Kobizen Yoshikane

[Jean]

This morning on Aoi Art.

 

https://www.aoijapan.com/katana-mumeiunsigned-attributed-to-kobizen-yoshikane-nbthk-28th-juyo-token

 

Just to draw your attention on the Shinsa oshigata and Aoi Art's one. The boshi is not the same at all. The real one is very close to the edge.

 

Always be weary about AA oshigata.

 

There was a Juyo sword for sale 1 or 2 years ago on AA website.

 

AA oshigata was totally different from the juyo one, but close to the pictured blade. One could say, there was a mix of 2 different blades. No, it was the same blade. There was only one conclusion. The blade had been retempered between juyo shinsa and its display on AA website. Always compare oshigata when available...

[Bugyotsuji]

A good exercise Jean to train the eye. Many thanks.

[seattle1]

Hello:

 How interesting Jean. I saw Aoi listing this AM and, while not personally willing to go quite as far as you, I did think it curious that the cut in the shinogi a little below the yokote looked more closed in the shop photograph than in the Juyo page shown. I also thought the quality of the oshigata provided by Aoi wasn't up to the usual high standard seen. Individual interpretations of people doing those drawings can vary quite a bit.

 If we assume is was saiba do you think the entire blade was done or just the boshi area? If it was done, presumably it was to show a more robust boshi, but would that be value adding or deducting for the blade?

 Curious to hear your thoughts.

 Arnold F.

[Jean]

Arnold,

 

2 swords

 

The first one posts today, the real boshi is reflected in Shinsa oshigata and not in AA's one

 

Second one posted at least one year ago (ko Aoe if I remember well). The blade had been retempered beween the juyo shinsa and the time it is posted on the web site, boshi was larger and as the original blade was almost ubu, the saiha made it ubu... very tricky

[Valric]

How do you see this? Could you point out what image you use to reach this conclusion about the Boshi? you mean by comparing the AOI and Juyo Oshigata? 

 

EDIT : you posted the reply before I could post my question! all clear. 

[J Reid]

Jean, the differences between aoi oshigata and juyo seem to be purely the artists interpretation, imo. I find it hard to think any reputable smith would retemper a juyo sword these days (as the risk for damage is high) especially one with boshi still intact.. It's more likely that a cosmetic polish was applied and that it is reflected in the oshigata as oppose to the actual boshi.

[ROKUJURO]

...... If we assume it was saiba do you think the entire blade was done or just the boshi area?......

Arnold,

 

you cannot heat-treat a part of the blade because other parts would completely loose their HAMON. The hardness goes down as soon as the steel is exposed to temperatures above 220°C (roughly). 

[Gakusee]

While I have noticed in the past the more creative interpretation of AA's oshigata, and personally do not trust them too much, in this case the boshi in AA's oshigata looks like the black & white photo with the kirikomi. If the photo is from the Juyo zufu publication, then AA is pretty close. If not, it might be the polish.

Jean was taking about a completely different blade when he was talking about possible retempering. Here I cannot see indications of retempering.

[Jean]

Thanks Michael to have translated my thought/post

 

The one retempered was posted on Aoi Art website one or two years ago. When the boshi and the ha machi in AA pictures and in AA oshigata are totally different from the juyo zufu, there is only one conclusion.

 

Concerning the picture, Michael, what you see is the keisho polish and not the real one.

 

The boshi as shown in AA oshigata is the boshi of a late Kamakura or Nambokucho blade and not of an Heian blade ..

[Gakusee]

I agree that boshi looks too healthy and possibly indeed skilful togi work has been involved. But it is not bad for Heian even in the Juyo oshigata.

I like the package and personally I also like kirikomi and ko-Bizen.

[seattle1]

Hello Jean C.

 This whole thread is giving me one of those " Who's on first?" feelings.

 I guess I don't have the technical knowledge to know that a blade can't be partially retempered, though I suppose if it could it would be the transitional area the characterizes the kissaki in several ways. I have heard one polisher talk about some pretty spooky things that some claim can be done these days by way of "repair" without leaving a smoking gun behind.

 Arnold F.

[Ray Singer]

Yakitsugi-bôshi (焼継ぎ帽子)

 

Quote below from Usagiya:

 

http://www.ksky.ne.jp/~sumie99/episodes.html

 

"Step-hardening

 

Kokaji was shown an old Naginata by a customer. It was very old, may be from Kamakura period or Nambokucho period, but very healthy with its meat. It was a little shortened.

 

The owner was proud of the blade. But Kokaji found that the hamon was a step-hardening, above the monouchi was a re-hardened new hamon. The owner was disappointed with that.

 

Sometimes we find such work on old blades.

 

The original hamon disappears before the new hamon. Then the reproduced hamon starts with mizukage.

 

This blade was polished very well by the modern style. Of course the hadori (white pattern) was made as one continuing hamon pattern. So it was a little difficult to break the trick of step-hardening for beginners.

 

Anyhow, it is impossible to connect new hamon to the original hamon."

[Ray Singer]

Also a great article from Markus.

 

https://markussesko.com/2013/05/25/new-boshi/

[Vermithrax16]

Fascinating!

[Stephen]

Interesting thread 

[J Reid]

I just don't understand why someone would have a blade retempered that has already achieved juyo status.. there must be another answer

[Jean]

I have created this new post for members in order for them to exercise their eyes . Just be weary and train your eyes. This blade is Ok but should the new owner decide to have it polished again based on AA oshigata ....

 

Josh,

 

The answer is money.

 

In 2014, the blade was a Juyo Aoe Kanetsugu.

[Ray Singer]

https://www.aoijapan.net/katana-kanetsugu27th-nbthk-juyo-token/

[Valric]

So the latest polish of the blade has used a clever Hadori masking to "rejuvenate" the Boshi area, is that the conclusion? And AA's Oshigata followed the new hadori line on the boshi, while the Juyo Oshigata refered to true hamon showing in the the old polish? 

[mywei]

can someone point out on the ko aoe Kanetsugu blade where the retempering was? I think I can see what Jean is talking about but not 100% sure

[Shugyosha]

I'll take a punt at the kissaki again: it looks a lot more healthy in Aoi's oshigata when compared to that in the Juyo papers but for me the light/ dark photograph that highlights the nioi guchi isn't sufficiently clear in this area for me to tell if it's hadori or something more.

[Jean]

Look also at the hamachi, the hamon in the juyo zufu runs through the hamachi, in AA oshigata and pictures, the hamon stops just at the hamachi as if it was ubu.

 

The nioi guchi is perfectly visible and not corresponding to the juyo zufu. The Mizukage does not appear on the juyo zufu oshigata...

[Shugyosha]

Thanks Jean - I've got to learn to look harder.

[Darcy]

I just don't understand why someone would have a blade retempered that has already achieved juyo status..

 

 

I can immediately think of two reasons. 

 

I have seen many blades modified between Juyo and Tokuju. From the innocent but hubris filled getting kinzogan mei done, to the downright profane that bothers me. Of course the modification we don't even think about is repolishing.

 

I posted one here of a blade that the owner cut the mei off himself but preserved the mei. He cut it off because some expert told him it was gimei on the "internet of 1950" or whenever he did it. When it passed Juyo the NBTHK accepted the mei as a detached piece of steel that he had preserved maybe out of guilt. When the blade passed Tokuju it was now inset as gakumei. Which may also have been done out of guilt. Or out of preservation. 

 

The question is: was that wrong to do? I am not sure. Why is it wrong to do gakumei now once the damage is done vs. doing it in 1600? Well we don't like to modify things so maybe it would be better to just make a nice tosogu style box to house the mei in and have it remain as a lesson to everyone to be careful about the damage one single opinion can cause. 

 

Whomever buys the sword now and doesn't do the level of digging that I like to do, just even basic digging, is going to assume it was done in the 1600s, that's the problem with modifying it now. 

 

That modification, it's hard to know if it was done to upgrade the sword or not. I have seen others that were absolutely attempts to upgrade the sword. For those that passed by like this there are others that were not successful.

 

Japanese and western interpretations of health I find to be different. If you want a healthy Tokuju  you need a bright hamon and flawed jihada is OK. A westerner will tell you the blade is tired and won't buy it because of the flaws. The same guy might buy an intact jihada blade though the hamon is dim, submit to Tokuju and it fails and he won't understand why. Japanese interpretation is that the blade is tired because the hamon is no longer vivid. 

 

So therein one can find the answer to one reason why it might happen. As well a blade that might be able to pass for ubu could indeed pass for ubu after retemper.

 

What's the other reason?

 

Pretty simple actually.

 

Same reason as always.

 

Your house caught on fire.

 

Sounds rare but my house caught on fire once. Well my apartment building anyway, nothing so energizing as waking up in the dead of winter to finding out the floor above you is ablaze. Within a couple of years I went out for beers once with a friend. When we were done our beers I walked her home but she was now homeless as her building had burned down while we were out. 

 

The other weird mod I posted here some time ago was a completely healthy and original looking Hiromitsu that I saw once that had a nakago filed over and a kinzogan mei and date put in place. I found the blade later in the Jubi books and it had the original mei. I couldn't fathom what had happened and so looked it up in the Juyo and got Markus to translate it, wherein the truth was revealed: someone stole the blade and pounded out the mei and date to hide its origin. Because it had passed Jubi before they could reconstruct the mei with kinzogan so again, modified an old blade to try to repair in a way the modification carried out by the thief. 

 

The reason became very obvious once you heard the story. The problem is, none of us are thinking in a way required in any of the above circumstances to imagine why someone would do these things. Why would you take a hacksaw to a signed Enju Kunitoki to cut the mei off? I mean... at least why are you cutting the end off the blade? Do it yourselfing to the worst level. 

 

So it can be hard to fathom why exactly some of these things are done. Some are obvious right off the bat, like making a bohi that was an add-on look original by grinding out the groove into the nakago. I have seen that too. I also was told by a western collector that he had a togishi change bohi because he didn't like the aesthetic. He got pissed at me when I got pissed at him for altering a kantei point (I forget the name of this type, where the top end of the bohi finishes well before the yokote, said to be done as a Nanbokucho period thing, he had it adjusted to look like the standard style and killed some of the value of his blade...) 

 

Devils can predict what angels will do, but angels can't properly understand the mind of devils so can't predict or fathom why they do what they do or what they are capable of. 

[Pete Klein]

Damn good thing I dwell in Purgatory...