Freddie

I wonder if that thread is not searchable or the search tool needs to be adjusted. I searched after the name before I posed. I like it, as a way to get the general population more interested in the subject and the fact that they have a lot of SME.

Netflix have just released a new documentary called Age of the samurai. Participants are several experts and historians. Age of Samurai: Battle For Japan is a six-part Netflix docuseries that deploys reenactments and historian interviews to tell the story of the country’s bloody 16th century, a time of familial power struggles and epic battles between provincial warlords. https://m.imdb.com/title/tt10551256/

Wow, I Have read the first two parts. He has real put some time and effort to this blog series.

True that...

Valric, I agree with you to 100%, both in the text you quote on and your contribution. I wish I hade the capability to express my self like you.. I humbly bow :-)

Off course Brian is correct, he simply describes the fact that the probability to be more precise in an analysis/guess increases with knowledge and experience. I agree to 100%. “with study and training kantei is nearly a science.” Again, I agree to 100% but even scientists (e.g. archaeologists) guess when they are not sure. Sure, they can do a much better guessing than we ordinary people, but still, they guess. The word guess is not a negative word if that is what somebody thinks. Some of you maybe see that word as disrespectful in this context. But it’s not. Def. To commit oneself to an opinion about something without having sufficient evidence to support the opinion fully: for example, to guess a person's weight. A fitness coach or doctor would probably be better in guessing someone’s weight due to their knowledge and experience in seeing and examining many different bodies. But they wouldn’t be able guess the exact weight. Some scientists dedicates their whole life’s to a specific area, they still guess when they are not 100% sure. Sorry, to break it to you, that is no difference from judging blades. And without a signature on the tang the guessing/assessment is harder and the blade is more difficult to verify. So hard that (in my simple opinion) it should not count for an official statement saying that a sword was produced by a specific smith (Attributed yes). Question for you, Is your view that two identical blades would be judged with the same result even if only one of them had a genuine signature?

Thanks for sharing your experience! The fact that you can get different reviews at different Shinsa tells us how hard it really is to do that analysis, hence my original question. So I totally agree with you, you get more insight and information the more people you show a specific object to, it is all about learning. And all this information (especially if you can get your sensie to complement it. ) adds to the real value for you as the owner (not monetary).

1.Could not have said it better my friend! 2.It depends on how you guys in this forum define collector. I’m fascinated my the culture and the craftsmanship and I have one sword that I love. But the question is really interesting by the way, what is a collector? I guess one criteria is that you have to own at least two swords to even call it a collection, so I guess I’m not a collector. :-) My blade only cost 1200$, is there a monetary limit to call it a collectible? I would say no to that. Is it the manufacturing process that stipulate if it is a collectible or not? This one is harder, but for me it is important that sword is made of tamahagane and produced by traditional ways. How does age affect the collectible? For me it’s crucial. I only look for blades that are older then mid Edo. Others may collect WW2 blades. I have only been engaged in Nihonto for 6-7 month, is there a knowledge level one needs to reach to be considered a collector? I would say no to that. Boy, you got me going there with your seemingly simple question.

Of course there is no exact answer to my question, it’s up to each and every person to decide your position on this question. For me that are new to this world and that see things a little more black and white I’ll stick blades that only have an authentic signature or is so beautiful that I can’t resist to buy it. I don’t see any point of arguing about this and here by close this thread... sorry for questioning the establishment.

I would say that paintings can be attributed to a painter but not sure. Also, I’m quite sure that the concept of letting students and relatives produce paintings for Caravaggio was not as common (even if there are some examples) as it is among ancient swords smiths.

Ohh, I didn’t know that this was such a sensitive question. And I don’t questioning the fact that you can identify a smith through their work, I’m questioning that you can be so sure about a 300 year old sword without a signature that you in fact can put your stamp on a paper and say, it is definitely that smith. If we use the art of painting as a reference you would all most (with a very few exception) never state that a painting is made by for example Picasso if you can’t find a signature. You can say that it looks like a Picasso and that it probably is a Picasso but you would rarely be able to get a Authentication document stating that is truly a Picasso. Note, Aldo, Picassons work is far from 300 years old. If you could find like pictures or similar that supports the case then that is another thing surely. But the these evidence should be attached to the object. To connect a sword to specific line of smiths, style, a time era or/and a specific school, that I have no problem to accept, but to pinpoint a 300 years old sword to specific smith I have a little bit harder to accept, especially when there are so many forgeries, sons and students crafting in the name of other smiths. I guess I’ll learn the answer to my question only by studying and learning more, I guess I’m to ignorant today. And as you so clearly pointed out, I need to read up on this more. A couple of books have not turned me into anything else but a more dedicated student of the lovely art of Nihonto. “The key to wisdom is this – constant and frequent questioning, for by doubting we are led to question, by questioning we arrive at the truth.” – Peter Abelard

Hi guys, I have another newbie question I guys. How is it that a sword without a signature can get an authentication document stating the smith? I guess the Authentication is about the sword it self at these cases. But wouldn’t it be better to just leave the smith out of the document and not speculate on the smith at all. I mean how sure can one be on guessing the smith? I think it takes some credibility of the Authentication.

Hi, would you mind translation the rest of the mei as well?

I guess that is why the same sword shows up again and again all the time. Thx Jussi. Now I’ll relax and let you guys rest from my newbie questions and read my first Nihonto book. :-)

Really appreciate you taking your time. Tack you so much!

I found an old auction from 2017 where the blade was sold for 2500€ and was valued to 4000€. At that auction they hade this document attached. Is this any help? could not upload the pdf because it is to large. INDEX OF Japanese SWORDSMITHS - Markus Sesko NAGAKUNI (長国), Genna (元和, 1615-1624), Iyo/Ōshū – “Nagakuni” (長国), “Yoshū Matsuyama-jū Nagakuni” (予州松山住長国), “Ōshū Aizu-jū Nagakuni” (奥州会津住長国), real name Miyoshi Sōzaemon (三好宗左衛門), he also bore the first name Tōshirō (藤四郎), he was born in the fifth year of Tenshō (天正, 1577) in Hiroshima (広島) in Aki province, he signed first with Yasuhiro (安広), after the death of his father Tsuneyoshi (常慶, also read as Jōkei) he was raised by his uncle, the Hiroshima-smith Harima no Kami Teruhiro (播磨守輝広, the 2nd gen. Teruhiro), with the transfer of his lord Katō Yoshiaki (加藤嘉明, 1563-1631) also Nagakuni moved successively to the Matsuyama fief (松山藩) of Iyo and to the Aizu fief (会津藩) of Ōshū province, he died on the 18th day of the sixth month Kan´ei eight (寛永, 1631) at the age of 54, his blades have a wide mihaba and can either show a thin or a normal kasane, the jigane is an itame mixed with masame which tends to stand out, the hamon is a suguha or slightly undulating notare mixed with gunome in ko-nie-deki with a wide nioiguchi, but also works with a tight nioiguchi are extant, jō-saku Referensmaterial från: NIHONTO MEIKAN 日本刀名鑑 - Honma Kaoruyama; Ishii Akirakuni; NIHON SHINTO SHI - Markus Sesko; THE CONNOISSEUR'S BOOK OF Japanese SWORDS - Kokan Nagayama - Kenji Mishina; NIHONTO KOZA VOLUME IV - SHINTO; SHINTO SHU - Mitsuo Shibata 光男·柴田 - Yoshio Fujishiro 藤代 義雄; KANZAN OSHIGATA SHINTO JITEN 寒山押形 新刀事典 - Dr. Kanzan; NIHON TOKO JITEN - SHINTO VOLUME - Yoshio Fujishiro 藤代 義雄 - Matsuo Fujishiro 藤代松雄; SHINTO MEIKAN - Markus Sesko

injave been search a long time without finding anything either. I’ll skip this one..

That was what I said as well :-) Thank you!!

Thank you so much. The have a reservation price valued to 8000€?!

Ahh, sorry man, I missed all the images :-)

Hi guys, I know from the seller’s info that the mei say Nagakuni, but is it Kawachi Nagakuni? Also, what would you guys say is a fair price for this blade?

👍

Thx, lol

Wow, you are unbelievable when it come your generosity man! This forum is asum. I remember being part of a wrist watch form were everybody was masters of everything and thought the knew it all. Nobody dears the even ask the most simple questions. So thank you all...

I know that. That is not what I’m asking. I’m asking a yes or no question. :-) Do the sword license include a mandatory section that refers to Shoshin or Gimei? The article say yes it does but others in the forum say no. So, I just like to get a straight answer about that. As I see it now with the help of all super kind and patient people here. There is no such part of the license. ”Mei (name inscribed) are stated, whether it's authentic (Shoshin 正真) or false (Gimei 偽銘)”