Masayoshi Tanto

[edzo]

Hello to members,

I’m happy to be back! FYI, I did not lose interest in the forum or topic, It became necessary to move to Florida in Dec 2012 temporarily (in short order), to assist my parents with their needs, medical issues and the home, they are 86 and 92 years young with numerous health issues. They are now living here (MA), with me and I am caring for them. I am happy to report that they are doing much better now!

That said, I would appreciate any assistance u are willing to provide regarding a tanto that I am examining. The Mei on the tang reads (Masayoshi), and is inlaid with gold. I remember reading that this was a practice that was performed when attributing a mumei blade to a particular smith by a qualified and respected expert. I recall that red or gold lacquer was used but this is gold. Can anyone shed some light on this, what is the difference; would it be done on a lesser blade and which Masayoshi might it be, Hosokawa, or earlier…? My first thought is that the appraiser would have applied his name and kao. The blade appears to be in good shape, not abused or as far as I am able to determine as an amateur, appears kizu free and quite old.

 

Respectfully, Ed F

[runagmc]

Hi Edward, Here are the definitions I have...

 

Kinzogan mei (gold inlayed signature) was done at the time of Osuriage to replace a mei.

 

Kinpun mei is a gold lacquer attribution on a suriage sword.

 

Shinpun mei is a red lacquer attribution on a sword with ubu nakago.

 

As far as your tanto, we probably need better pics to say much... Also the measurements blade length, width, and thickness...

[edzo]

Thank you very much for your effort and information Adam L. I will provide the vitals The nagasa is 19.3 cm, The Iori is shallow. I do not have the kasane at this time and am having a problem posting the tang sig. I will work on it tomorrow, have been out of the loop for a while.

Thank u very much for the input I will follow-up. Ed

[Jean]

Ed,

 

The third picture shows a nakago with 2 mekugi ana, the first and second picture show a nakago with one mekugi ana, why?

[Brian]

Because the 3rd picture shows a totally different unrelated tanto Jean

 

Brian

[cabowen]

Most definitely not Hosokawa Masayoshi. Earlier blade...

[Jean]

Yes, of course Brian, but which one and why posting it?

[edzo]

Hi Jean,

I'm happy to hear from u. Been away from the process for a whale and had difficulty posting the photos. Not up to speed yet. The photos intended to be posted were a close-up of the tang with the gold signature, which I cannot open on the forum and a full size scan of the reverse side of the entire blade. Am going to work on it.

 

Dear Adam, imo, I'm not sure that the tang has been altered with regard to your definition.

 

I'm going to figure out what I did wrong posting to the forum and try and improve on the pics and specs.

Respectfully, Ed.

[Jean]

Ed,

 

It seems that the third picture you posted is a nakago with two holes which does not belong to the topic. :D

 

There was a sue Tegai Yamato smith who lives in Muromachi Eisho...... But if the nakago fits well with pictures, the kaeri is very very long, makes me think of some Shimada works but it is not.

 

BTW, glad everything went well for your parents.

[edzo]

Hi Jean and others, This is an effort to send the Kinzokan-mei of the subject blade. I have not been able to view two of the photos that were posted on the forum. I'm hoping this works better.

Ed

 

Edit: added better...? photo reverse of subject blade, Thanks for the info Jean and also your good wishes, Ed

[Jean]

Very good

[edzo]

Hi again, I have some details regarding the tanto blade i submitted. Jean, thanks Jean and cabowen for the tip-off I'll explore that next. If anyone chooses to contribute more regarding this blade here are some details if I am correct.

Blade in Shirasaya, Silver Habaki.

Sugata: Hirazukuri, Hikushu-Iori mune, uchi-zori ( 2 mm)

Nagasa: 19.3 cm, Fukura not rounded, Kasane @ munemachi is 7.48 mm, Mihaba is 2.54 cm

Kisaki is Ko-maru with long turnack, Hamon appears as Notare but (slightly billowing.

Tang is shirabata-gata, katte-sagari file marks and kurijiri tip.

 

Signature is Kinzogan two character.

 

Is it possible that the Honami family applied this to a mumei blade?

 

Gratefully Ed

[Geraint]

Hi Ed,

 

Given that you have looked at kinzogan mei on other swords what are your conclusions regarding the quality of that on this tanto?

 

All the best.

[edzo]

Hi Geraint,

Thank you for participating and sharing with me your input. My second impression (while inspecting the blade), is that the Honami (I suspect), would have extended their effort to a signature as well as having a more well executed signature which is what hesitates me and begs my inquiry here. I have not seen many and as I have experienced, all is not cut in stone. Additionally, I am as a novice convinced that this is an early blade for a few reasons. I also believe it is well forged and executed which suggests to me that a kinzogan mei might be likely. I think that this is what your comment is directed to but this is part of what I'm considering here. I'm still not able to confirm and determine the age/period of a blade, my thought and efforts are only indicative if correct and am searching for that knowledge.

Gratefully, Ed

 

Edit: Hi again, sorry to say I neglected to say that another flag to me was that I thought it (the kinzogan mei), was somewhat sloppy but i am far from an expert just a hunch with motivated my curiosity. Thanks again Ed

[edzo]

Hi Jean and Chris, I'm thinking from some research I've done that you were referring to the Sue Tegai School closely related to the late Yamato products. I have found a reference to a Sakakura Masayoshi using the same yoshi character shown on the kinzogan. He dates to around koto 1504. I have not been able to review for comparrative purposes any blades by him or descriptions of his work though. I u can help or anyone else that may read this kindly comment. Indecently, The kinzogan mei is not inlaid but applied, possibly by hammering on.

 

Gratefully, Ed F

[Darcy]

Hi Edward, Here are the definitions I have...

 

Kinzogan mei (gold inlayed signature) was done at the time of Osuriage to replace a mei.

 

Kinpun mei is a gold lacquer attribution on a suriage sword.

 

Shinpun mei is a red lacquer attribution on a sword with ubu nakago.

 

As far as your tanto, we probably need better pics to say much... Also the measurements blade length, width, and thickness...

 

I haven't seen "shinpun" before but we usually call that shumei for the red lacquer.

 

I think these are the intended rules that you have, but in practice they don't always work out so clearly. There are certainly blades that are mumei and shortened which have received kinzogan by Dr. Honma and by Honami Kozon well after the fact.

 

There are shumei on suriage blades.

 

And I think sometimes kinpun may be chosen to avoid altering the nakago.

 

I had a Yukimitsu tanto where Honami Kozon did the attribution in kinpun and then added notes on the other side in shumei. That was curious.

[edzo]

Thank you Darcy for that input. My thinking was that it was an attribute to a mumei blade because (with my very limited knowledge), the tang suggested (from it's size and shape), was intended as a reliable weapon (sturdy). I was also aware that the Hon'ami conducted this practice but usually signed it as well. Given the attempts to forge tangs to mislead people I'm not sure it is a bona fide attribution but the blade looks decent to me.

Gratefully, Ed F