flemming

With respect to Mr. Robertshaw's post, it is quite perplexing with respect to Tadayoshi's activities, since it would appear that almost all of the "Omi dai Jo Tadahiro" works of Tadayoshi are either by Yoshinobu or the "real" Omi dai Jo" Tadahiro nidai I have noticed. I actually have a theory that every sword after the bestowing of Omi dai Jo to the first Tadayoshi, were daisaku-daimei based on workmanship and signature...

If you look through the Tadayoshi school Meikan, you see that everything under 2 shaku was considered a wakizashi, and is signed "katana mei". I hope this answers the question. Lloyd

I see on ebay that another of these is being offered. It is apparently in a Toad Theme. I find it peculiar that I have not seen one of these type ever before now. The toad theme item appears to be Japanese, since the level of workmanship to produce it seems above the Chinese offerings, similar to the blade of this discussion. As a long time collector, I am puzzled by these, since they must be some sort of reproduction!? https://www.ebay.ca/itm/365786805403?_skw=sword+morikuni+kongohyoe+moritaka+tanto&itmmeta=01KDG5VV8WXXQ94F1Z8QV8K5KB&hash=item552a97b49b:g:hZsAAOSwNydn64VV&itmprp=enc%3AAQAKAAAA4FkggFvd1GGDu0w3yXCmi1d9zCpwjtNWHlFamxbvJ4G%2BoczlU%2BTLLEJCUuIgKELTYZDJxxGEVBe8uPaKR4OQtETKQc7X6jYlLbWYk6g0BK8fTuXRVJYZ5BYsKXC72v1aCc0%2BBOZNpuVZiP0%2FY%2FbhAgt7SVnucUv%2FiUOomn6ESIcs%2F%2BQZzVJSQEjCXT0qpD6w4qLgyxD5BNtSr3hN8I5G64d7g%2B5YOoB0SDbPnp51IqYxfeUc60NDa%2B2KTJr%2BGSpylYj0%2Bz%2B%2FLCMy872ivEMhJNl4e11UPkYqR9f0WZ68LkmG|tkp%3ABk9SR86074XsZg

After looking at the photos, I agree that the original machi was around the top ana. The koshi sori can be seen in the horimono. Now, the habaki is just ahead of the koshi sori, originally it would be just behind the curve. That makes the middle mekugi ana the original, making the blade about 76cm. originally? since it does look a little machi-okuri. Based on the measurements, especially mihaba taper and kasane I agree that this is an early Muromachi blade, and around this time the double shallow horimono was used by a few Kongohyoe smiths replacing the bo-hi style used during Nambukcho. The kasane had become thicker than late Kamakura blades for the most part, so they do feel quite heavy as a rule. There was a Moritaka from around 1375, the 5th generation, whose signature does appear in Fujishiro given a jidai of 1390. That may be who made your big tachi. The first Muromachi Moritaka is the 6th generation, 1409-1429 who I believe made your signed blade. It is a nice piece of work with plenty of remaining hada, and the signature makes it quite rare as most katana have lost the signatures or were not signed. Lloyd

That is my finding as well. It may be because there are only 2 generations listed in Fujishiros with signatures, and being suriage in most cases, it may be difficult to pin down the jidai with full confidence. The Juyo blade I mentioned has comments with the papers, attributing it to Nambokucho due to shape, length and nakago. I have seen few NBTHK papers with a jidai mentioned for Kongohyoe, but I do have one, ko-Kongobyoe with jidai of Bun-Ei 1264 in Tokubetsu Hozon papers. I will study the photos that you posted and possibly tomorrow will have more info. Lloyd

By the way, that is a magnificent tachi, of the Nambokucho period. I recently examined similar mumei tachi which had achieved Juyo Token papers. Lloyd

Yes! That is exactly right. It is easier to see in the oshigata. Lloyd

I am glad that you have seen the Kongohyoe book. I have written a very different and more comprehensive book about the school which I hope to publish in the new year. In my opinion the kissaki is just fine; it was originally an extended-ko and still has its shape. If you push the ko-shinogi back, it may not look proper. It is typical to find the hakikake in the boshi nearing the tip on some Moritaka blades. Because all Kongohyoe blades were made with compound sori, this enables one to figure out where the original machi and habaki were located. There is around 2 inches of koshi-sori at the base, which is not exposed in most samples, from suriage. If you can locate in the nakago this curvature, which is usually still there, originally it began abruptly, coming forward out of the habaki. If you can locate this spot you know which ana is original and where the machi was. The picture you have posted is not clear enough to be sure. Perhaps you can place a ruler beside the mune side to make it more obvious. Also, you might include some measurements to aid in kantei of period, like moto-haba, saki-haba, moto-kasane, and come to think of it, a top down photo of the kasane might be handy. Lloyd

If you could post a picture of the whole nakago plus an inch or two past the machi, it would be easier to see where the original machi was. The picture should be taken straight on if possible. It would also be nice to see a picture of the kissaki. Lloyd Flemming

As a Mitsumori the signature is not good, as it is signed Morimitsu, of which there are many generations. This one probably selling as the highly ranked 2nd generation from around Oei. Lloyd

To address the original question; hitachi metals details the 5 kinds of iron sand regionally found in Japan. See section on iron sand... http://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/tatara/index.htm Lloyd Flemming

I would like to just make some observations; it has consistencies with Ko-Aoe, like the visible utsuri, and significant original koshi-sori. It also seems to have notable saki-sori however. Of most interest is the first photo, as it shows the mokume grain crossing through the hamon into the yakiba, also found with Ko-Aoe. Regarding the first picture, it may be a reflection or something else, but along the yakiba edge, there appears to be an old nioi-line quite faded, but running in a Hoso-Suguha fashion above the edge. The hada in the yakiba seems to stop at that point, and below the dim suguha line appears a different steel, like a yakiba insert that has been cut back to re-harden the blade. The nie in the hamon looks dull, and seems to be sporadically above the habuchi, sometimes a sign of saiha. Of course, it may be some reflection, should have it in hand to really see what is going on. Lloyd

Barry, I thought your ko-Naminohira blade was outstanding, it was an excellent opportunity to study it, even for a short time. The members provided some remarkable swords for this event which were a joy to see. Lloyd Flemming

Thanks Ewe, that particular size of hada seems limited to one or two moritakas, with finer chikei and less prominence than Sadamori. That could be a Sadamori. Lloyd

And by the way, if that happens to be the or a Moritaka, then it is likely a convoluted 5 piece construction, in which the interface of the compicated yakiba piece with the ji is above the hamon, related to Hawleys #29 sub-assembly diagram. Lloyd Flemming