cabowen

Completely agree. And in the case of gendaito, they were intended to be in shin-gunto koshirae. A thought - give it another hundred years of folks junking shin-gunto koshirae and they might be fetching silly money for their rarity value. :lol: Kevin I am always amazed at what people will spend money on and collect....I think shingunto koshirae are already fetching silly money....glad someone wants them.

If it is Suetsugu then the smith would most likely be Suetsugu Shigemitsu as he was from Fukuoka....

Yes, my question presupposed that the gunto koshirae was not something unusual or special, just the usual machine made, mass produced, garden variety.... And I agree that a Monet, like a good sword, deserves a first class "mounting"...

Firstly, if it was to be pointed out, I am glad it was you that did the pointing... As far as buying swords sight unseen, it is the most dangerous of all sword play. I will admit to having done it many times, but only when dealing with swords by makers I am very familiar with, having seen enough of their work to know that it was a safe bet, though a bet nonetheless. I recall the first such time I actually cheated a bit, knowing that Mishina san had polished the blade when in England, and called him for his opinion. On his advice and my knowledge of the smith, I wired the greatest sum of money I had yet to pay for a sword to someone I had never met for a sword I had never seen. My mail order bride and I are still as happy together today as we were when we first met at the toroku shinsa some 15 years ago.....

The genesis of this question comes from the thread wherein a poster stated his plan to sell a blade independent of the gunto koshirae it came in. Many people were quite steadfast in their opinion that by all means, don't separate the blade from the gunto koshirae as this was an important part of the sword's history. I am not speaking to those who expressed concern that the blade could be damaged by sending it without the koshirae-with that I agree. I take it this is the artifact view. Personally, whenever I have bought a good sword in gunto koshirae, I can't get it into a shirasaya and get rid of the gunto koshirae fast enough. I see now that empty gunto koshirae are fetching sums that are beyond my belief. Makes me wish I would have held on to the dozens of them I gave away in the past. I tend to take the art view. To me, gunto koshirae are simply mass produced and have nothing to do with the art of nihon-to. Koshirae have always been changed at the whim of the owner thoughout history and I find it hard to jump into the archeology mindset where everything is a valuable relic, especially when these mass produced, machine made koshirae are neither rare nor exceptional by any artistic standard. I wonder how the artifact view would translate to other fields of art???...For example, if someone found a Monet at a garage sale that some prior owner had put a Walmart frame on, would they keep the frame as a valuable part of the painting's history? Maybe I am missing something here (wouldn't be the first time....)????

Fukuoka ju Sue ? Tame Kikugawa Shi (made for Mr. Kikugawa)

Per the written order: Oite Hishu Kumamoto Saku Kore 於肥州熊本作之 Made in Kumamoto in Hishu

bushu ju shoami

He is not listed, unfortunately, in the Meikan. It is possible he used a different mei and is listed elsewhere but without further research it is not certain if that is the case. He worked in present day Yamaguchi Prefecture, an area not exactly overflowing with smiths during the war. The nakago is nicely done so I expect he had training and was a skilled smith....

I wondered how long it would take before someone brought this up.....longer than I thought.... Yes, I am a director of an organization that issues kantei-sho. They also publish a journal aimed at educating people which includes a kantei section to help with identification. As I said, kantei-sho do serve a purpose in some instances but the thrust of my comments has been that they are used as a replacement for knowledge by many; this lack of study and education is not something I nor the NTHK-NPO endorse.

Back when ebay was only a few years old there were a few years when I bought many really nice swords for next to nothing. This was when there were maybe 50 or so swords listed at any one time and there were no dealers selling there, only private parties listing grandpa's sword. Now there are usually 2000+ swords listed at any one time and you have mostly dealers selling...I hardly ever even look at ebay anymore. I am sure there are still some great buys but there was a time when it was a great place to buy swords....

Need more pictures but I have that Chinese feeling.....

I have heard this many times: "if the sword was sent to Japan for polish, there must be something wrong with it if it wasn't papered"....No doubt there are instances when this is true but dismissing blades out of hand because they weren't papered when polished is foolish. I have had many blades polished in Japan both for myself and for others and didn't bother with papers in many cases. There are reasons for not papering- not everyone thinks they are necessary or worth the money. Personally I wouldn't spend the money if I was confident in the signature. If people ask me to have blades submitted when I send them for polishing, I do so and I have submitted blades which I planned to sell. Blades I intend to keep I don't submit...

Probably the same place they were purchased???

No argument there....I think ebay gets the most attention simply because it is the largest and most international and tends to attract the less desirable elements on a large scale....

The main reason people are down on ebay is because the bulk of what is available there is trash. Much of it is misrepresented, either out of ignorance or pure fraud. There is little or no recourse available if you get screwed. If you really know what you are doing, you can sometimes get a great deal, but most do not really know what they are doing and thus most knowledgeable people on this board will advise staying away from ebay. It is like swimming in waters confirmed to have sharks. You might get lucky now and then, but sooner or later you will get bitten....

There is much to be said for buying from reputable dealers, nearly all of whom I am aware would offer a return privilege. How many would buy without papers simply on their own knowledge with this privilege? It does indeed offer security, much like a life jacket for those who can't swim. To continue the metaphor, some people are in over their heads and in my opinion shouldn't be buying a) at a distance and b) things they aren't knowledgeable enough to fully understand. Thinking about the real value of papers a little deeper, I think it is safe to say that most signed swords, unless by oft faked smiths, can usually be verified without sending to shinsa. Even those by oft faked smiths can in many cases be verified by people with years of experience without needing a shinsa. Papers can not turn a shoshin signed blade by an average smith into a first class work. All they can do is provide an opinion that the blade is indeed by the smith whose name is on the blade, something as I have said, you really do not need a shinsa team to tell you in many if not most cases. Papers do, however, determine the value of an unsigned blade by attribution and here is where mischief can be, and has been, done. If you submit an unsigned blade to three shinsa teams, you may very well get three different attributions. I have seen this happen more than once. Usually the owner will believe whatever attribution is the "best". I have also seen the same blade get different attributions from the same organization. An argument could be made that if you get different opinions it must mean that the workmanship is not clear and thus it can not be a first class blade in any case, so who really cares? The flip side is that a first class blade, even if mumei, in many cases will be readily identifiable by the obviousness of the workmanship, so again, what is the real value of the shinsa? I suppose that if you saw these sort of things happen enough times you may begin to question the real value of papers in many circumstances as well..... I am not saying papers do not serve a legitimate function in some instances, i.e., big name signatures (sometimes), or less than first rate mumei blades, (or for estate sales) but how many times have I heard the first thing someone say when told about or shown a blade, "does it have papers?" I have seen people when told no to then wave off the blade and not even look at it.... Perhaps some who do spend the time learning should be happy there are so many who rely on papers as it makes for that many more opportunities....

No argument with that harsh reality...My main point is that papers are a crutch for far too many- the result is people collect papers, not swords, and thus develop no real concept of quality....

Bizen Kuni Osafune ju - cut- Smith's name has been removed....

Playing the devil's advocate a bit, but why would you sell a prized sword to someone who needs a paper to tell them it is a good sword? I know of many collectors in Japan that are extremely careful/picky about who they sell to and will not sell an important blade to someone not "ready" for it....Again, maybe that is a best case scenario; many people seem more concerned with the financial end of things than what is actually best for the preservation of these blades....

"closer to history"..."opinion business" Do you really believe it is as simple as that? reinhard What is as simple as that?

reinhard I am at a loss to understand exactly what that adds to the discussion at hand...???

Clive- Yes, that is another opinion that gave pause as there must certainly be at least some blades of quality that were mumei by design. I am sure we can both think of at least a few reasons why that could be the case. Also, to say that because he has seen a few lowly Takada blades with orikaeshi/gaku mei that ALL good shortened swords should have the same is also, in my opinion, unreasonable. It all depends on who the owner was at the time of shortening....there were some incredible egos that owned some of these swords in the past and no doubt they did whatever they pleased...To use his logic, because we weren't there when the blades were made, we will never know for certain (if they were signed or not). I also think that by and large many of his comments are mostly aimed at high quality works by famous koto smiths. Some of his opinions seem to suffer as far as I am concerned when the topic shifts to lessor and/or later work. Personally, I do not own any mumei blades, then again, I don't own any koto blades either....I would not own a mumei shinto. shinshinto, or gendaito. As far as the other comments in response to my original post, I agree that this is not a first sword book , which is also my opinion on Nagayama Kokan sensei's excellent kantei book. I believe in having the basics and accepted theory under one's belt as well before swimming into deeper water. It must begin with the terminology and fundamentals and for that Yumoto and Sato sensei's books are a good foundation. On the Hon'ami vs NBTHK, clearly the NBTHK has the modern benefit of access to many more swords while the Hon'ami had the benefit of being closer to the history. The Hon'ami, historically, have kept their opinions and secrets to themselves, for obvious reasons, while the NBTHK, also obviously, is in the opinion business....Truth be told, there are many in Japan that tend to follow the author's advice about learning to identify quality and have thus freed themselves from reliance on any organized authority....in that both the author and myself are preaching the same gospel.....

There are several options. You can send it through an agent to Japan or you could send it through an agent to the US when there is a shinsa stateside. You might also consider posting pictures of it here where experienced people can give you an opinion for free....

Having recently received this new book through the generosity of a kind soul (thanks again Ted!), I was excited to read through it after hearing all the comments made about it online... First, I would be remiss without giving credit to Paul for his excellent translation and collaboration. I know very well what goes into a translation like this and how much time is involved-great job Paul! I would argue that this is a book that belongs in all collector's libraries for the simple fact that while I don't necessarily agree with everything the author postulates, there is more than enough valuable information in this book unavailable elsewhere which outweighs some of the rather contentious opinions given. Specifically of value are the author's tips on recognizing quality. This is the major weakness most western collectors have and often the reason for the addiction and reliance on kantei-sho. Being able to tell a good sword from a bad one is the first step in sword appreciation and this book provides the benchmarks. Once one has reached this point, one can begin the study of what separates the good swords from the great swords-a decidedly more difficult task. Another important area discussed, and I know of no other book which dares tread on this territory, is the various manipulations and alterations done to swords, sometimes for repair and sometimes to deceive. Most of this is rarely discussed outside of closed circles in Japan and I was quite surprised to see many of the tricks of the trade I have been told by several togi-shi openly illustrated and discussed. I would think this would also be a major benefit to western collectors who know very little about much of this. It can be a bit unnerving however to see the extent of what can be done with a sword. The author does make many bold statements, some of which I would take exception to. Two that come to mind are his opinions that furisode nakago were never original and always the result of repair. I wonder if the author has ever watched a smith as he does hi-tsukuri, the shaping of a blade. To shape the nakago, the smith hammers the hot blade to thin the edge of the nakago. As he hammers, the displacement of the steel forces the nakago to curve naturally into an exact furisode shape. I have no problem believing that some smiths simply left the nakago in this natural shape and thus have my doubts that they are not original. Another statement I would take issue with is a comment made that any blade that has no ware or kizu has had them filled with umegane. In the author's defense, perhaps he was referring to koto blades, though he made no such distinction and his statement could quite easily be taken at face value to include all swords. I have watched many swords being made from start to finish and unless someone snuck some umegane in when I wasn't looking, they sure looked flawless to me. I have many flawless WWII era blades that I doubt anyone would have taken the time to repair with umegane.... Finally, he quite rightly points out that yaki-ire is the most difficult operation in the creation of a sword and that the quality of a blade rests on the nioi-guchi thus created. He dismisses ware and such as "not a big thing". I would tend to think that if forging is not as difficult as yaki-ire then a first class smith capable of a first rate yaki-ire should be able to forge a blade without flaws. If we are judging blades on their artistic merits rather than as weapons, as he seems to imply by dismissing missing boshi, then surely ware and the like detract as well. It is hard to understand why forging flaws can be dismissed while hardening flaws can not when simply evaluating from an artistic standpoint. Perhaps I misunderstood.... Other criticisms are directed at areas of remission: the author clearly focused on koto with little on Shinto and even less on Shinshinto and gendaito. It would have been interesting to read more about later blades. The author also clearly admires the works of Bizen and states clearly his reasons. It would have been nice to see more said in regard to the other traditions. These are rather inconsequential criticisms in any case and again I would like to recommend the book without reservations.....Again, great job Paul-I look forward to your next!