Sword Prices during the Edo period

[Robert S]

Markus Sesko wrote an excellent summary of samurai incomes and sword prices (https://nihonto.com/samurai-income/), which identified how high sword prices from known swordsmiths were, relative to samurai real incomes ( net of enforced borrowing by Daimyos, retainer costs, etc.).  He quotes prices of 5 - 7 ryo and up for new swords, which could, depending on the income level of the samurai, be multiple years of potentially available income.  And that is only "potentially" available income, because many samurai, even those with incomes above the lowest level, were chronically going into debt.

 

I have recently been doing a lot of research into samurai economics and culture during the Edo period, and came across another reference to prices of used swords in "Tour of Duty", a fascinating book by Constantine Nomikos Vaporis on the impact of the alternate attendance system.  He provides actual ledgers from various samurai of both their regular expenses, as well as of purchases during their period in Edo.  A samurai named Mori Masana, who clearly had more money than most, although the source of his money is unclear, bought three swords during his Edo tour in 1828-29 (as well as something like 20 tsuba!).  In his ledger he noted priced for two of the swords:  1 ryo 2 shu, and 1 ryo 1 bu.  Of the latter sword he notes that it is "a fine sword that I can wear with pride", which given that he was clearly higher up in the ranks of samurai, certainly means that it wasn't a used low level "off the peg" sword, although unfortunately he doesn't give any further details.

 

While this is a very limited sample, it does indicate that even pretty decent used swords were available for a price much lower than a new sword - in a sense, (and obviously with the exception of masterpieces) it sounds like they depreciated with age - probably because they were somewhat "out of style", or didn't provide the boasting power of "look at the sword I had made"!

 

Robert S

[Hoshi]

Hi Robert, 

 

That's an interesting source. Funny that he collected so many Tsuba. I think that these were still "off the peg" swords in a sense, though. 

 

On the high-end, there are recorded transactions in the thousands of Kan (string of copper coins) and hundreds of Mai (Oban). There are also battles triggered over swords (one famous Kanemitsu comes to mind) and orders of gift giving by the Shogun rejected with stern words such as "I would rather surrender a province than part with this blade" (the blade was, as a result, named after the province). These are fascinating recorded events that demonstrate that at the Daimyo-level and above, there was a fierce competition for high-class masterpieces. Below, a Hon'ami Koyu origami for a blade attributed to Masamune with a value of 500 Mai, this is equivalent to 82.5 kg of pure gold (~165 gr per Oban), worth ~7-11M$ today depending on debasement.  

 

 

Best, 

 

Hoshi 

 

[Robert S]

Hoshi:

 

I totally agree that this wasn't a "Daimyo level" sword that he was talking about.  I'm guessing it was more like what today would be a TH level blade, or maybe low Juyo.  The top of the top end has always been astronomical, and even high end swordsmiths then had prices which were much higher - Marcus indicates that one smith quoted 100 kan for a new blade, so something like 22 ryo, way above the 5 - 7 ryo quoted by others.  The swords that Mori Masana was buying seem clearly to have been "used" swords... could even have been koto.  So not (originally) necessarily "off the peg", but also not "name" swords, and in the early 19th century, clearly available from "everyday" sword dealers for lower prices.

 

Robert

[Mikaveli]

Early Edo, around 1660-1680, Sesko quotes a basic income for low ranking retainers of 3 Ryo annually.

 

1 Ryo was approximately the cost of 1 koku of rice. If eating is going to take up one-third of your income, I'd be very surprised if they ended up with much left. Sake, sandals, clothing, accommodation etc. I read somewhere else that just a Samurais everyday (street) clothing would have been around 1 Ryo too. Spending 1 Ryo on a sword would probably have taken a decade (at that level).

 

Sesko goes on to say:

Quote

we can safely say that the vast majority of simple hanshi and gokenin wore off-the-peg kazuuchi-mono(数打ち物) and higher-paid hatamoto and daimyô ordered individual chûmon-uchi(注文打ち).

 

A hatamoto might earn more (100 Ryo upwards - two thirds earning less than 400), but around a third of that would have been spent on staff.

 

Around that time, Jo Saku / Toko 3m Yen-level smiths would costs around 5 Ryo or more.

 

So, after expenses, we're talking maybe 10% of a lower end hatamoto's salary to buy such a sword. Probably doable, but that's a big purchase.

 

 

[Rivkin]

Its difficult to make such analysis, because coins were devalued, prices fluctuated, 1710-1790 no one was buying any swords, koku stipends experienced both inflation and deflation, but I don't think two ryo stipend is something that was actually meant in the text.

Generally a very good stipend was 150 koku. Top administrator for a top clan could make 500. The least stipend was often in 25-40 koku range, and in clans like Uesugi you were expected to have a side trade at this level. Hatamoto were more or less equivalent to a lesser clan serving a major Daimyo, so they are not one to one comparable to samurai.

The main question was how much spare cash existed after expenditures, especially since the system typically aimed for "zero" as the answer. The system was also "Pareto" designed, with sharp boundaries between the classes without "in between" steps like 120 or 225 koku.

Honami valuations are more or less fantastic rather than market based.

Very few clans which could more or less consistently acquire swords at high level. Probably most exchanges involving such swords were not purchases, but gifts. In which case Honami valuation suggests the gift's value...

Very good modern sword would more often than not be under 10 Ryo, quite affordable for the upper administration. 

Then again the real market prices (i.e. pawn shops) constantly fluctuated and what would be taken as collateral at 100 Ryo in 1700 and in 1740 would be very-very different amount of material.

Edited Thursday at 01:36 AM by Rivkin

[nulldevice]

This might be relevant to this discussion.

 

This exhibit was at one of the geisha house exhibits in Kanazawa. 
 

[Hoshi]

Hello, 

 

While the primary function of Hon'ami valuation was indeed for gift-giving purposes, there are extant records of masterworks trading for large amounts. This also surprised me, as I used to believe that these valuations were symbolic. It is an interesting topic and does confirm that beyond land and estates, swords were the most highly valued objects of their time. 

 

This is, of course, the tip of the iceberg. We can assume that vast majority of transactions went unrecorded for obvious reasons.  

 

The table below compiles from reliable sources recorded transfers of properties. 

#	Meibutsu (English)	Type / smith	Approx. date of transaction (Edo)	Buyer / recipient	Seller / previous holder	Nature of transaction	Stated price	Brief note on the deal	Primary Japanese online source
1	Shinmi Rai Kunimitsu (新身来国光)	Tantō, Rai Kunimitsu	Mid-17th c. (Aizu Hoshina Masayuki’s time)	Aizu lord Hoshina Masayuki (Hosokawa Masayuki / 保科正之)	Unspecified (sword already famous)	Purchase, later献上 to shogun	3,000 kan (purchase); later 200 mai as shogunal valuation	Aizu lord buys the oversized Rai Kunimitsu tantō for 3,000 kan (“三千貫にて…お求め”) and later presents it to the Tokugawa shogun; the shogunal house then attaches a 200-mai valuation. meitou.info	名刀幻想辞典「新身来国光」
2	Ikeda Masamune (池田正宗) – purchase 1	Katana, Masamune attribution	Late Momoyama / very early Edo (Toyotomi–early Tokugawa)	Date Masamune (伊達政宗)	Earlier, unspecified owner	Purchase	1,000 kan	Meibutsuchō excerpt: “伊達政宗卿千貫にて御求め” – Date Masamune buys the blade outright for 1,000 kan. meitou.info	名刀幻想辞典「池田正宗」
3	Ikeda Masamune – purchase 2	Same sword	Same generation as above	Ikeda Bitchū-no-kami (池田備中守輝政)	Date Masamune	Purchase (re-sale)	Implied 1,000 kan (“同代にて御払ひ…御求め”)	The text records that Date disposes of the sword in the same generation and Ikeda Bitchū-no-kami “御求め” (buys it), at what is clearly understood as the same 1,000-kan level. meitou.info	同上
4	Ikeda Masamune – shogunal acquisition	Same sword	Early Edo (2nd shōgun Hidetada)	Tokugawa Hidetada, later Owari Tokugawa	Ikeda Bitchū-no-kami	Confiscation / purchase with price noted, then gift to Owari	1,000 kan	“秀忠公また千貫に召上られ尾張殿拝領” – Hidetada “summons up” the sword at 1,000 kan and then grants it to the Owari house. Financially a shogunal buy-back followed by a gift. meitou.info+1	同上
5	Asai Ichimonji (浅井一文字)	Tachi, Fukuoka/Ko-Ichimonji school	c. late 17th–early 18th c. (after princess Matsu’s marriage, Hōei era)	Matsudaira Mino-no-kami (Yanagisawa family)	“Saishō-dono” (Maeda / courtier acting as sender from Kaga house)	Paid transfer (“被遣”)	1,000 kan for that transfer (later 1,500 kan valuation in Yanagisawa hands)	Meibutsuchō text: after Matsuhime’s marriage, “right blade was sent to Matsudaira Mino-no-kami at 1,000 kan” (“右刀千貫にて松平美濃守殿へ宰相殿より被遣”). Later in Yanagisawa ownership it rises to 1,500 kan. meitou.info	名刀幻想辞典「浅井一文字」
6	Kanze Masamune (観世正宗) – Ietsuna confiscation	Wakizashi, Masamune attribution	Kanbun era – Kansei 3–4 (1663–64) and later	Shōgun Tokugawa Ietsuna (as acquirer)	Echigo lord Sakai Mitsunaga line, via Honda Nakatsukasa-no-kami	Forced re-acquisition with compensation	400 koban (“黄金四百枚拝領”)	Long transmission note records multiple re-valuations (1,000, then 3,000 kan etc.). Eventually, in Kanbun/Kan’ei years, the shogunate seizes it back and the holder receives 400 koban in gold as compensation – a de facto compulsory purchase. meitou.info	名刀幻想辞典「観世正宗」
7	Nara-ya Sadamune (奈良屋貞宗) – merchant sale	Tantō, Sadamune	Bunroku era (1592–96, Toyotomi rule; technically very early Edo contextually)	Toyotomi Hidenaga (“Kōmon Hidetoshi-kyō”)	Merchant Naraya Sōetsu of Sakai (堺・奈良屋宗悦)	Purchase, then献上 to Hideyoshi	500 kan	Meibutsuchō citation: Sakai merchant Naraya owns the blade; in the Bunroku years “右貞宗を五百貫に黄門秀俊卿求め秀吉公へ上る” – Hidenaga buys it for 500 kan, then presents it to Hideyoshi; it later passes Hideyori → Hidetada → Owari, with documentary evidence of the original price still attached in Keian 3. meitou.info	名刀幻想辞典「奈良屋貞宗」
8	Togawa Shizu (戸川志津) – Maeda purchase	Tantō, Shizu (志津兼氏)	Early Edo (Keichō–Kan’ei; Maeda Toshinaga’s time)	Maeda Toshinaga (利長卿) of Kaga	Togawa Higo-no-kami (戸川肥後守)	Purchase	“Gold 130 coins or 1,000 ryō” (two alternative figures)	The entry explains that Togawa Higo-no-kami once owned the piece; Maeda Toshinaga later “求む” (buys it) at “黄金百三十枚歟小判千両歟両様の中にて” – either 130 gold pieces or ca. 1,000 ryō. It is subsequently presented to Hidetada and re-valued at 100 mai, then moves via Kii Tokugawa and back to Owari. meitou.info+1	名刀幻想辞典「戸川志津」
9	Sayo Samonji (Sayo no Sayo-monji) (小夜左文字) – famine sale	Tantō, Samonji (左文字)	Kan’ei 4 (1627), Kokura famine	Unspecified external purchasers (via intermediaries such as Doi Toshikatsu, according to later traditions)	Hosokawa Tadatoshi (忠利), 2nd Kokura / later Kumamoto lord	Emergency sale to raise famine relief funds	Price not explicitly recorded in Meitou Gensō Jiten	The meitou article notes that in Kan’ei 4, during the great famine in Kokura, Hosokawa Tadatoshi, to relieve his starving subjects, sold off the celebrated tantō “Sayo Samonji” together with the daimyō-grade tea caddy “Ariake / Ankokuji Katatsuki”. This is one of the clearest cases of a great meibutsu sword being liquidated in early Edo. meitou.info+1	名刀幻想辞典「小夜左文字」
10	Sayo Samonji – Yamauchi acquisition	Same sword	Late Azuchi–Momoyama / very early Edo	Yamauchi Kazutoyo, lord of Kakegawa	A local polisher (togishi) who had received/kept the blade	Purchase (“買い上げて所有”)	Price not given	Before the Edo-period daimyō circulation, the same article relates that Yamauchi Kazutoyo bought the tantō from the sword-polisher in Kakegawa who had used it in the famous revenge episode; this is described explicitly as “研師から山内一豊が買い上げて所有”. meitou.info	同上
11	Ikoma Samonji (生駒左文字) – exchange & resale	Katana, Samonji attribution	Mid-17th c. (after transfer to Ogasawara)	Honami house, then various daimyō	Ogasawara clan finds it ill-omened	Exchange (道具替え) and later resale (売買)	No explicit price for the exchange; later 1,000 kan valuation in Honami origami	The Ikoma Samonji is eventually considered unlucky; the Ogasawara family has Honami take it in exchange for another sword (“本阿弥家に渡し別の刀と交換した”), and the Honami house later sells it onward (“その後本阿弥家から他家に売買され”). This is a documented secondary-market transaction, even though the exact sum is not recorded. meitou.info	名刀幻想辞典「生駒左文字」
12	Kodama Masamune (小玉正宗) – transfer with prior purchase	Tantō, Masamune attribution	Early Edo (Keian era)	Owari Tokugawa (Yoshinao), later Takasu-Matsudaira branch	Naruse Hayato-no-shō family, earlier holder	Gift / transfer “received from Naruse” with earlier 1,000-kan purchase on record	1,000 kan (折紙), earlier price 130 mai	Entry gives “小玉正宗 無銘長八寸三分半 代千貫 尾張殿… 是ハ右兵衛督様御拝領 成瀬隼人正より請取”. The sword is in Owari hands with a 1,000-kan origami; it is explicitly said that Yoshinao received it from Naruse Hayato-no-shō. The earlier price of 130 mai is preserved in documents, making this a well-documented transfer, though the act from Naruse to Yoshinao is framed as “拝領” rather than a straight commercial sale. meitou.info+1	名刀幻想辞典「小玉正宗」

Edited Thursday at 07:31 AM by Hoshi

[PNSSHOGUN]

More on the subject of sword prices during the Shin Shinto era: 

 

https://markussesko.com/2019/09/06/breakdown-of-price-for-sword-blade/

[Robert S]

On 11/12/2025 at 5:05 PM, Mikaveli said:

Early Edo, around 1660-1680, Sesko quotes a basic income for low ranking retainers of 3 Ryo annually.

 

1 Ryo was approximately the cost of 1 koku of rice. If eating is going to take up one-third of your income, I'd be very surprised if they ended up with much left. Sake, sandals, clothing, accommodation etc. I read somewhere else that just a Samurais everyday (street) clothing would have been around 1 Ryo too. Spending 1 Ryo on a sword would probably have taken a decade (at that level).

 

Sesko goes on to say:

 

A hatamoto might earn more (100 Ryo upwards - two thirds earning less than 400), but around a third of that would have been spent on staff.

 

Around that time, Jo Saku / Toko 3m Yen-level smiths would costs around 5 Ryo or more.

 

So, after expenses, we're talking maybe 10% of a lower end hatamoto's salary to buy such a sword. Probably doable, but that's a big purchase.

 

 

Because I'm researching these issues, I got a copy of a book that Markus Sesko mentioned "A Study of Samurai Income and Entrepeneurship" by Kozo Yamamura.  (As an aside, a copy of the book popped up in small town bookstore in British Columbia!  I'd love to know why :-) )

A good example of the data in the book is a table on the distribution of incomes in Okayama han in 1673, 1700, and 1840 to 44.  For 1700:

	In the year 1700
stipend in koku	Number of retainers	Total cost
10000+	6	60,000
5-10,000	3	22,500
1 - 5,000	25	75,000
500 - 1,000	36	27,000
400 - 500	22	9,900
300 - 400	81	28,350
200 - 300	159	39,750
150 - 200	101	17,675
100 - 150	54	6,750
50 - 100	217	16,275
30 - 50	427	17,080
20 - 30	1126	28,150
10 - 20	270	4,050
< 10	93	837
Total	2620	353,317
Median income, koku	20 - 30
Mean income	135

 

This table includes both retainers paid in koku, and in hyo.  The book gives some context about this data:

1. Many of the lower level retainers were in fact paid by higher level retainers, not the han.  Thus this han (with a value of 350,000 koku) was not spending its entire nominal income on wages, as it would appear.
2. Many of the retainers at the bottom of the income scale may have been "part time samurai"- foot soldiers who farmed as well.  Their stipend thus did not include their income from farming.
3. This table is before any obligatory "loans" back to the han, so actual available income will have been less.

At the end of the day, most samurai remained eternally broke.

[Mikaveli]

Thanks @Robert S - that's really good / interesting information.

 

Very useful to see it compiled into a table like that - as it shows us what a typical samurai earned.

 

There's an odd spike around 200 koku, where otherwise the distribution largely follows a decline in number of recipients with greater income, after the median.

[Mikaveli]

Are the stats much different in 1673?

 

I'd really like to see the data from 1600-1660 too, but doesn't look like that book goes so far back.

[Robert S]

16 minutes ago, Mikaveli said:

Are the stats much different in 1673?

 

I'd really like to see the data from 1600-1660 too, but doesn't look like that book goes so far back.

I was going to include the 1673 stats, but they look like there may be some issue with completeness at the lower income levels there.  While there was a trend of increasing the overall number of retainers over time, the number of retainers under 200 koku is 212 in the 1673 data, and 2288 in the 1700 data.  I suspect that retainers of retainers may not be included.  It thus didn't look as useful in understanding the total income spread.

 

The book indicates that for Okoyama han, the records available are largely annual for the last +/- 200 years of the Tokugawa period.  I suspect that the 1673 records are therefore at the early end, and 1600 - 1660 may not be available from that source.

 

The book does include lots of detail on the finances of bannermen in direct service of the Tokugawa, including wage rates of particular positions, and the number of retainers they were expected to maintain, by class.  Most of this data is from the 18th century, though.