The later made by the same smith, the higher the value?

[Promo]

Trying to learn on Nihonto and when speaking and researching specific topics I also tried to understand a bit more on the pricing. While I fully understood and can only concur that each item has to be looked at individually and specific details can result in a particular item not following this rule, I had however wondered that if it can be seen as general rule that the later a particular smith made a particular item and therefore with greater experience the higher the value is when comparing it with early works.

Yes, the value is the sum of (additionally) a huge amount of small potential influences such as previous owner, cutting test, if the smith had a bad day, etc., but if ignoring those and as a maybe very superficial and overall guidance rule I wanted to understand whether the Nihonto collecting world would see the later item from the same smith at higher quality level and therefore also estimate a later item at higher value.

 

Sorry if this might be very controversial and/or sound very amateurish - I'd not deny I'm a beginner, but I'm here to learn and the question above was something I couldn't find an answer upon. So thanks for any input in advance!

[Grey Doffin]

Hi Georg,

I am not an authority but here's what I think.  I'm sure that for some smiths, time of life of manufacture makes a difference, but I'm just as sure that there will be a premium for early work from some and later work from others.  As you say, time of life is just one of many variables and not necessarily any more important than others; this is far too complicated for one sentence rules.

Grey

[Promo]

First of all: I'm learning and this by reading as much as I can, to understand as much as possible. So please forgive me if I'm wrong - it would be of great interest to be correctened and understand why this is wrong.

 

My intention was not to form a simple rule, it was more intended to understand the view of others on the value and maybe take with me a very broad and highly general guidance rule. Of course every item should be looked at itself only, but where do you start when you put a value on a specific item. There is nothing such as "pricing modules" which would work (I guess?), so when trying to determine a value I assume it is either based on prices the particular item may have been bought or sold for in the past, or it will be compared with other items and based on variables put into a certain relation to something else. Coming across several times the argument that a later produced blade is of higher quality, I therefore had wondered if this might been a very general guidance. I however do need to admit that my conclusion was mainly based on the assumption that the more experience a smith has, the higher the quality in theory should be. And the higher the quality, the higher the value would usually be.

[paulb]

I think the starting point for any pricing is to compare the item with similar examples that have sold before. Having done that one then needs to focus on specifics. The governing factors (at least I think they are)

Quality- the level of skill employed in producing the piece, the material used and how successfully they have achieved their vision (subjective I know)

Condition- The better the condition, fewer faults the higher the value

rarity- it is easier to be more forgiving about condition if what you are looking at is one of very few extant pieces by a particular smith.

 

Within a single smiths work there can be great variation. I have seen Rai Kunitoshi blades that were breathtaking and others that were quite frankly boring. One would expect that the work of a smith's mature years might be better than their earlier works but this is not always the case.

 

Ultimately price is established and based on what someone is willing to pay. There are no hard rules. If someone desperately wants something they will pay more for it. If what is on sale is one of many examples of similar quality then the price becomes more sensitive.

[Ed Harbulak]

In general, a person's abilities increase with how long a person's working life is or was and how long he's been doing a particular activity, like making swords.  Middle age, for example ages from perhaps 30 to 60 years old in the working life of a sword smith will see quality differences between his early years, his middle years and later years. When a sword smith is in the middle  of his working years, his work will most probably be at its best and then the quality may gradually go down hill as he gets older and older. As he gets older his son often starts taking over the work under his father's name so it's sometimes hard to know if the father made the blade or his son or top student. On the other hand, if the smith dies during his peak working years, his last swords will be among his best work. One sometimes sees swords with the inscription made at age 60, as sort of an indication that the smith is saying "Wow, I'm still able to make a good blade at my age". Each sword really has to be judged on it's own merits and knowing at what point in his career the smith made it.  

[vajo]

 

Ultimately price is established and based on what someone is willing to pay. There are no hard rules. If someone desperately wants something they will pay more for it. If what is on sale is one of many examples of similar quality then the price becomes more sensitive.

 

Thats the only rule.

[Ken-Hawaii]

Also, many collectors are willing to pay a premium for early work from a smith. But, as others have noted, there are no hard & fast rules.

[David Flynn]

The old adage, Judge every sword on it's own merit.

[Shugyosha]

Also the smith in question, for example:

 

With modern swords that are advertised as being made by mukansa swordsmiths it's important to work out whether the sword was made before or after they were made mukansa - afterwards implies a greater level of skill.

 

Also with Inoue Shinkai, I understand that his work after he changed his signature from Inoue Izumi Kami Kunisada is valued more highly than before the change and I remember Darcy writing something similar for Tsuda Sukehiro saying that his prime work occurred after he changed to signing his name with grass script.

 

No doubt there are other examples of this, or perhaps where the premise works in reverse and a known event marks a drop-off in skill.

 

Edit: my memory let me down. Here's Darcy's article that I was trying to quote: https://blog.yuhindo.com/context/#more-840

[Alex A]

I think if you get to study a certain smith for a while and follow values online with sales, you will gradually see why some blades are more expensive than others. Lots of variables as mentioned and some swords more sought after than others. As an example, you may find that a sword with an early mei is cheaper to buy than that of a later mei (Edo period lots of changes to how some smiths signed), no doubt down to the level of skill and experience and the mei that confirms that.

 

Ive seen this with a number of smiths ive looked at. It depends though, you might find one sword on the market by a certain smith and the price is high, then other times when there is three by the same smith on the same site with a significant price difference, this then lets you work out why one is better than the other.

 

Top notch swords with top notch prices are swords where everything is has it should be for that particular smith, without flaws, mei discrepancies, ubu, etc etc.. 

[Surfson]

Nice thread guys.  Another influence is the bestowing of titles etc.  As a smith rises in title, ultimately to no kami, the collectibility of their blades often goes up.  Getting approved to use a kiku mon can have a big effect, as can use of the Tokugawa mon or other mon from a daimyo.  Of course, special order blades made for an important man or blades with cutting tests are much in demand, as are blades with Hon'ami kin zogan mei etc.  I agree that name changes are also important.  Can anybody tell us the difference in value, on average, between a blade signed Masayuki or another alternate name, versus one signed Kiyomaro?  Maybe Ken can bring some light to this.