Nihonto student

Kansei = from 1789 to 1801 --- Kansei 10 should be 1798 so for Mr. Yamasaki 19th October 1798 I can't confirm the signature in question, but even if it were the same year I don't think it would substantially change the cards on the table from an evaluation point of view, of course you would surely know that it is a blade made at the peak of his career so qualitatively would expect more compared to previous works.

Dear John, I'll try to simplify Jean's post. The blade was previously covered in rust, but now it's not...who cleaned the rust from the blade? You or a professional togishi? This is because when it comes to Japanese blades, the problem isn't just removing the rust, but maintaining the geometry. If you don't maintain the geometry, it's a big problem. This is why becoming a togishi requires years of training...in the photos you posted, the shinogi seems barely visible, which suggests that whoever removed the rust had no idea how to maintain the geometry. @Lindley Suketaka received honorary title “nagato no Kami” in 1789 (Reference Sesko Compendium). All the best Giordy

Also on the ura side futasuji-hi appear in a strange place...I think there was something else at the base before otherwise it doesn't add up.

This blade is attributed to Nidai, not the only one to make suguha, although I'm struggling to find another example right now and I don't have any books to hand. In any case, as you can see long kaeri is found from Tenbun onwards. https://sword-auction.com/en/product/27176/as25215-脇差相州住綱広特別保存刀剣/ https://www.aoijapan.net/wakizashi-soshu-ju-tsunahiro-2/ Many elements here point towards Sagami... mitsumune and style of carving for example. I think the discussion is mainly about period (Which generation Tsunahiro). Giordy

Dear Julien, very nice piece! As little as my opinion matters... hada here seems like a mirror of yours https://togishi.com/store/p519/Soshu_Ju_Tsunahiro_3rd_Generation_.html also typical horimono and regarding kaeri I see several examples with pronounced one http://sanmei.com/contents/media/o_H113827_S3041.html Check also https://nihonto.com/tsunahiro/ where the long kaeri is indicated as a feature. In any case good luck for shinsa!. All the best Giordy

Great Jussi and perfect timing for the post! I was also searching around and found this one: http://www.e-sword.jp/sale/0810_1116syousai.htm Nakago and Mei's style are a great match.

Dear G.K., I haven't found any matches with this mei yet. I'll continue searching. I still believe that sugata and nakago are not typical of the Tenbun period. Now, considering only Fujiwara Nagayuki, the first thing I'd associate it with is the Takada school,. As you can see Mr. Sesko lists another Nagayuki from the Takada school, I can't confirm that he is actually the author of this blade but I would definitely take the Takada school as the direction and from the sugata I would say from Momoyama to the middle of the Shinto period. Is the signature genuine or not? Without a certified signature for comparison, it's difficult to express an opinion...as a general thinking, I'd say Takada doesn't seem a target for gimei, but you never know. If you get the chance, post some better photos and, above all, the measurements of the blade, nagasa, kasane, sori, etc. measurements are essential to give it context. All the best Giordy

Dear Jeff, from this photo the nakago looks suspicious...can you post a photo of the complete nakago? Thank you Giordy

The fact that the seller suggests in the description to have it certified I see as a good sign that in their opinion it passes, otherwise they would be very unprofessional, I think that there are the requirements for Hozon (if a hagire does not come out during the polishing) but I do not know if the orikaeshi mei which appears at least questionable even if illegible can have any weight in the judgment, perhaps some other member can express his consideration on the matter. Giordy

Hello Max, If you intend to buy it I agree with others that it is certainly worth certifying, but as Lewis said it would be better to arrange with the seller first if the blade does not pass. Giordy

Dear Max, the first question that comes to my mind is why they didn't polish and certify it directly with the possibility of having a greater profit? The simplest answer is that it's not worth it and I'll try to explain why: Sugata and hada seem Shinshinto to me. If you combine Shinshinto/suriage/mumei from a collecting point of view you will get a blade that has no appeal, they would have no profit in polishing and certifying it, they prefer that the buyer requests it and bears the costs and risks. Remind that the costs of polishing and certification do not add up directly as a value... polishing makes the blade more attractive and sellable, certification increases attractiveness as it gives more certainty to the buyer and in some cases can increase value of the blade even considerably, therefore these evaluations are made individually on a case-by-case basis. Regarding the conditions, I seem to see little machi considering the reference period, it makes me think that the blade has already seen several polishes. The fundamental point however remains why you have to buy a blade... if you looking for a display blade it could be fine if you like it, if you intend to study nihonto more in depth I would honestly suggest to look at something else, in any case the asking price + polishing + certification seems high to me...for that price you can find some very nice wakizashi. All the best Giordy

Dear GKFalk, drawing conclusions with this little information is difficult, and the condition of the blade also prevents from reading the work. To try to answer a bit your questions: - The lack of yokote is certainly due to polishing. - From the picture blade appears not to be really bad condition, but needs to seen.. keeping in mind that any defects may be hidden under the patina. I can't tell if a naginata-hi is present or if what I see toward the base is a reflection. - I can't read the signature from the photo. Perhaps another member can confirm... the sugata with that nakago taper personally suggests something later than the Tenbun period. All the best Giordy

If I remember correctly, this swordsmith used to place the place of residence "Bishu Osafune" on the Ura side together with the date and that only for blades intended for temples he used to indicate the residence on the Omote side but it should still be on a single column and not in two as in this case...

Thank you so much Hoshi Giordy

Thank you for the correction. Giordy

Dear Eric, blade is authentic, signed Bishu Osafune Suke...(Sada?), no comment on the validity of the mei but nagasa places the blade in the middle of the Muromachi period. Regards, Giordy

Overall, 400 Euros seems like a fair valuation to me. I'm happy the seller was honest with you, and I hope this piece is just the beginning, encouraging you to continue your study of Nihonto. All the best Giordy

Regarding defects, everyone has their own perception of what they can accept. Some want only perfection, while others don't mind the signs of aging. Often, this is also related to financial resources. The key point, however, for me remains awareness: If you're not aware of what you're buying, you risk overestimating the item. Just to give you some food for thought on the blade you posted: - The fact that it's 500 years old (to be verified) doesn't make it valuable or rare. That's when the most blades were made, and the high demand is generally synonymous with poorer quality. - The signature needs to be verified, but generally for Bizen blades beginning with "Bishu Osafune" isn't synonymous of quality blades, but rather with blades made for purely utilitarian purposes, which are called kazu-uchi mono. - The blade seems hard to read in this condition; you can see little or nothing of the "pattern"—hada, hamon, activity, etc.—the cost of a restoration (If possible) will be around €2.000 (€ 20 -25 per centimeter is the average cost of a professional polish), with the real risk that the restoration's value will be greater than the value of the blade itself. This is just to name a few things. Based on this, as I said, you might still be convinced to buy it. I don't want to convince you otherwise...the important thing is that you're aware. Giordy

Dear Gerry, We live in a strange world, but I doubt you'll ever hear anyone say they prefer Gimei blades as a matter of fact. Have you ever heard of anyone preferring paintings with fake signatures? I don't think so. It's possible that a gimei might still be recognized for its technical/artistic quality, It can happen of course, but it's not the norm. There's always a tendency to give the advice, "Buy the sword, not the signature," but this should be taken with common sense and requires experience in evaluating a work. The market in general strongly penalizes Gimei blades. Whether this is right or wrong is something you can find plenty of insights on the forum. All the best Giordy

Seems confident mei execution: https://www.aoijapan.com/katana：iga-no-kami-minamoto-kanemichinbthk-tokubetsu-hozon-token/

Just reached Chonin. From Wiki: They were important figures in Japan for the introduction of a more materialistic lifestyle, not typical of Japan, characterized by an increasingly weighty connection to material goods and a tendency towards consumerism, due to the preponderant advancement of capitalism. I don't know if it's something to be proud of

I don't want to add fuel to the fire, just a few considerations, always with a view to learning: I see a lot of confidence in the Shinshinto dating, but honestly, as others have expressed, I have some reservations... it's not rare but not common to find a Shinshinto osuriage blade. 0.65 Kasane for a Shinshinto blade is very thin... why all these polishes? Horimono atobori (I agree), but considering the kasane, this makes me think it was applied a long time later... early 1900s? I also agree with Alex that to spend the money on horimono, either the blade is worth it or the owner was particularly keen on it. The Nagasa seems to be around 66cm (Correct?), so we're in the uchigatana range... something doesn't add up here either... so the blade was made in Shinshinto and then shortened to uchigatana? Perhaps a personal choice by the owner... So, in my ignorance, I see three solutions: 1. The blade is older. 2. It's Shinshinto, and the blade has undergone an unconventional life/choice. 3. Shinshinto, and modifications have been made to make it appear older. Offtopic For what it's worth: There are tons of informative posts on the forum where people can understand how to approach a purchase, from various perspectives (Some even recent posts). Despite this, someone regularly posts about their newly purchased blade without having done any research. This should make us reflect on the pointlessness of setting up a roundtable of inquiries...there will always be people who do their research and those who don't, regardless of how many posts on the subject are made...for me, a purchase in itself is never a bad thing. I'm one of those who bought their first blade without knowing anything (the blade wasn't even for me). Without that purchase, I wouldn't be here today, I would never have bought books, and I wouldn't sleep with Nagayama on my nightstand. The purchase opened my eyes to this world, I realized there was so much more to know, and it gave me the motivation to delve deeper. This is to say that regardless of the advice, there will be those who want to delve deeper, those who don't, those who will have their own time to do so, and I think that from this perspective, the role of a forum like this is also to encourage people to continue along the path without making hasty judgments on hasty initial decisions. There's always time to redeem yourself All the best Giordy

Obviously, certification can't be understood from the nakago or the signature alone, so in this case I was just making a deduction. Process: Of the three signatures, identify the one that is definitely genuine... the third is a textbook example and is also the only one dated (Perhaps a coincidence, I didn't open the Aoi links to see if the others are dated). The other two are both well-executed overall, so need to delve into the details. What doesn't convince me about signature no. 2 is the character 近, which doesn't seem precise, and it seems like more pressure was applied to the strokes than the rest. Then there's the character 忠, where the bottom stroke appears a bit rounded, whereas it should be very square, as can be seen in examples 1 and 3. Overall, his signature is very square with very clean strokes. The last is a gem from @Jacques (Honor to merit), who in another post had indicated that one Tadahiro's signature feature is the decreasing size of the characters from top to bottom. For me, this feature is very evident in #3, less so in #1, and completely absent in #2. An interesting thing to explore in this specific case is that Aoi has decided to list #2 as non-guaranteed. This, to me, means they're ruling out the possibility that it could be a daimei which is common for Tadahiro since he collaborated with both the 3rd and 4th generation, so as I interpret it for Aoi it is gimei. Giordy

Dear Pierre, Start by saying that the signatures of the Tadayoshi line are tricky and among the most counterfeited. In this case, we're talking about the second generation, which had a long career and its signature has undergone several evolutions. Personally, I'd say from left to right: - Tokubetsu - Disputed - Juyo Giordy