Second Generation Muramasa - Green Papers...???

[Infinite_Wisdumb]

Interested in the boards take on this one.  Seller weaves quite a story....

 

Green papers, oshigata seems a little off from the nakago.  But im not an expert

 

https://www.jauce.com/auction/r1052374088

 

[Brian]

Oshigata is fine.
Work/hamon matches the smith quite well.
However, since it's in Japan, why didn't they get new papers to verify? You have to buy this as though it would fail.

[Gakusee]

OK, Jesse.

 

I think we have started making it very easy for newcomers here on this board and people just ask for answers and get pre-digested opinions. This is not how one is supposed to learn/progress (even though at school that is what teachers do but they also set homework :).

 

So, let us jointly look at this:

 

- easy one: do you think the mei is on the appropriate side for a 1520s-1550s sword (ignoring the generational argument for a moment); does the patina look right in the mei

- slightly more difficult: do you think this is a Muramasa hamon (tips: look at the nioiguchi, look at presence of lack of sunagashi/kinsujiu, look at the shape, etc)

- the hada question is a bit more difficult yet again but again, look at hada (itame vs nagare  and loose vs tight and presence or not of jinie)

- even more difficult: can we see a slight, shirake-like utsuri (not always there but often there in Muramasa)

- most advanced: look at the chisel strokes, particularly the last two-three atari of the Masa character vs genuine/recently (Hozon and above) papered examples

 

As a reference, please consider the yasurime and patina of the attached (TH Muramasa nidai).

 

 

[PNSSHOGUN]

Yahoo.jp auctions & green papers is not a combination to inspire any confidence.

[Infinite_Wisdumb]

Thanks @Gakusee - was looking for a conversation indeed!  Appreciate the questions new people should focus on!

 

Mei/nakago age sure looks awful clean and tidy for a 700 year old item!  The mei certainly have differences as well...... 

 

[Gakusee]

 

6 hours ago, Infinite_Wisdumb said:

Thanks @Gakusee - was looking for a conversation indeed!  Appreciate the questions new people should focus on!

 

Mei/nakago age sure looks awful clean and tidy for a 700 year old item!  The mei certainly have differences as well...... 

 

 

 

 

Well, if we are talking about Ise Sengo Muramasa, I would not even go into chisel strokes and patina just yet. Look at the configuration of the nakago and mei.  Remember - for Sengo Muramasa, we are not in the Kamakura time period, hence not in tachi-mei timeframe, and Muramasa forged katana.....So, on which nakago side should the mei be?

 

The very old books did try to put Muramasa back in Koto but this has been superseded. In fact, the numerous genuine Muramasa I have seen (papered by the NBTHK) are all signed katana mei. The same applies to all the blades in the Ise No Toko book dedicated to Muramasa and his lineage. 

 

I have only seen illustrated two tachi-mei blades and as far as I know they are not NBTHK papered and do not a have government designation (JuBi, JuBu, Kokuho)either. They were exhibited in the Kuwana Museum for the special Muramasa exhibition and have very long mei and nengo. So, they are special blades (perhaps commissioned or dedication pieces) and of different type to the one above. The usual niji-mei blade was always the typical katana with katana mei.

 

The two tachi below are dated Tenbun 12, so 1543, which should be the nidai as the shodai was generally deemed to work in the era Bunki. But there could be an overlap there between sho/nidai as it is not such a long period between 1501 (start or Bunki) and 1543. In fact the oldest dated is a JuBi dated 1513, so not even 1501. 
 

So, please do not let the 0.01% exception (and then, different exception to the posted green papered Mino blade above in the original post that someone put a Muramasa signature on)  mislead you into believing that such a tachi mei is either normal or common. 

[Rivkin]

The criteria for NBTHK Muramasa changed drastically between 1980 and 2000, in the direction of being very conservative.

With such pictures being more precise is difficult and daito Muramasa can be difficult to kantei with certainty.

 

This being said, I looked at the link - its in pure nioi. Its certainly will not paper as Muramasa today. Its a late Muromachi work which can be frankly anyone - Odawara, Mino and even Bizen sometimes churning up pieces with such hamon and itame hada is well done but not distinctive.

Personal opinion.

[Gakusee]

9 hours ago, Rivkin said:

The criteria for NBTHK Muramasa changed drastically between 1980 and 2000, in the direction of being very conservative.

With such pictures being more precise is difficult and daito Muramasa can be difficult to kantei with certainty.

 

This being said, I looked at the link - its in pure nioi. Its certainly will not paper as Muramasa today. Its a late Muromachi work which can be frankly anyone - Odawara, Mino and even Bizen sometimes churning up pieces with such hamon and itame hada is well done but not distinctive.

Personal opinion.

 

Kiril

 

I beg to differ. The hamon is rendered in tight ko-nie (the rest is hadori obfuscation) and the outline is very, very Mino.  In fact, I would go as far as saying that this hamon is not Muramasa at all. 

[Infinite_Wisdumb]

thank you for the education on the tachi mei @Gakusee!

[Jacques D.]

On 5/31/2022 at 3:01 PM, Gakusee said:

OK, Jesse.

 

 

 

As a reference, please consider the yasurime and patina of the attached (TH Muramasa nidai).

 

 

 

If I'm not mistaken the photo you share is of the nakago of a yari. In this case you can't compare with the nakago of a sword because the wood of the koshirae is not the same. The wood used for a yari is oak and it contains tannins which accelerate the corrosion of the nakago and make it look older than it is.

[Gakusee]

23 minutes ago, Jacques D. said:

 

If I'm not mistaken the photo you share is of the nakago of a yari. In this case you can't compare with the nakago of a sword because the wood of the koshirae is not the same. The wood used for a yari is oak and it contains tannins which accelerate the corrosion of the nakago and make it look older than it is.

 

Excellent point, Jacques and I was not aware the yari saya was made of oak rather than the typical magnolia. Thank you. 

 

I used a photo of a blade I used to own in both instances so as not to cause issues..... The katana mei was quite removed/impacted and not too visible but the yari one was pristine. 

[Jacques D.]

The saya covers the blade, not the nakago which is inserted in the shaft named nagaye or ebu, it is this last one which is in oak,; the saya is in magnolia 

[Ooitame]

Wotrh a shins fee, either NBTHK or NTHK.

[AntiquarianCat]

I'm surprised green papers were so generous with attributions. It seems like almost everything with the mei and a passing resemblance got papered. This made me want to reread Darcy’s blog, it's always relevant https://web.archive.org/web/20210123052725/https://blog.yuhindo.com/green-papers-no-papers/

 

Also I’m surprised the auction ended at about 20K USD, I guess the temptation to have a sword and a piece of paper claiming it's a legendary sword was just too strong for some.

[PNSSHOGUN]

This sword will likely come up again with the same green papers, as the new owner realizes it's a dud ~ ad infinitum.