Chikugo Yoshikuni Tanto?

[AntiquarianCat]

So one of the daggers from my collection appears to be signed Yoshikuni and I’m not sure if it’s Gimei or worth trying to take to a shinsa.

my understanding is that its mokume hada with nie patches and some coarsish masame is consistent with what Nagayama and Markus Sesko wrote about Chikugo Yoshikuni blades in their books and so is the konie suguha hamon with its odd dimple at the start of the monouchi... Then again, I’ve had an acid “polished” sword under my nose without noticing it had acid damage so clearly I need all the help I can get.

 

If people would be kind enough to weigh in, could you all tell me if this blade seems consistent with Chikugo and the swords by the Yoshikuni line of smiths, and if it would be worth trying to bring this to a shinsa?

[AntiquarianCat]

Here are a few more photos in case if they're of any use.

If it helps there are higher quality versions of the collage photos here:  

https://app.photobucket.com/u/OddAntiquarian/p/e94fcf21-8438-4e09-a398-a0cbb845181d
https://app.photobucket.com/u/OddAntiquarian/p/951503ea-6246-494e-b7cd-51e79845ee46
https://app.photobucket.com/u/OddAntiquarian/p/cb4a00e9-394b-4386-a42d-c9c36cbbfff3

 

 

[Rivkin]

I'll throw in a very controversial statement:

Its exceptionally rare for NBTHK to classify any koto nijimei as gimei. The reasoning is that you can't prove that the tanto signed Kunitoshi was made to fake the Rai Kunitoshi and not by some later person, whose name was indeed Kunitoshi. One can argue that nagamei is factually wrong, but doing it for nijimei is difficult.

The papers issued would simply note that its a Muromachi (for example) period's Kunitoshi, even though one can reasonably suspect that it was made to be fake - but it is an old, Muromachi period's fake.

So I think this one will paper with >90% probability.

Such reasoning aside, it does appear as later Muromachi example with genuine signature (Uda?). Unfortunately with those, sugata does not get one to a very precise dating/attribution.

[AntiquarianCat]

Thank you very much for your help. By Uda do you mean this blade might have been made by the Uda school? Markus did write about how two Uda school smiths from the late Muromachi (Bunmei and Tenbun) signed their works with Yoshikuni. That would fit in with the period of manufacture you estimated.

 

Also, I’m not sure if I should be worried that my attempts at attribution are never right. I mistakenly thought this was an early shinto blade from Chikugo. Now that I think about it, the nakago seems much more worn and mineralized than other shinto examples I have so that should have been a clue. It seems that I can buy a ton of books, but at the end of the day I probably should try to attend more shows and get more experience at looking.

[Jussi Ekholm]

I would think like Kirill above that most likely it would be some unknown Muromachi period Yoshikuni, or gimei signature that was added a long time ago. As you are in Georgia (I assume in the US Georgia?), you have NTHK shinsa at some US shows. So you might want to wait for a chance to put it through NTHK shinsa in the US. Unfortunately economically I would not see sending this to Japan for shinsa as cost efficient option. Then again should we always do everything from monetary view? Personally I would run this through NTHK just for fun too to get their opinion, and also if you have local sword clubs, organizations etc. I would also ask opinions from their members.

 

For reference here is how Yoshikuni looks in Onizuka Yoshikuni signatures. Unfortunately I don't have reference examples of the lesser known late Muromachi Yoshikuni smiths.