Tachi - Kashu (Kaga) Kagemitsu

[FZ1]

 

This Tachi was offered by a well-respected dealer in Japan.

 

Mei	Mumei, attributed to Kagemitsu from Kashu
Shape	Shinogizukuri Iorimune, Typical Tachi Shape with Koshisori
Region	Kaga Province
Era	Namboku-cho Period

 

Length	83cm     32.7 in
Sori	3.6cm      1.4 in
Motohaba	3.1cm      1.2 in
Sakihaba	1.9 cm      0.7 in
Mekuniane	0.7 cm     0.3 in

 

Jihada	Itame-nagare and Mokume with faint Utsuri
Hamon	Kogunome-midare with Konie, Ashi and Yo
Bōshi	Almost Sugu, Turning a bit sharply
Nakago	Ubu, Kiji-momo shape, Sujikai file pattern and a Kurijiri end
Mekugiana	1
Habaki	Copper base gold foil Tachi Habaki

 

Status/Date

NBTHK Hozon Token / 31 Jan 2013

 

Responses from the dealer to some general questions:

• There are several kizu/kitaeware flaws on the blade and they are visible through the images. However, I can tell you that there is no serious flaw. Considering the history, current conditions are quite natural and tolerable.
• This blade was forged in the Nambokucho era, over 600 years ago. It has a rich history and compared with other swords with the same tachi, it is natural. The Hamon and the Boshi are clear and the faint Utsuri is visible.  In hand, this blade appears to be mature and robust. 

 

This answer was in response to a question about the partially erased Kikumon/Ichi:

It is not a Kikumon, but someone probably engraved Kikkumon and ichi to try to be recognized as a Kikugosaku.

Kikugosaku swords mostly became national treasures, which were forged for the Gotoba Emperor in the early Kamakura Period. I think the style and shape of the sword resembles that.

Later, it appears as if someone tried to grind the non-legitimate Kikugosaku, but you can still see a little of the symbol. 

NBTHK recognized it as Mumei and not Kikugosaku. 

 

I’d appreciate thoughts on this blade from those more experienced than me.  I’d be most grateful if any critique of the blade is constructive, i.e. please provide reasons for your thoughts, so that I can learn from them (dismissive one-liners add nothing to my knowledge!)

 

I attach photos from the dealer, an image of the Hozon paper and (for convenience) the Sesko and Hawley references for the Kashu/Kaga Kagemitsu smiths.

 

Thanks,

 

Jon

 

 

[O koumori]

Hi Jon,

The nakago looks suspicious to me, like it's been in a fire.  Perhaps I'm wrong.

Dan K.

[Baba Yaga]

• There are several kizu/kitaeware flaws on the blade and they are visible through the images. However, I can tell you that there is no serious flaw. Considering the history, current conditions are quite natural and tolerable.
• This blade was forged in the Nambokucho era, over 600 years ago. It has a rich history and compared with other swords with the same tachi, it is natural. The Hamon and the Boshi are clear and the faint Utsuri is visible.  In hand, this blade appears to be mature and robust. 

 

This answer was in response to a question about the partially erased Kikumon/Ichi:

It is not a Kikumon, but someone probably engraved Kikkumon and ichi to try to be recognized as a Kikugosaku.

Kikugosaku swords mostly became national treasures, which were forged for the Gotoba Emperor in the early Kamakura Period. I think the style and shape of the sword resembles that.

Later, it appears as if someone tried to grind the non-legitimate Kikugosaku, but you can still see a little of the symbol. 

NBTHK recognized it as Mumei and not Kikugosaku. 

 

That answers all the question for me NOT buying the sword. Why go any further in picking it apart? 

[Rivkin]

Well somebody was trying to cook up a ko-bizen kissaki with a fake Ichimonji signature. Also sugata suggests Muromachi period.

[Baba Yaga]

Did the dealer acknowledge all the Kizu before you asked, because the photos supplied don't show. 

Always buy the sword not the papers. 

 

 

[FZ1]

Thanks gents.

 

16 hours ago, O koumori said:

The nakago looks suspicious to me, like it's been in a fire.  Perhaps I'm wrong.

 

Dan - I think that its more rusted than burned (i.e. poss water ingress to the tsuka).  Difficult to determine from those pics because they are pretty naff (as per Pat's comment about kizu not showing-up well)

 

 

14 hours ago, Rivkin said:

Well somebody was trying to cook up a ko-bizen kissaki with a fake Ichimonji signature. Also sugata suggests Muromachi period.

 

Indeed Kirill! 

Muromachi was also the view of one of the NMB's koto specialists when I PM'd them for an opinion;  it was actually the sugata that got my attention. 

(As per the last line of the Monty Python Pope/Michelangelo sketch, "I may not know much about art, but I know what I like"!   )

https://youtu.be/l9Aj7W3g1qo?t=228

 

 

Pat - Thanks for the comments, but I'm not looking for buying advice.  I'm looking for informative comments on the blade itself because (as per your advice), "Always buy the sword, not the papers"  

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

 

 

[Baba Yaga]

1 hour ago, FZ1 said:

Thanks gents.

 

 

Dan - I think that its more rusted than burned (i.e. poss water ingress to the tsuka).  Difficult to determine from those pics because they are pretty naff (as per Pat's comment about kizu not showing-up well)

 

 

 

Indeed Kirill! 

Muromachi was also the view of one of the NMB's koto specialists when I PM'd them for an opinion;  it was actually the sugata that got my attention. 

(As per the last line of the Monty Python Pope/Michelangelo sketch, "I may not know much about art, but I know what I like"!   )

https://youtu.be/l9Aj7W3g1qo?t=228

 

 

Pat - Thanks for the comments, but I'm not looking for buying advice.  I'm looking for informative comments on the blade itself because (as per your advice), "Always buy the sword, not the papers"  

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

 

 

 

Cool, I'd tell you how much that sword is worth and a lot more, but it's probably against forum rule 1001 

[MarcoUdin]

44 minutes ago, Baba Yaga said:

I'd tell you how much that sword is worth and a lot more, but it's probably against forum rule 1001 

 

I don't believe it's a rule unless in the for sale/trade forum. But you can always PM if them if unsure.

[Baba Yaga]

2 minutes ago, MarcoUdin said:

 

I don't believe it's a rule unless in the for sale/trade forum. But you can always PM if them if unsure.

 

Thanks Marco and I hear you. 

[FZ1]

I forgot about this thread (I've been too busy looking at everyone else's stuff!) so thought I'd best finish it off.

 

The reason I'm not looking for buying info or asking about its subjective worth is that I've owned it for some time, but I've not got round to posting it up.  I appreciate that no one can make an accurate judgement on condition, value, history, etc, without seeing it in-hand, but thank you for the comments and opinions based only on the poor quality photos.

 

I'll admit that this was a bit of a "punt" for me, but I really loved the shape, so took a gamble.  I was very pleasantly surprised on seeing it in-hand, because the kizu mentioned by the dealer are much smaller than expected (and there's only a couple of them). Overall, its in much better condition than I thought it would be.

 

Bottom line:  I love it .......and let's be honest, that's why we all spend so much time, money, effort and emotional capital on these old chunks of steel! 

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

 

[Matsunoki]

Best reason for buying anything……because we love it. I applaud. Only the sword can tell us exactly it’s history and It cannot speak.  I also like it……it exists…..we are so lucky.