Mikaveli

Thanks, I've now ordered a copy. Does it cover many of the smiths, or just the Kotetsu story?

Many of us will be familiar with the story of the Shinsengumi, Kondo Isami and his famous (gimei) Kotetsu... Kondo was also known as somewhat of a sword connoisseur, and by all accounts, had many others. However, I don't see too much in the way of provenance data - more often it's just included in spiel from online sellers. So, I thought I'd see if anyone can point me to anything more concrete? Docs, pictures, links, museum locations etc. So far, I have the following: Mutsudaijo Miyoshi Nagamichi 陸奥大掾三善長道 Reportedly in a private collection, no other details. Tanba (no) Kami Fujiwara Terukado 丹波守藤原照門 Also in a private collection (原家 Hara family?), although I found a few mentions of it being displayed temporarily as part of two museum exhibitions in around 2015 and 2016. Yamatonokami Hidekuni (Motooki?) 大和守秀國 Shinshinto - apparently known for having crafted swords for Kondo Isami and Hijikata Toshizo. In the Inoue Genzaburo Museum (井上源三郎資料館). Ashu Sukeyoshi 阿州吉川六郎源祐芳 Another Shinshinto, apparently in the Ryzen Museum, Kyoto (霊山歴史館). Banshuu Fujiwara Munesada 播州藤原宗貞 No other details - I wasn't able to find exactly which smith / era this was? Osumi (no) Kami Hiromitsu 大隈守広光 Shinshinto - the order for sword was preserved, with a picture.

The videos are a big improvement. One of the biggest drawbacks of photos, is you tend to need so many - to see detail across the sword, different angles and lighting etc. I'd say it's possible to get some indication from photos, but there's usually a lot of detail that's easy to miss. Just look at the sellers that are able to take selective photos to mask flaws etc.

Junk. All those photos are from a commercial seller, who won't be claiming that it's a genuine Japanese sword.

Likewise, my experience is old papers, with a smith you'd pay in the thousands for, there's a very high likelihood of gimei. Especially if still in Japan, as shinsha access is simplified.

For ji nie, I'd start with Markus Sesko's summary: So, evidence of uniformity or deliberate application. Still somewhat subjective, especially if we're trying to establish the very best, rather than a boolean split into high and low quality.

Examples, as we had earlier, prove the point either way. Do we have many good examples of artistic merit only Juyo swords? And conversely, swords with issues that would usually preclude them, but have history or other provenance that awarded Juyo.

Potentially much older than that, if the blade matches the smith Ray linked to. Early Edo - circa 1675.

Between the Kami and Kane characters, there's 4 more Kanji - but I can't make them out.

That's kinda what I'm getting at, in a roundabout way. What I'd like to imagine, is as Jacques said - it's the sword that obtains Juyo, but my concern is whether that's the reality. As you, and others have said - papers don't constrain a blade - just because it "only has Hozen" doesn't mean it's not higher quality etc. I've seen a couple of blades that (in my head at least), stand out as potential candidates - certainly great examples of their smith. Last year I saw a number of Shinshinto pass - but I think the overall success rate was only 8%? It'd be interesting to see the rejected examples and understand why etc.

Bonus question, what's the biggest delta in quality seen from a single smith? One smith making both a "masterpiece" and something little better than a bundle sword?

Thanks Jussi, very interesting. So, maybe a difficult question to answer precisely, but what percentage / absolute number of Juyo would you have expected for Kanenobu? Would you expect all (well preserved) extant works at jo-saku to be able to achieve that level, 75%, 50% or 10% etc. Just as a rough finger in the air. Likewise for chu-jo, jo-jo and sai-jo? It seems like we've seen lots of examples of good smiths the Fujishiro ratings missed out, but are their examples of a chu-saku rated smith producing Juyo winning swords?

So, I was reading a Darcy article about rating systems, and it said that in current convention, only Fujishiro "Jo Saku" rated smiths could obtain Juyo, with some exceptions. Does anyone have any Chu Jo Saku (or below) rated Juyo swords? I'm also interested in any damaged / flaws that have made it through (run off boshi) for koto blades. Or, modified or suriage shinto blades.

So, the book arrived today. So far, I don't think I've found your smith. I've only looked at the index and a few pages, but the only smith listed from the same prefecture seems to be a different smith? 清水吉幸 (Shimzu? Yoshiyuki). Am I looking in the right place. Can you confirm the province and era. The book seems to include shinshinto, so I'd hope to find him.

Kesho just means decoration, veneer (or makeup). In the example, both the file marks appear decorative - and the mei has an artificial border. Both decorative elements, so I suspect it's as simple as being described as such?

To add, what's the purpose of Juyo (from an NBTHK perspective). We (the collecting) market, tend to view it as higher status, and by extension, quality. But, with the Shinto ubu requirements - one could say it's a preservation competition (as well as importance) - looking for the best condition, unmodified original swords - and that's different. Yes, we know the criteria is looser for older blades (somewhat by necessity) - but if suriage rules out your Shinto blade, that's not a criticism of quality - just a statement of originality, in that it's different from what the smith created.

This (Yoshihiro?) to me looks 100 times better executed than the pic in the OP. Norishige, unsurprisingly, I've never held in hand - so I'm reliant on pictures (of attributions) on the internet, but unless there's some photography issues - looks worlds away, to my eyes. A level above again.

Try some incandescent light sources, as well as LED and fluorescent lights. (Auto) Focus can be tough - but looks like you've handled that well.

Interesting, possibly my ignorance, but the way the hada is so course, and the "hamon" is just a visual continuation - makes it look artificial to my eyes. I'm probably completely wrong, but is it a recent "Damascus-inspired" blade with an acid hamon? Otherwise I don't understand the run off and lack of activity?

So, I collect Shinto, Kanbun-era Mino swords - not generally the most expensive end of the market, but I wanted to share my experience. In that segment (of the smiths I collect), every sword online I've seen online in the last 3 years, available for (or for auctions, starting at) less than £1000 has been gimei! Usually very obviously. I read somewhere, maybe from Darcy, that a Kicho certificate was almost a guarantee of gimei. I've also found that to be the case. Every single one. It's as if the sellers know these swords wouldn't pass Hozen / TokuHo now, so they're sold for cheap (less than a modern-papered wakizashi) - topping out at prices between £2-2.5k. * I'll caveat this that I've seen more expensive Kicho swords, that appeared genuine (but are outside my scope). Wakizashi - I'd like to understand whether this holds for other smiths, but for an ubu, TokuHo companion sword - these often seem to be priced somewhere between 50 and 60% cheaper than an equivalent condition/workmanship/feature katana. Even when 59.9cm etc - bargain! Katana - wide price ranges, with the hamon being the biggest cost factor from what I've seen. With "interesting" hamon swords from the same smith selling for considerably more than ubu, tighter jihada and generally better condition swords. A connoisseur's hamon can more than double the entry point. For the modern NBTHK papers (post 82), I haven't found anything that would make me suspect gimei. I'm guessing fakes exist, but what price point do these usually target from? Interested to hear other people's experience of what to look for or avoid etc. Feel free to share any anecdotes. 🙂

As many long katana there are, there's an equal number of shorter daito - 2 shaku, 2.1, 2.2 2.3 -2.4 is often said to have been the average, but plenty of longer swords exist from that time period (2.5-3). Looking at the wakizashi lengths, I don't these these would make sense with a nakago length removed.

That's a bit like saying the drunk guy I met at the pub said... Nothing on the page mentions a bayonet, it states tanto (短刀). The character for gun or bayonet doesn't appear anywhere?

I've recently bought the Shinto edition, but hasn't been delivered yet - if no one beats me to it, I'll happily look up your smith then. Otherwise, for your search the Japanese title is: 日本刀の研究と鑑定 (Sometimes it's for sale, but Japanese sellers transliterate it incorrectly)

Some Tachi are like that too. I also saw some examples of menuki that used to have a pin attached, but were later removed, to be used as the now-typical style (decorative under the tsukamaki).