Bizen And Bishu Signature

[BIG]

Hi, read that the Bishu signature is not as good as the Bizen signature. The difference between long

and short signatures will be a kind of " kantei " point. May be the "Bishu osafune..." is a signature that

shows malus value?

 

Best Regards

[Kronos]

It depends on a number of factors. Firstly when was the sword made? If we take O-kanemitsu for example there's kokuho signed both Bizen (no) Kuni and Bishu and there doesn't appear to be a distinction in quality between the two. It is most likely a result of who the client was but the quality of the work being at the same level for all clientele similar to shinsakuto these days. If I ordered a Katana from a modern swordsmith I'd expect to get his best work the same as if the head of the NBTHK ordered one or anyone else of note.

 

This continues through Oei (Morimitsu, Yasumitsu etc) and up until at least Onin. Sometime after Onin in the sengoku Jidai this changes and the exact time is different depending on which source you believe. Personally i think it's when you get into the 1500's and sukesada/kiyomitsu when they differentiate between quality based on signature going from mumei (lowest quality) through: nijimei, and the various nagamei's in order (Bishu osafune, Bizen no Kuni, Bizen (no) Kuni Ju Osafune Hikobei-No-Jo [highest quality]).

 

Having said that there are Sue-Bizen Juyo's signed Bishu Ju Osafune Sukesada and there's many mediocre works signed Bizen (no) Kuni Ju Osafune Sukesada the latter may be partly due to tiredness however.

 

So overall I would say it's an indication when you get into Sue-Bizen but exceptions do apply so every sword needs to be judged on it's own merits. As a general rule mumei (if originally mumei)and nijimei are always Kazu-uchi-mono and look like it; whereas When the smiths personal name is included (Hikobei, Jirozaemon etc) they're all high quality. It's just Bishu Osafune and Bizen no Kuni that seem to present problems and this could be caused by the individual smith. So Jirozaemon Sukesada using cheaper materials and signing Bishu Ju Osafune Sukesada may still produce a fantastic katana, whereas a much worse smith using the best materials and really putting in some effort and signing Bizen no Kuni Ju Osafune sukesada may still only produce something mediocre with forging flaws and rough hada.

[Kronos]

Can one of the mods edit my post, there seems to be an issue with the forums where I can't post without going into "more reply options" which completely decimates paragraphs but i cannot edit.

[Alex A]

As James states, judge a sword on its own merits, an interesting thread on this somewhere on the forum.

[Shugyosha]

Hi Peter,

 

This may be from the thread that Alex mentions. I copied the text into my reference file some time ago and I can't remember exactly where it came from now, but it may have been put together by Jean:

 

1. Longer signatures which include personal names generally indicate higher quality blades made for a specific order. 
2. The use of Bishu rather than Bizen is supposed to indicate a lower quality (bundle sword/mass produced) 
3. There was something somewhere about the positioning of the "ju" character before or after Osafune, but I cant remember it or find the reference, someone else may be able to help on that one 
As said above these are general points and there are always exceptions : beautiful swords exist with signatures beginning Bishu and some average looking ones with full signatures. As always look at the blade and work before the signature and try to judge it on what you see there. 
As said often on this Board : sword quality does confirm the signature. There is an example of a Bishu Osafune Sukesada that is Juyo, proving the point. 

In general, the Sue Bizen smiths did use a scheme with their signatures that provides a rule of thumb to judge the intended market of their swords. 

1. Sukesada / Bishu Osafune Sukesada, you will see this on the lowest class of blade. The Juyo above is Hikobeinojo Sukesada who was the earliest of the great Sukesada smiths and he may have been following through on the older period signing style. Not clear. Generally considered mass produced, but there seems to be a lot of variation between really weak stuff and things that will be very nice and what you would expect would be Tokubetsu Hozon... and of course the one Juyo. Very hard to tell, take it on a case by case basis but know it is generally a negative indicator. 

2. Bizen no Kuni Ju Osafune Sukesada... middle class blade. 

3. Bizen no Kuni Ju Osafune John Sukesada... in this case, John is signing his personal name, expending special effort and time and attributing it as his personal work in this really big workshop of Sukesada smiths. This indicates a special-made order for a client and is always high class work. 

4. Bizen no Kuni Ju Osafune John Sukesada Made For Bob... same as above, but they've added the client's name and this is considered the highest form they did. 

When you scan through the Juyo index, you will see that there are a fair number of daitos signed (2), but I think no tantos. All the tantos from Yosozaemon Sukesada are signed (3). 

The trick with Osafune is that pre-Sue Bizen the smiths signed "Bizen Osafune Ju Whomever" if they used this pattern, and in Sue Bizen they move the Ju up so it is "Bizen Ju Osafune Whomever." People faking Yosozaemonnojo, Genbeinojo and Hikobeinojo often missed this detail and flipped it around into the "correct" spot which is "wrong" for the Sue Bizen smiths. In the Shinto period the smiths refered to "correct" form but this should be checked. 

The way the Sue Bizen guys say it, is like they have adopted Osafune into their name. Osafune Sukesada, living in Bizen, rather than Sukesada, living in Osafune town, Bizen province. 

 

 Best,

John

[Alex A]

Some info here too http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/2099-kazu-uchi-mono/

[Brian]

I think Darcy also had a decent write up about this, some of that info may be from there.

[Jean]

Confirmed: Darcy has written a complete post in one NMB topic about this subject.

[dig1982]

Mmm my i think it is a stupid statement...

 

http://iidakoendo.com/4632/

 

http://iidakoendo.com/3158/

 

http://iidakoendo.com/438/

 

http://iidakoendo.com/414/

 

I think these blade are not mass produced or low quality.

[Jean]

Kronos has summed it up. Now concernng Bizen kuni ju Osafune ... and Bizen kuni Osafune Ju, here is what Darcy wrote 2 years ago:

 

Quote:

 

Gimei or not?: post #27 Darcy

 

 

The first smith that seems to have done this is Kunimune but it was not a habit. He has some examples that read "Kunimune Bizen Kuni Ju Osafune". All of the Juyo blades though are Nijimei with the exception of the Nakahara Kunimune blades.

 

Sukemitsu in Bun'an (1444) is not recorded by Fujishiro as signing "Bizen Kuni Ju Osafune" but only using the Bishu style signature.

 

The first smiths doing this by habit seems to have been Munemitsu (Bunmei, 1469) and Katsumitsu (Bunmei) and then Hikobeinojo Sukesada (Entoku). So it appears to have been something which comes up between these generations (Sukemitsu to Munemitsu/Katsumitsu).

 

Fujishiro remarks on the habit as Osafune being used as a family name under the Kiyomitsu entry. He comments also under Munemitsu that "Osafune is the name of a place, but considered from the point that Osafune is inscribed after Bizen Kuni Ju, this means that Osafune is used like a surname. This example also appears in others of late Bizen" (i.e. Sue Bizen).

 

The latest entry in the koto period which follows this pattern is for Yukikane and Harumitsu (Tensho). Harumitsu also signed unusually with Bishu Ju Osafune and Bushi Zen no Kuni Ju Osafune. He seems to have not always used the Osafune though.

 

Hichibei Sukesada in the Shinto period (late 1600s) also used "Bizen Kuni Ju Osafune". The rest of his line seems to have continued to do this as there are entries in Kawachi no Kami Sukesada in 1688, and Godai Sukesada (Hichibei) 1751.

 

Yokoyama Sukekane in the Shinshinto period is back to signing "Bizen Osafune Ju" (Keio, 1865) as does Sukenao (1854), Sukenaga (1830), and others I assume.

 

My conclusion (which can also be picked up from several other books) is:

 

1. from Bunmei on, Osafune works in the Koto period, the rule of thumb is that Ju precedes Osafune.

 

2. if the order is not reversed, then the blade is most likely gimei

 

3. no general rule in swords is absolutely certain -- if only for the fact that we have certainly lost works so potential dissenting examples that break the rules have possibly been lost AND Japanese habit is to eliminate examples that break the rules. This further distorts the rule in that dissenting examples may seem to be more in the minority than they may have been at some point in the past, which means that conclusion #3 here needs to be respected (bearing in mind that it's a general rule itself!).

 

4. the reverse ordering clearly needs to be kept in mind in the Shinto period as well for Osafune smiths though it is not clear how tightly they kept to the habit without doing a full study of smiths more obscure than appear in Fujishiro. "

 

Unquote