Kawa

Absolutely Jean, I agree. to "see" I think one must dedicate the most valuable currency of all, and that is time. It is definitely not necessary to own swords in order to gain an internal library.

Well this is going south pretty fast, lol. I cannot change someones opinion at all, I am not going to try. If you feel offended or upset at the thought of how I make money or how much people spend on items they collect then you are going to angry with soooo many people. I do not think (from what I gather) that Brian takes offence to my mentioning the Aizu, he has mentioned it himself many years ago and so it is as the title says an open discussion, I am only replying with the same pattern I would should Brian and I be sat at a round table face to face, I tend to be direct. I do not think opening up about what one has in their collection is a bad thing as we are here to discuss swords and people regularly reveal their collections...what is wrong with that? But no sir, no offence or criticism as I did not read as such. I just cannot comment right, I have no idea about your situation as you have no idea about mine. I just think that if you were to sell a few swords, gifts or not, then a new memory could be made, I for one would be very happy if the sale of a sword you were gifted would lead to an upgrade, why not?

Agreed, I think this was a nice attempt at a nouveau take on the evolution of the sword. I liked that the mention there is still solidarity between the legends and the reality of the sword, keeps it interesting

Brian, I really appreciate the situation there. I am not saying everyone is able or should prioritize a collection of Nihonto over the sensible things in life. I cannot control that situation and I prefer if I am not criticized for having my point of view from my situation. We have never met so I cannot advise you on what to do because I do not know where you stand exactly and for me to comment there would be silly. I do find it hurtful that you say you do not have a single good sword, I seem to remembers sending you a papered Aizu to show my appreciation for everything you do for the NMB....where is it? LOL, well it was a gift so you can do with it as you like. I would sell the Aizu and everything else you have and then see where you stand? Possible?

I have done the same through Paul Martin and asked him to help me with a Gassan Sadatoshi https://yumecollection.com/collection/69 The process was perfect and Paul is excellent. He will take care of everything, I also suggest getting the sword certified which he can do for you through the NBSK. I am also getting traditional Koshirae done for the sword and will post here when finished, but these take time. Congratulations on your choice with Paul Martin, safe as it goes.

That is a valid point but as I said, to judge anything in terms of its quality you must have experienced great swords in hand and I agree that is difficult but not impossible if one tries and reaches out to the members who own great collections to ask for education. The problem is I could place a great sword here and the comments will come from all members experienced and inexperienced alike and in most cases it is a taxing exercise trying to explain quality. Condition is different, a suriage Muromachi sword may have a Nagasa that is in good condition but the suriage has now affected its relevant quality, does this make sense Alex? I am trying to explain the various conduits that make an art piece sit at the level it is supposed to in terms of the scales set down by experts in Japan. So mass production is an effect on condition rather than the quality of the item as a whole, quality is instinctive, when you see a sword of quality it is relevant only to your experience as a collector where as condition can be judged by even the beginner in many aspects because that depends on their education rather than experience. One of the best pieces of advice I have ever been given by a top art critic in the UK was, "Collect the dealer first, then make a collection" The advice came about after a trip to Japan where I met up with Darcy Brockbank. Darcy had for many years been shouting (in a kind way as he knows how) about how I should be collecting in a different way and that my pursuit of a collection from Heian to modern day needed refinement. To prove hos point he showed me swords that I had never though possible in the world of collecting, items that I could compare to museum grade. It was a shock, I had to quickly calculate in my mind how many items I had that now had no place in the collection, not because of their condition (I pay what a dealer asks, I do not ask for discounts), but because the path was not linear to my goal and needed refinement in quality rather than quantity. Raymond Singer is a good dealer to collect and keep in our list. Therefore the Uda is (for an Uda) a good sword in quality but lacks the merits of condition in size attributes and zaimei (this is acceptable given its age and period in hostory that the shortening happened). Ergo the price you paid was I am sure in line with the item you have received from Raymond. I also have a Juyo Ko-Uda with sayagaki from Tanobe Sensei who pins it to Go Yoshihiro and the Juyo paper is from session 13 attributing it to Ko-Uda, I love these swords, so much activity to admire. I do not think yours is anything to do with Yamato Shizu and nor should you wish that either. An 80cm Nagasa Ko-Uda with mei and in Ubu condition at Juyo would run the price segment of closer to 75K USD depending on the condition (which attributes to its overall quality), did you pay 75K for your item? When we speak in general terms of dates the you may take the Google reference, but we are speaking of swords and unfortunately as much as we want to re-write the standards by Japanese experts there is a very clearly defined date of sword manufacture for each period, in fact we could break the entire spectrum up into even more concise periods but that will take me all night and I am not going to do it. There are swords such as in the 1400 Nobukuni or Mino that still resemble their forefathers Sugata but you will see changes in the Nakago for sure leaning more to one handed use, again, stop looking at the Nagasa only and start looking at the entire sword. Early swords that are Mumei and Ubu are fine, but if they were Ubu and Zaimei the value is automatically higher. It is one of the reasons we see that the majority of Yamoto blades from the Kamakura that are Tokubetsu Juyo have a mei and Bizen Tokubetsu Juyo can be mumei and pass with flying colors, it is about significance in this case, where do the judges place their significance? What about the condition perhaps that plays a role eh, the Yamato swords are not considered to be as well made as Bizen or Yamashiro or indeed Soshu at the time of Kamakura. The founding fathers of Soshu stem from Yamashiro and Bizen and so this holds a greater significance in the history of Nihonto. Buying what you can afford is also relative, if you can afford a 1000 dollar sword this month then I am sure you can up that budget in 6 months, but it is in the waiting, I understand the pain in waiting. Ken, on your post I think it deals more with the full prohibiting of swords being carried. I am more inclined to assume that the change in fighting styles led to the shortening of well known blades, but I could be wrong and leave that one open to discussion.

I think the use of Uchiko is as said, very outdated. What we were taught when I was young and able to do Iaido and Tameshigiri was that Uchiko should only be used on your Shinsakuto after practice to make sure it does not rust and keep the sword oiled. No one was ever, ever advised to use Uchiko on their Nihonto (antique swords). I have not seen any dealer or collector in Japan using Uchiko on an antique sword that was in pristine condition and polished. It is a tool for an age where microfiber was not available and as technology advances so should we. I agree that getting the older minds to change is a frivolous exercise and anyway, the important aspect is making sure younger and new collectors do not go that way and allow the older mindset and habits to go the way of the dinosaur. No one here using Uchiko does it correctly, I have seen it being used in demonstration but even then if you see the sword used in those demos they are not polished blades and they are definitely not Koto masterpieces. Tradition is one thing but interpreting that as law is incorrect when tech is available to give our swords longer lives.

Any better pictures? Soshu seems interesting, the Kissaki seems off for that, pics please?

At first glance the shape looked like sue-Bizen but the Nakago looks reshaped and extended for that period, the Mekugi ana is also placed in the wrong area for sue Bizen (pictures could be better). Muromachi maybe?

Yes it is me, and I make no apology for what happened. The practice of posting bad items for sale here and allowing them to be bought is a separate issue and if action needs to be taken, please take it. However, I still believe that this is a place where people come for information and it should be given in the correct way without collusion and definitely not behind closed doors through messages, etc. I am not trying to ruin a community, just call out the bad apples who are profiting from your community. There should be a seperate discussion on if I should be allowed on here, start a poll and vote me in or off?

Mumei and Suriage blades – When it is OK and when it is not OK The following post is just my own opinion and open for discussion. If it offends anyone, you are free not to read it 😊 In the Heian period when sword smiths of Japan began making the single edged, curved blade, we now associate with the Samurai they produced swords of massive Sugata, Ko-Bizen Tomonari for example has Ubu Tachi (signed) with lengths of over 95 cm Nagasa. The style of fighting with these Tachi was most likely on horseback as cavalry warriors who also carried Tanto for close quarters combat, of course their arsenal comprised of the bow, etc, but we are discussing swords here primarily. Swords were even greater in the Nanbokucho with evidence that shows swords that are over 110 cm in Nagasa from the Soden-Bizen and Aoe schools. As we all know when the Muromachi wars began swords started to fall in length as we approach the Momoyama period because the style of combat began to change. Samurai on foot were the norm and the introduction of firearms meant that the tactics of combat would call for stealth and in-fighting within castle perimeters meant the shorter Uchigatana was the go to sword length of between 62 and 70 cm Nagasa. This meant that many of the magnificent longer swords from the Heian to Nanbokucho were shortened to the average lengths of use for the time and thus signatures were either lost or in some cases had the old signatures reattached or inlaid into the shortened Nakago, but, in these cases it is important to be very sure of the signature and the sword in question as this method of re-attaching a signature was used to fake works from great masters (another discussion all together). This new sword length was ideal for faster combat styles and those that have studied Iaido in today's martial way understand the significance. The Momoyama saw the Samurai wearing the Katana and Wakizashi, 2 swords which had their own style founded by Musashi Miyamoto, however the immediate application of the long and short sword is most likely one for outdoor encounters and one that was acceptable for indoor use should it be needed. A Samurai should still be identified as a noble warrior even if they needed to relinquish their long sword before entering another nobleman’s abode. Insert: Excerpt from pages 68 and 69 from “The Japanese Sword a Comprehensive Guide” by Sato Kanzan (Translated by Joe Earle) “The most important development in the late sixteenth century and early seventeenth century was the almost total abandonment of the tachi and the adoption of the custom of wearing a pair of long and short Uchigatana together. Such a pair is called DaiSho (literally, “big-little”). We may never know exactly when the new style appeared but in the Oyama Shrine, Kanazawa city, there is such a DaiSho once used by the powerful warlord Maeda Toshiie (1538-99 pl 1, 54-55), with scabbards decorated in red and gold sprinkled lacquer (makie) which can be attributed to the Tensho era (1573-92), as can the DaiSho with red-lacquer scabbards wrapped in gold foil given to another warlord, Mizoguchi Hidekatsu (1538-1600), by Toyotomi Hideyoshi (pl. 74), indicating that the custom of wearing two swords first became popular in the late sixteenth century. But these early DaiSho mounts differ from their successors in that they did not always have the characteristic metal fittings, in particular the matching large and small Tsuba, and many of the blades used in them were old Tachi which had been drastically shortened. This was common practice with Tachi of the Kamakura and still more of the Nanbokucho period, and blades formed in this way had a very shallow curve especially suitable for use by soldiers on foot.” From here on there were standardized sizes for swords and experimentation began in great numbers. But the point of note is that there was a good reason to shorten swords and a period in time when this was done for the style of combat. The low sori on the shortened swords would go on to form the blue print for the Kanbun based blades where drawing to strike and opponent required a sword perfected to that style of fighting and was achieved around the 1660’s (perfected). So when is Mumei OK? Heian to the Nanbokucho blades that have been shortened are acceptable and, in many cases, accepted so if they present as Mumei that is a condition we are used to. Swords from this period are quite simple to classify (in hand) to a certain style of manufacture according to the Gokaden scale. Pinning them to a school and smith is a whole other skill and no one here is well versed in that. You need to see swords to get to that level, the best Kantei experts such as Paul Martin, Markus Sesko, Darcy Brockbank, Ted Tenold are not on here anymore, that is a loss we have to endure. In the Muromachi onward swords should be Ubu and Signed when collected (if dated it is a great plus). The evaluations that are done by collectors mentally revolve around these changes in Japanese history so there is no real reason to look at a Mumei Shinto or Shin Shinto sword and attempt to learn something from that sword. Due to the amount of experimentation the most you could hope to learn is if the condition is good or not good and if it is from the Momoyama onwards then most swords that did not encounter too much combat are in good shape. You will not narrow down school or smith and you will not have any scholarly information thrust into your internal library. That is also the reason to be very suspect of Momoyama swords onward that are Suriage as there is no good reason for that either. Standardization dictated the lengths and so if we see Suriage swords from the Momoyama onward it is not an attribute of historical significance, it was done for a reason no one can comprehend, we can only speculate and as soon as speculation enters the frame of collecting, walk away. When is Suriage ok? Heian to Nanbokucho – OK Muromachi onward – Not OK For those of you that own Suriage Muromachi or Suriage and Mumei Muromachi onward, or Mumei Muromachi onward swords, who do not agree with my post, please go to the rack, raise up your swords and feel the comfort you must to ignore good advice. I am no longer giving sound advice for you, you have made your minds up. My only hope is that new collectors do not fall prey to those same mistakes.

Ah Jean seriously man, there is a reason you shouldn't have to go private in these circumstances and a reason the NMB is losing so many good voices. Get real please

Correct Adam, and if one sees one amazing high quality sword, they will go home and have a stiff drink to drown the sorrows of the 20 bad ones, even if they do not admit it.

Well if the mods made certain fields mandatory (esp measurements in writing and translations on papers) this would be a lot more honest

Well Jp You cover a lot of ground in your statement. However, imagine this scenario: 1) You still keep your first purchase, the one that ignited your passion 2) You learn and learn (and at the same time you save and save) remember I say 13 years 3) after you have saved you buy something even better in provenance, quality and condition .... Is this scenario incorrect to propose? Everything in my life is an investment, but remember the definition of investment to you is different to the definition of investment to me, so we can share a common ground in that we are different

I have been quite vocal on the NMB about certain practices I see that goes against the spirit of education that these types of forums and societies should be about when it comes to the collection of Nihonto and Tosogu. I get called names and berated for being a loudmouth anarchist so let me try an approach that perhaps goes above the intellect of most beginners and will no doubt ruffle the feathers of dubious sellers of which there are some online. A note on collecting swords: I began collecting swords some 20 years ago, in that time I had very little information on what a good Nihonto was and as a University student definitely did not have the budget to buy what I buy today. So, the inevitable happened, I went into martial arts, Kendo and Iaido which eventually led me to buy Chinese made Paul Chen swords and later Bugei versions of the same for Tameshigiri. I thought “What a great sword” later I was introduced to a fellow called Don Bayney who explained the difference between Nihonto and China made swords used for Tameshigiri. He showed me a traditionally forged Gendai blade and I immediately saw a difference in the steel, I was hooked. I couldn’t afford that sword so the next time I went around to his small store he had a Mantetsu waiting, rusted and in terrible shape he lauded its historical significance (even mentioned the railway) and then sold it to me, caked in rust for 250 British pounds. I was over the moon. Fast forward to today and I can say that the fact it took me 13 odd years to get woke about what a good Nihonto is, is a crime on the community and the only reason I am still into swords after being burned to a crisp for 13 years prior is because I know if you keep looking you will see and have the chance to buy great swords one day. It may only be one but if you keep at it you will get the one someday. To date the most I have shelled out on a Nihonto has been for my Fukuoka Ichimonji TJuyo which was considerably more than the Mantetsu all that time ago, Incidentally, I held onto the Mantetsu, eventually got it polished, found the right fittings for it, had it remounted and sold for 4500 USD (I should have put 250 GBP in Amazon quite frankly, but you know, hindsight). In his article Collecting nihontō – what, how and who? The author Guido Schiller explains: “The collector who boasts "I don't know anything about nihontō; I just buy what I like" makes a statement that is not very profound. Of course he buys what he likes. If he doesn't buy what he likes, what does he buy? If he doesn't buy what he likes, he had better not collect. The collector who doesn't know anything about nihontō will benefit by learning.” The first step to collecting must and always will be learning. How do we learn if not by observing the mistakes of others and trying our best to ask the right questions in order not to make cock-ups. Learn, buy books and speak to those that have experience in order to learn so that you can build an internal library of what you envisage your collecting journey to be. The direction may change over time but that is OK, as long as the direction is onward and upward. Collect as an investment, it is a rule I have always lived by and this rule teaches one to respect the hard decision. The hard decision is when someone who knows more than you tells you that you just bought a turd and no matter how much gold you try to dip it in, it is going to be at its core a turd. When an investment is going south and the analyst is telling you there is no means to recovery because of these fundamental facts you know you can either hang on for the ride down or you can cut the loss and put the money into something better later (or sooner) and the market always exists it just depends where you play in this market. Collecting as an investment also shows you respect yourself and your money. Even though I burn bridges I can acknowledge that on the NMB I have met great mentors and some real crooks to boot. “Often dealers, and some collectors, too, advise neophytes in maxim form: "buy your experience". It's a variant of "learn by your mistakes". They mean by this that the toll for mistakes exacted by the purse makes the most unforgettable lesson of all. This advice is tinged with cynicism. It is true, of course, that experience is a great teacher and we must all learn from her, but there is no wisdom in buying first and discovering the mistake second. As the Chinese sages reasoned, the experience by which one learns need not be one's own. One can learn from the experiences of others and save oneself costly errors. The capsule advice of the numismatists "buy the book before the coin" is much sounder advice. The coin book distinguishes the genuine from the counterfeit and gives dates, identification marks, and values. The coin collector avoids mistakes at the small cost of the book and the time to study its pages. In the same way the cost of a good library on nihontō is in most cases much less than that of the purchase of one nihontō that was priced for fine quality, but was actually inferior.” Guido Schiller NB: The cost of a good library will set you back up to 25K USD so take the direction in pace. What is possible is buying a good book or 2 every month. There have been members on the board that state one should research before buying an item. Well research, knowledge is like financing, it is relative. The reason people come to the NMB is to be educated so if the sellers are selling one thing and teaching another well, that 13 year degree I have received kind of a mute decade to be honest. Research is important but more important is being taught how to research (will do something on that later) There are elements to evaluating a good sword and these rules should be followed with conviction: - is the Sugata right? - Look at the Jigane and the condition of the steel - Observe the Hamon - Look at the condition of the Nakago On the Sugata the sword is the sum of all, all, its parts and that includes the Nakago and the Mei should it have one. Never say that the Nakago of a sword is not important, it is the fundamental area that rests in the hands of any warrior and their mark is left on it for generations. When it comes to value and should you be paying X or Y for said sword that has its own scale. For example to make the field level we should look at what makes an item of antiquity valuable: https://www.sothebys.com/en/series/the-value-of-art Do not take my word for it, above are detailed rationale from the industry experts. In my next post I would like to talk about Suriage swords and then about Mumei swords. I hope I have not ruffled too many feathers.

Paul is the greatest, where would we be without such help, I shudder to think. We should do our best to continue to support him especially during this difficult time of COVID. He is working on some great projects so I really cannot wait to see them, Gotoba based subject matter that we should support and encourage. We get so few English language based documentaries on sword history that anything that detailed from someone of such repute is a treasure.

Looking at the pictures of your sword Matt it is in good shape and the steel looks good. There is (only from what I see in the pictures) a good amount of Niku, all in all a nice sword. The Aoi one is THozon but that is part an parcel of a lot of criteria that warrants the THozon such as its age and attribution to Katayama Ichi, which I feel is an important school, just not the most important in the Ichimonji range. The Juyo panel is doing interesting moves these days with outlying schools passing where before it was mainly reserved for the big names. I have even seen a Mumei Enju that has passed TJuyo and that surprised me. I think quality is everything in this case and I would not place the quality of Aoi's K-Ichi as a high one (My pictures show the boxes outlining the flaws but it is very blurry when I upload it - bug maybe?) In the context of Juyo, there are meh Juyo and there are outstanding Juyo so within the range of quality you can see vast differences from a Juyo Katayama Ichimonji that has TJuyo potential and a Juyo Katayama Ichimonji that will never go TJuyo. Congratulations to Matt on the pass, it was one of the toughest sessions.

Yoshikage is one of the greats, love that smith too. I have no idea where you found it, Soden-Bizen are getting impossible to find now a days, well done Rob San!

One of the dealers of great repute and honor is Iida. He has a Juyo Katayama (Naginata Naoshi Waki) https://iidakoendo.com/7462/ The prices are on the high side but he is honest and the quality is there. Please observe. If you save, you could own something that has no doubts and no regrets. The greatest and most impressive Naginata Naoshi Katayama Ichi I have had the honor of seeing is from Darcy Brockbank and that was 80cm plus Nagasa. If you are ready to pay at the 20K mark why not wait it out till you can play at 40K?

Hi John This is a great question and I have asked it myself many years ago. Jussi is the best source for this but let me give it a crack. Many define the O-Kissaki as the shape that appeared in the Nanbokucho period however, there is evidence that some (very few) schools made extended kissaki before that time. The shapes of swords that came after the Mongol invasions attributed to the new shape of swords but even at the time of the early Kamakura some sword schools were experimenting with new styles. To define O-Kissaki I wish to note that I will omit the converted Naginata Naoshi blades, indeed some Naginata that were converted to larger Kissaki are wonderful and imposing in Sugata but they do not count. I will focus on swords with Kissaki that extend 4 cm and above with specific width over 2.5 cm in width. There will be Aoe blades that are longer in Kissaki but more slender (these are more extended Chu-Kissaki), I am open to the other members rebuttal on these measures. The Ideal O-Kissaki is over 3 cm in width and over 4 cm in length not exceeding 7.5 cm, in my opinion (Sadamune, Chogi, Motoshige, etc) There is evidence of Ko-Hoki (later Heian Ko-Hoki) making blades with extended Kissaki, this is a nice reference since we know that Masamune and Norishige used Ko-Hoki as a reference to their own eventual styles of Sugata, although the most beautiful Masamune (all Mumei so I leave that for another discussion) do not have overly extended Kissaki, they are just right so to say. Continuing into early Kamakura and there are very few examples from Ichimonji and Yamato that show extended kissaki but these may also be reshaped blades, hard to tell. Moving into the Mid-Kamakura we get Miike swords(love Miike myself), robust and powerful with intimidating shape that show the features of extended kissaki (still before the Mongol invasions of 1274 and 1281). But then we move to the golden age of sword constructs where almost every school begins to show O-Kissaki construction. Out of anticipation of the returning Mongol invasions no doubt, but impressive Sugata with massive Kissaki. Ichimonji (later schools), Mihara, Sairen in Chikuzen, and finally leading into the Soshu schools that really perfected the O-Kissaki and lent their skill to Soden Bizen. In my opinion the most magnificent O-Kissaki stem from Sadamune (Soshu) and then, (Soden-Bizen) Chogi, Kanemitsu, etc during the Nanbokucho. Were they preparing for another Mongol invasion, had the Japanese learnt more about armour from their enemies and then incorporated the best aspects into their construction at the time so the swords needed to answer that development? I am sure the armour groups here can answer that. What does become clear is that the next time we see the beauty of O-Kissaki after the Nanbokucho is during the Shin-Shinto period and that should be of note as to the use of such blades where Kiyomaro made outstanding Sugata that broke the status quo. In addition to O-Kissaki I think take into account the Kasane and Motohaba / Sakihaba as that tells you a lot about the robustness of the sword, for example, if you see Chogi (or Miike for that matter) it is not only about the O-Kissaki but the blade itself is wide and thick. Aoe has extended Chu-Kissaki that some mistake for O-Kissaki but this school is clear in its intention, some (few) late Nanbokucho follow the trends of Soden-Bizen and earlier blades are Chu-Kissaki and then extended Chu-kissaki and earlier ones will be Ko-kissaki. Conclusion, if you wan the best Koto O-Kissaki look at Soden-Bizen blades.

As always, if there is someone dying to add a Katayama Ichi to their collection then ok, but for this price i think save, save, save and maybe go for something better.

Hi Rob I know your repute and level of study from observation on the NMB. But, i will bite. No i do not think polish is a way to "smooth" out anything on a sword. I also have a lot of experience with Aoi, as they may have a different variation from the NBTHK i tend to go with the attribution in paper, it is recent and well founded. The main call here is quality and from my standpoint, the quality is very bad.

Hi Rob This is from structured data that is available from blogs like Darcyband Jussi but also from my experience. Almost all my Bizen Juyo are above the 70 cm. There are definitely exceptions to the rule, but I did state for the Katayama Katana (this does not include Naginata Naoshi conversions to Katana or Waki from this school) that 70 cm is a good place to be. All said, condition is everything at that level of judgment and I feel this one is a bit bad.