords that have attributed to Gō (I left out 2 tantō from this). Now out of those exactly half, 32 feature some sort of carvings on the blade. 10 of these have the hi ending short of yokote, few of them extremely far and 3 of them just barely. 17 of the swords have in my view pretty standard hi ending, 2 of the swords feature very short hi on lower portion of the blade. 3 of the swords have horimono. So while it does happen in work attributed to Gō I would not put extreme amount of weigh towards it. As I was browising items it did happen on works by many various Nanbokuchō smiths. Also as I am obsessed with ōdachi I did some viewing on them and it did occur on some however I wouldn't put significant importance towards it. I would personally see the hi stopping well short of yokote mainly as aesthetical decision.

Amazing work Andrew, thanks for sharing this with us. I can't even imagine how difficult it must be to polish a sword like this but you made details so nicely visible, I can only imagine how wonderful it looks in hand.

I believe the Japanese term for this is 樋先下がる (Hisaki-sagaru). It could be giving some direction on school and era, however like John said above then the hi would need to be original. Judging that for me would be very difficult especially on ō-suriage swords. Here is an example on a sword that I have and I am almost certain the hi is added on later.

1. Theme - I will keep my dream theme a secret for now as unfortunately I do not yet own an item that would be of that theme. My next purchase should be of that theme, when that will be I cannot yet say... After 20+ years of collecting I own only 3 swords and each of them are supportive of that theme I have in mind. 2. Aim - It would of course be amazing to have vast collecting of various items of that dream theme. However given the time it takes for me to get an item it won't be happening. Realistic aim would be just getting items that I enjoy. 3. Border - No borders. Only requirement for me would be that I like the item. 4. Behaviour - Just watching while doing my research. I admit this is the most tedious part for me as it would be fun to actually buy something. I keep scouting the items every week and I will try my best resist the urge to do sword dealing or trying flipping items for profit, as I don't want to go down that road. 5. Purpose - Research. I am very happy I enjoy research as I cannot collect at the level or in the style I would like. I feel my purpose is just doing my research and I am enjoying doing that. 6. Stage - Evolving, I've had various ideas for collecting before and they've been evolving into my current vision.

Seems like they added it to their website and asking price is 6,000,000 yen. https://eirakudo.shop/233657 I think for many the Hon'ami sayagaki (if genuine) might be much more important than NBTHK papers. I do have lots and lots of reference sayagaki by Nisshū. Unfortunately I am complete novice when it comes to Hon'ami sayagaki so I cannot judge their authencity. To me this is an interesting item but for me the price makes this unobtainable. And the problem is that for that amount of money there would be so many other items I might seek if I would ever end up having that amount to spend for a sword.

Like Michael above I would feel this would be quite plausible as being a genuine work by Enju Kuniyoshi. Unfortunately the TJ13 Orikaeshi-mei example that Michael posted above is the only actual picture of signature by this smith that I have. Here are the 3 tachi signatures that I mentioned above. Kasuga Taisha Ise Jingū Jūyō 15

Like in the title I am looking for Tōken Bijutsu (刀剣美術 ) issues 167 & 170. These are issues December 1970 and March 1971. Same thing as last time about a year ago when I was looking a single magazine, I am willing to pay 50€ per magazine, or I can do a trade 1 to 20 NBTHK magazines if someone else is collecting them. Last time I got multiple offers and in the end ended up trading & selling around 60-70 magazines and I got the 1 I was chasing. I just checked my double magazines and I do have 129 issues ranging from 100 to 365. Keeping my thumbs up on nailing these 2 magazines as then I would have spectacular continuous set of NBTHK magazines.

Good catch on the torokusho Michael I just looked at the one big picture. Maybe something in NBTHK photography has made the mei removal stand out a lot in the picture on the papers, as I thought it to be more recent. I do think the mei has been removed vs. worn down by age. I admit Hon'ami attributions are way above my level, and I cannot judge their authencity. Still I think it should be a very good sword as NBTHK judged it as Ayanokōji Sadatoshi, so even big early names are something that might have been originally on the nakago. However I cannot figure out the differences on these high level smiths. I think personally the mei removal would drive me mad if I would somehow manage to end up with a sword like this. As it has been judged as very high level Yamashiro smith, I would think about the possible signatures that were on it. Very interesting item none the less. Lots of speculating on my part but it is still part of the fun. I am happy I am not shopping for anything as I would be bit tempted with something like this, yet I don't understand the sword as much as I would want.

Also as it is signed item NBTHK is stating they judge it as Seki Kanemasu (兼倍). So it is authentic signed wakizashi by very little known late Muromachi smith.

While completely out of my level and out of reach here is bit additional info on the 2 above items. They both passed Tokubetsu Jūyō 28 shinsa and were sent in by same person. Both swords were re-evaluated at Jūyō 49 with added on Kunzan kinzōgan. I believe at Jūyō 49 there were 4 previous Jūyō that all had Kunzan kinzōgan addons (since their original Jūyō pass) that were sent in by same family (however different than submitter at TJ28). The Yukimitsu originally passed Jūyō 8 as mumei Yukimitsu and the Norishige was originally passed Jūyō 24 as mumei Norishige. These are top tier items for top tier collectors. However I think personally I would rather have 10 good items compared to 1 top item. It is a choice of preference and unfortunately I probably will never achieve either one. Apart from those 2 items there are lots of items in the catalog that I find much more appealing to my own taste. There will be wonderful items at DTI, happy for everyone who will get a chance to visit there.

It is very interesting item, thanks for posting it Gerry. Unfortunately I have no clue about the price it will reach but as it is Yahoo auction by Eirakudō I am pretty sure they pull it off and don't sell it through Yahoo JP. One note about the sword, that is my speculation is that I believe the mei that it had was removed. At least it looks like that when looking at NBTHK paper. There is a Hon'ami sayagaki for Munechika (I think dated 1982 [Shōwa 57]) and I think it may have originally been signed Munechika. I would think the signature would have been thought to be gimei and it was possibly removed to achieve NBTHK papers. Now if this has happened like that I am very sad. I would rather have the tachi with gimei signature and no appraisal papers, than mei removed and with NBTHK attribution papers. Of course the second option is financially much more desirable but now the sword is forever altered.

Sorry for the bit cryptic message but the discussion got the idea I was after, that sword would either be greatly shortened or original length. Now this following is just purely speculating from measurements and pictures alone and perhaps far from truth. I personally would think the sword being greatly shortened. As the sword has massive motohaba measurement and fairly large sakihaba measurement, I would think it would have been sent to shinsa as potential Nanbokuchō blade. It is my personal guess that several wide mumei swords that get attributed to various Takada smiths might have been sent in with hopes of them passing as Nanbokuchō work. That is just my own speculation with no facts to back that up. I like the item regardless of the attribution and NBTHK panel sure knows lot more than me. The unfortunate thing financially is that there is quite a large price difference between mumei late Muromachi sword and mumei Nanbokuchō sword is similar condition and comparable level of attribution. I see it as nice and wide blade that I think would have been 80+cm in original length. Hamon looks wild and interesting on this one. As there is not too much curvature in general I think it would have been similarily curved originally. Of course I could be completely wrong in this line of thought if the sword would be in original size currently.

Nothing wrong with Bungo Takada at all. If your sword also has been attributed to a specific smith then it is most likely an interesting one. One thing you can think about is, where is the original hole on the tang?

NBTHK has certain standards that they have. Of course with 75,000+ Tokubetsu Hozon swords there might be some that are outliers. In general if you have a mumei sword with Tokubetsu Hozon it would be early Muromachi at latest. Fuyuhiro being mostly late Muromachi period school in general attributions, then the mumei items with that attribution will mostly stop at Hozon. There are 10 Jūyō swords by Fuyuhiro but they are all signed.

Jake has had multiple very nice swords for sale. In the view of NBTHK as they judge it as mumei Fuyuhiro then Hozon is as far as it will advance in their ranking. The item looked nice as far as I remember it.

NBTHK just uses two categories in results. Usually in the Jūyō books, Book 1 is Kotō and Book 2 is all other stuff, swords generalized as Shintō followed by koshirae & fittings. There are currently some items that are made in 1900´s that have passed Jūyō evaluation. Gassan Sadakazu (貞一) has 3 blades 1906, 1906 and 1908. There is an uchigatana koshirae that has a tsuba by Gotō Mitsumasa dated 1905, meaning the package as such cannot be older than that. There is also a daishō tsuba by Hashimoto Isshi dated 1901. I believe only criteria of NBTHK is that they don't judge work of living smiths. I suspect some Tokubetsu Hozon items by quite modern smiths have been sent in for Jūyō but that is purely my speculation. I admit I have spent way too many hours with Jūyō results and some cases I still don't understand why they pass Jūyō. Just seeing the item & description in book does not give total picture, however in Japan I have seen several Jūyō that were not that special to be honest. I have never sent an item to NBTHK and unfortunately I think I might not send even in the future. As HB described above sending a sword internationally seems to be getting extremely stressful lately. Even though I have addiction in sword info and NBTHK Jūyō books are amazing resources, in general I am not a fan of multiple levels of evaluation papers in separate sessions. Of course that is NBTHK proven to work style and it brings money in. I would just personally wish it would be a single session where the sword would be evaluated and given the paper level at the same time. I believe the shinsa staff will remember many items that have been sent in multiple times. Of course that information is not really open to public how many times item X has been sent in etc. As items need to currently be Tokubetsu Hozon for Jūyō submission it would be extremely easy for them to make a file with the Tokubetsu Hozon numbers of the items that have been sent in, so it would be even super fast to check up as I believe they operate with very small time window for each shinsa.

Thanks for posting this Erik I hadn't seen this item before. Other above me will know lot more than me about fine details. Unfortunately for me the blade is very uninspiring in size & shape, as well as in condition. I think the only reason for the price is that it has the den Norishige attribution. Give it something like Kodai Hōju or generic Uda (Muromachi attributions), and it would be 3,000-4,000$. I know financially this would be an opportunity for many to get a Norishige attributed blade, as they tend to go for very high prices as mentioned above. However I would personally aim for better quality & condition item for much lesser smith for that amount of money, as I would see it as much more enjoyable option.

Large sized Kuniyoshi (国吉) signature would indeed be pointing towards Enju Kuniyoshi. The signature placement is also good sign in my books. It seems to be relatively short one if the listings 68,6 cm is correct. So far I have only found 11 signed tachi by Enju Kuniyoshi and only 3 of them are ubu. 79,1 cm one of Kasuga Taisha 78,0 cm one that passed Jūyō 15 76,1 cm one of Ise Jingū Will be interesting to see more of the sword, and even if some big issues arise it would still be very important reference item if genuine.