Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I acquired this sword over a year ago. A salute to the dealer who procured it for me.

Perhaps I will be coy, and not say who this sword is attributed to just yet. Consider this a kantei of sorts.

 

It's a Kamakura blade by a sai-jo saku smith from the Sagami provence with a relatively narrow hamon, based on suguha with choji midare.

One of the interesting features of this blade is that there are small balls of temper rising above the choji in the ji, which might be referred to as tamayaki. Kawazuko choji possibly?  

 

This sword was Tokubetsu Hozon when I bought it. It came with a nice koshirae which I have posted pictures of in some earlier posts. I also posted a pic of this sword once in response to a post about utsuri. This sword has a prominent bo-utsuri, when viewed in the right light. It is relatively rare I am led to believe, and signed examples are few. It also has a mark of pride (a kirikomi).

 

Some of the pictures are not so great (taken while I was still experimenting). All of the pictures are my own. When I get it back from Japan, I will attempt to take some better photos.

 

There is more to this story. 

 

post-2683-0-75426800-1420269889_thumb.jpg

post-2683-0-88584500-1420269916_thumb.jpg

post-2683-0-79208700-1420269930_thumb.jpg

post-2683-0-26723200-1420269944_thumb.jpg

post-2683-0-28325900-1420269957_thumb.jpg

post-2683-0-78578300-1420269990_thumb.jpg

post-2683-0-46085800-1420270010_thumb.jpg

 

Alan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted

Beautiful sword! Lovely polish and very healthy for a Kamakura tachi. That is one to be proud of I think.
Hamon and time period remind me of Ichimonji school. Those "balls" that separate from the choji are a kantei feature. I remember reading about them on a page somewhere. Maybe Fred's page?

A really healthy and beautiful sword that shows utsuri wonderfully.

 

Brian

Posted

It is not bo utsuri on this sword, but it is I think two layers. One is ko-midare that is clear at the edge of the antei. This is not a thick consistent layer of utsuri but you can see that it is fading in and out in dark bands. This is I think a second layer of choji shapes on top of it and is similar in structure to my Fukuoka piece.

 

I would not call the tobiyaki tama in this case as tama are very carefully induced and the old smiths never made something so artificial as that (as beautiful as Sukehiro's toranba is it is artificial as a plastic plant). So this is tobiyaki where it is clearly defined and yubashiri where the edge is less distinct. You can think of it as independent pieces of hamon floating around for tobiyaki and yubashiri are thick areas of nie in the ji standing out but no clear border.

Posted

I'll say Fukuoka Ichimonji now from pictures looks like midare utsuri which is more in line with Ichimonji than bo utsuri more caracteristic of Oei Bizen.

Posted

The sayagaki attributes the blade to Ichimonji. Are you saying it has a new and different attribution to a saijo-saku Sagami smith from the Kamakura period?

Posted

Okay. One more clue, before posting better pictures of the sayagaki (which would make it too easy for cabowen).

 

His adoptive father was a very important smith in the Fukuoka Ichimonji school, who later moved from Bizen to Kamakura.

 

Alan

Posted

There were (Markus'index of Japanese swordsmiths) 3 Bizen Suketsuna smiths, all quite important, none are listed as Yoshioka smiths. One is Kokubunji, the others two are Fukuoka. Searching the web I found this article about this Suketsuna who had for adopted father Sukezane (he moved from Bizen to Sagami thus the mistake of Alan):

http://www.nihonto.com/abtartkamakuraichimonji.html

Posted

I assumed since the mei of the sayagaki started with Suke that it would probably be a Yoshioka smith but that was obviously wrong given Alan's additional info.

Posted

Thanks to Darcy for correcting me on the utsuri.

 

Cabowen was correct. The sword was attributed to Kamakura Ichimonji Suketsuna.

 

In The Connoisseur's book, both Suketsuna and Sukezane are listed in the tables as belonging to Sagami province.

Sagami province was the centre of the Kamakura Shogunate, based in Kamakura. Kamakura is a city, I think, not a province. These smiths moved to Kamakura and this was the beginning of Soshu, to my understanding.

 

After I bought this sword, it was kept in Japan to be submitted for Juyo shinsa in 2013. It did not pass then.

After much encouraging, I resubmitted it in Sept. 2014 and it passed to Juto. I used Bob Benson's services to get it back to Japan. It was submitted using Darcy's NBTHK number, rather than my own membership number. All I know, is that it passed. I would assume that the attribution to Suketsuna still stands.

 

The sayagaki was supposedly written by Honami Koson in 1943.

post-2683-0-69366600-1420333763_thumb.jpgpost-2683-0-99172000-1420333741_thumb.jpg

 

Alan

 

 

 

 

Posted

I looked it up in the Token Bijutsu just now (results are published in the November journal) and it is behind a Den Sukezane as Den Suketsuna. The works of this maker are very rare. I have been lucky to have seen and examined the signed one. That plus this makes about 15% of what exists.

Posted

That it passed is all that counts. :)

A fine result for a fine sword. The Hon'ami sayagaki is also a desirable feature. One to be proud of Alan. Congrats.

 

Brian

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...