A reasonable purchase?

[nihon]

https://katana-boutique.com/products/antique-Japanese-sword-s03476-kunimasa?variant=46436705075338

 

Nothing exceptional, just a simple mumei tanto for the early edo period with nthk papers. But the attribution is rather big being attributed Horikawa kunimasa, a Smith that's a part of the famous Horikawa school. Im currently saving for a juyo swords so I'm trying to avoid detour hence would like some opinions before deciding.

[Shugyosha]

Hi Jedediah,

I may have this wrong but my reading of the paper is to "den" Bushu Kunimasa and then in the notes it says Horikawa mon. The seller, however, is talking this up as being an attribution to the smith himself which I don't think it is.

[Mushin]

Jebediah,

 

John is correct: the blade is papered to "den" Bushu Kunimasa. I see there is also a polisher listed on the origami who goes by the name Horikawa Akira. The blade is in decent condition, but as a general rule, stay away from unsigned Shinto works - even those by smiths from famous schools. They are easy to buy and extremely difficult to get rid of later. They also don't hold their value over time very well. I discovered this to my own detriment with (of all things!) a Horikawa Kunimasa katana I bought years ago. It was signed, and was a flawless masterwork, but it would never climb the ranks because it was slightly suriage. At the time, I brushed that aside. Why? In addition to being stunning, in amazing condition and 70 cm long, it also had great provenance that I could trace from the Lord of Himeji to one of his retainers in the late 1600s. But in the end, all that did not matter. The sword was not ubu and that made it mind blowingly difficult to sell when the time came to move on. I sold it at a significant loss. But like I said, that's a general rule. If you love the tanto, than that's a different story. Personally, I would pass. 

[Jacques]

NTHK NPO, i no longer trust this organization since i saw they papered a showato (seki stamp)

[SteveM]

 

4 hours ago, Mushin said:

I see there is also a polisher listed on the origami who goes by the name Horikawa Akira.

 

I think maybe you are confusing 堀川門, which is, as John says above, a kind of "bucket" attribution to "the school of Horikawa". 

[Geraint]

Dear Jedediah.

This is all adding up to the same outcome really.  An unsigned tanto with a pretty cautious attribution, something that the seller has failed to indicate.  Add to this the koshirae is of little interest, note the fuchi is simply a metal band around the tsuka and I wouldn't be surprised to find that the fittings were very recent.

 

So the question is, 'Why are you thinking of buying this?'  If you are heading for Juyo where will this sit in your collection?

 

All the best.

[Mushin]

1 hour ago, SteveM said:

 

 

I think maybe you are confusing 堀川門, which is, as John says above, a kind of "bucket" attribution to "the school of Horikawa". 

Steve, you are 100% correct. My bad. Looking again, Bushu Kunimasa is apparently referring to the full signature of the Horikawa smith, "Bushu Edo Fujiwara Kunimasa." Work period would indeed be Kan'ei, and the paper does point to this being a Horikawa school blade. That said, I don't see it. While the photos are poor making it hard to see a definitive link to the school, the yasurimei of the Horikawa Kunimasa referred to here are supposed to be sujikai or o-sujikai. That's not what we see. Granted, the nakago could have been reworked, and it indeed  looks to be have been repatinated by some chemical process, it all screams an extremely optimistic attribution to a smith with a small body of work. I stand by my advice to steer clear.