eternal_newbie

Hmm... I was answering a topic somewhere else and remembered this anecdote by Ted Tenold: And now I'm wondering, because the dates certainly make it a possibility...

Reading this story reminded me of an anecdote shared by Ted Tenold many years ago on this very board: I remember a story relayed to me about a Japanese swordsmith that was a visiting guest here in the US. He has made a few small tanto while here and was signing them the morning after a long night of libation. As he was inscribing the mei, he made an abrupt stop from his pace. He grunted and shook his head obviously annoyed by his misplaced strike of a single stroke. Looking up at the observers he laughed lightly and said, "In two hundred years, this is gimei!", then went back about his business. https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/4357-signature-comparisons/#findComment-38825 Useful reminders that for all their artistry and consistency, the great artisans of old were still human and subject to the same pressures as us; a slip of the hand, a bit too much sake the night before, the infirmity of age and sickness.

It was probably easier to see a ghost than a Go in pre-war Japan. To see a Go you'd need to be nobility or the trusted servant of one; to see a ghost you just needed (mis)fortune and working eyeballs.

Great stuff, just one small thing - the measurements for the Nagayoshi are off: I assume this should be 70.9cm, 2.67cm and 3.15cm respectively?

Agreed with Brett... even when nihonto are labelled as such, any documentation or provenance are usually kept with the blade or passed along to the destination as well.

A couple more examples for your perusal: https://www.giuseppepiva.com/en/works/shinto-sunnobi-tanto-takahashi-naganobu-1846/ https://sanmei.com/contents/en-us/p2265_Wakizashi-signed-Takahashi-NAGANOBU-zou.html

Yep, Sukesada was considered synonymous with Bizen swordmaking and swords in general, like how kids in the 90s would just refer to their sneakers as "Nikes" regardless of the actual brand.

When it comes to Japanese swords there are several dimensions of evaluation: shape, steel, hamon, balance, sharpness etc. If you're talking strictly about cutting performance (i.e. tameshigiri or battlefield durability) that's not really something we can know without a cutting test of similar blades by this lineage of smiths. I would venture though that this blade was not made with iai/kata training in mind, as it seems quite solid (note the slightly raised shinogi in the habaki) and lacks a bo-hi to reduce the weight.

Is this a modern-made sword without a signature or is it just the photography that makes the tang look new? Because the appraisal criteria is drastically different for newly made blades compared to antique swords.

Keep in mind that "Bizen" and "Soshu" function like brand names which are more or less a known quantity. Think of all the counterfeit Casios and Seikos at the night markets in Asia. Why not put all your effort into making fake Rolexes? Because it's easier to fake a lower-end item from a well-known brand and sell it to someone at a price that seems cheap. The seller makes a decent profit off something that's less labor intensive and has fewer material costs, and the buyer gets to show off their brand name product to folks who won't know the difference at a price far below the market value of the real thing.

I also can't help but wonder if an AI/LLM was used in writing some of the descriptions. I've seen such shortcuts being used in other fields, no reason why museum curation should be any different.

I assumed as much, given the sword itself is listed as "mumei". I have occasionally also seen papers given with 銘不明 (mei fumei - signature illegible/unclear) for swords where some trace of a mei remains. I'm not sure whether the "plausibility" of the traces of remaining signature has any bearing on mumei vs. mei fumei.

Now that's a tsunagi!

Interestingly, another one was discussed here not too long ago:

He's been doing this for a while. Not just good photography, but also regularly seeks out notable exhibits and gets footage of the best blades in the room. One of those essential bookmarks for collectors who can't regularly make it to Japan to see these exhibits in person.

I confess I haven't been paying too much attention, but as far as I'm aware I haven't had any of the slowdowns since your post about the hosting upgrades.

I agree! When it comes to knowledge, range of items and market contacts, Japanese dealers are far superior as a whole to those in the West. And I'm certainly not suggesting that all, or even most, dealers in Japan are scoundrels or cheats. My main purpose in highlighting this article is to point out that beginners and intermediates without the necessary knowledge or Japanese language skills to read between the lines and understand why a certain piece is priced the way it is should either stick to Western dealers they trust, or do comprehensive due diligence. No doubt this is the same for any other field as well, but I've seen quite a few posts lately (and not just in this forum, but other platforms I frequent) of folks identifying themselves as first time buyers or beginners asking for advice on a piece listed in Japan. My secondary objective here is also a slight defense of a Japanese dealer who regularly catches flak (https://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/53731-why-i-dislike-this-dealer/) to point out that the things this dealer is being criticized for are actually relatively commonplace in the market, and it is incumbent on us as customers to either cultivate the necessary expertise to identify them or else stick to dealers closer to home.

Aside from the main things (faked papers, kicho papers, photographs and descriptions that hide flaws, horimono in odd locations that cover up flaws) here's a few other "reading between the lines" things beginners and intermediate buyers should watch out for: Sword with papers and described as being from a famous smith, but if you check the papers themselves, they specify a different generation or area (e.g. kyodai Kanemoto or Seki Kaneuji) Sword with papers and described as being from a famous smith, but the papers specify a period that rules out that smith (e.g. Magoroku Kanemoto - late Muromachi) Sword with papers and described as being from a famous smith, but the mei matches that of a different smith with the same name Sword described as former daimyo/officer property without any proof of provenance Sword described as showing all the hallmarks of a big name smith, when the papers are only to his school Sword with a very thin motokasane, munemachi or hamachi Damage from mishandling being advertised as kirikomi A particular section of the sword not directly appearing in photographs "With a high ranking polish, the sword should paper as <big name/school>" (so why hasn't this been done yet?) "As this is the first time this sword is on the open market, it is being offered at a low price" (so why didn't the dealer buy it and put a markup?) "The sword is in an acceptable polish" (acceptable for Hozon? TH? Juyo?) or "the sword has been polished" (when? the Edo period?)

Thought I'd put a post here to raise awareness of a very good article put up by Danny Massey at his website: https://www.nihontocraft.com/Problems_Buying_Swords_on_the_Internet.html I've seen umegane and airbrushed ware/hagire before, but this is my first time seeing putty being used to fill openings. With several folks recently asking for opinions on swords offered by Japanese dealers, as well as some discussions around a particular dealer potentially being more "dodgy" than others, this is a good wake-up call that the Japanese market is no stranger to dodgy dealings and lies by omission, and this is hardly restricted to any one dealer. Unlike Western dealers, who typically have to balance the need for profit with the responsibility of educating and promoting interest in the field, Japanese dealers have a thriving, established and competitive market and have less to lose from the usual unethical practices you see in any other market of that nature. Always remember, if something seems too good to be true, it probably is.

This is my experience as well, including with Giheiya. If there's nothing new to say - they won't say anything.

Yeah, it worked for me earlier today too. I think they're just doing maintenance on their shopfront, since https://nihontou.jp seems fine.

The site is either down, or inaccessible from my region. Nonetheless, being unpapered and in rough shape are more than enough red flags for a beginner, because a polish can often reveal flaws (even fatal flaws, such as hagire) that were not visible previously. Assuming there are no fatal flaws though, it's likely to pass Hozon as long as it's not a modern or Chinese blade; whether it gets an attribution that will make the cost of the polish + papers worthwhile is another matter.

If so, that would only strengthen the evidence in favour of Go being a student or direct descendant of the Senjuin Yoshihiro lineage, a theory that already has quite a few ardent supporters.

What a fascinating blade... made by a well-known Mukansa smith, while in the US, for someone with a distinctly non-Japanese name. I'd love to know the story behind that! Maybe he was a wedding guest?

Worth keeping in mind that the first two do not appear to be papered, which will greatly hamper your ability to resell, especially if it's already signed. Add that on top of polishing costs and you're looking at a fair amount of risk for something that will likely end up gimei (since Hozon is fairly trivial for an antique blade in Japan). The Akamatsu Taro smiths are a pretty interesting group (disclaimer: I have a sword that I commissioned from Kanemitsu/Mitsuhiro, the current head of the family). They make their own tamahagane and are known for long, impressive swords for martial arts use, and art swords aimed at reproducing Kiyomaro (and typically succeeding quite well).