Happy New Year 2010 - New tanto

[Jean]

It seems it is one of the san saku maker : Genuine or not? a few pictures

 

Tanto : nagasa 20,3cm, motohaba 1,98cm, motokasane 5,5mm

[Jean]

Some more :

[John A Stuart]

Hi Jean, It certainly would be a good year if it was Awataguchi Yoshimitsu. Although your tanto has gunome in the yakidashi I think the hamon tended to a suguba based hamon with a very slight notare after that. Fujishiro mentions how the hamon narrows at the fukuru, but, it may be due to repeated polishing/reshaping. Really though, it does tend towards the ha to me even with the likely reshaping. As to the signature it isn't Yoshimitsu 吉光, although I always thought Yoshimitsu's signature resembled 吉充. I hope I'm completely wrong. Nice tight tanto. John

[moss]

Jean,

I can only dream and dribble.

Nice looking Tanto.

 

Bonne Annee

 

Moss

[John A Stuart]

I think you might consider one of the Kagemitsu 景光 smiths of Bizen. John

[Jean]

Yes, it is Kagemitsu, one of the san saku maker (Nagamitsu group).

 

At least, it is what it is supposed to be from the papers - let's say late kamakura - Cca 1320.

 

Question : legit or not ?- tokubetsu kicho paper 1968 + unknown Kanteisho, perhaps Koichi san can provide the translation.

 

KAGEMITSU - Leaning "Stooped Shoulders" GUNOME with SAKA-ASHI

The pattern is somewhat even in height.

 

What is your thought? I am at office and have no means to check the mei.

[John A Stuart]

Maybe I'm confused. Aren't the San Saku, Go Yoshihiro, Masamune and Awataguchi Yoshimitsu? Anyway Jean, I am not convinced by the examples in Fujishiro for Kagemitsu. I hesitate since I'm not a judge, but, well quite different. The hamon for tanto references nokogiri ha. I think this is what we see, isn't it? John

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

This work doesn't look like Kagemitsu's one, this gunome is too regular and monotonous. What about an utsuri?

[Jean]

Hi John ,

 

OSAFUNE NAGAMITSU and his SAN-SAKU "The Three Makers"

 

NAGAMITSU - KAGEMITSU - SANENAGA - CHIKAKAGE

 

-Showing NAGAMITSU "SAN-SAKU" BOSHI

-Showing OSAFUNE MONOUCHI - CHU-width of less pattern

-Showing CHOJI-UTSURI - may be spotty

 

NAGAMITSU - GUNOME-CHOJI MIDARE BA with NIOI "Smoke" TOGARI

Pattern has gentle undulations of height.

 

KAGEMITSU - Leaning "Stooped Shoulders" GUNOME with SAKA-ASHI

The pattern is somewhat even in height.

 

CHIKAKAGE - Gently undulating KO-GUNOME with ASHI or CHOJI BA

 

SANENAGA - Tight NIOI SUGUHA of KO-MIDARE or KO-CHOJI SAKA-ASHI

[John A Stuart]

How foolish. I remember now, the san saku boshi. I am not sure this gunome can be classed as nokogiri ha, it doesn't slant and I think that is necessary as it is a Kagemitsu kantei point for tanto. The boshi does resemble the san saku boshi but the lack of yokote makes it difficult to pin-point for sure, for me anyway. The ko-gunome hamon can be regular in this group can't it? I know they tried to keep the hamon away from the shinogi. Here is a Nagamitsu showing the san saku boshi. John

[Jean]

In fact, the gunome in Kagemitsu is regular - that's the positive but apart that I don't know. It is very slim ans are the tokubetsu kicho paper dtd 1968 valid.

 

And what does say this unknown kanteisho posted in the translation section say?

 

Any other opinion? Reinhard? Guido? Jacques? and All :lol: :lol:

[Eric H]

Jean, for comparison

 

Tanto 26 cm - Shochu 2 - 1325

Tanto 22.2 cm - Karyaku 2 - 1327

Tanto 25.2 cm - Gentoku 2 - 1330

 

Eric

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

 

Maybe this one

 

[Jean]

Thanks Eric and Jacques for provided Oshigata.

 

One observation : all Eric' samples are nagamei, Jacques'one is niji mei.

 

In all oshigata samples provided in the kage kanji, the "upper box" is "smaller" than the "lower one"

 

Not in this tanto. That is the main difference I make between the oshigata provided.

 

All four oshigatas have differences in mei chiselling.

 

Your opinion?

[Chishiki]

Hi Jean. Have you considered looking toward Kashu Kagemitsu? Page 143 of Fujishiro. He did at times do bizen style. Also the ji and hamon would point more to this group. There were also others in the Kaga group with the same mei which would explain variations in documented examples at hand. Regards Mark

[Eric H]

BIZEN KAGEMITSU, a VERY BIG NAME

his name immediately recalls a hamon in kataochi-gunome. Jean's Kagemitsu displays a pronounced gunome in regular succession, a feature which is not expected to see in a hamon by Kagemitsu. Of course my limited opinion is based only on what was available from books and the Internet and is therefore not at all decisive. In the Token Bijutsu engl. Edition are listed 7 swords by Kagemitsu and I have attached 4 representative Tanto's.

Is there a possibility of the second generation ?

 

No. 26 - 27.97 cm Genka 2 - 1322

No. 18 - 24.20 cm Gan-Nen - 1324

No. 13 - 22.73 cm

No. 03 - 21.20 cm

 

Eric

[Jean]

Thanks a lot Eric,

 

There are few generation . The one given is the one of the san saku . But there are others

 

http://www.sho-shin.com/mitsutad.htm

http://www.sho-shin.com/kagemit.htm

 

according to this link there are at least 3 generations but as you Eric I am not convinced despite the Tokubetsu kanteisho issued in 1968 (before the "problems").

 

So, unless submitted once again to Shinsa for Hozon ...

[Ted Tenold]

Jean,

 

I too have a couple of fundamental observations against Osafune Kagemitsu.

 

1. The gunome is too uniform, too widely spaced, and not slanted or square cut.

2. The jigane is not what I would expect from the Sansaku. Too course, and not "wet" enough look to it.

3. The nakago does not have sufficient and consistant taper, and the jiri looks a bit too rounded.

*edit* Also, the sayagaki does not define "Osafune" Kagemitsu, which with works of that significance are usually defined as such.

 

The features of the Osafune Sansaku lend to tighter, more concise, and abundant gunome with Kagemitsu works sometimes even looking compressed or packed in.

 

I would expect this kind of gunome with Yoshii being a place to start. If there is very clear and regular utsuri that patterns the hamon very accurately, then this might be a Yoshii piece that was mumei.

 

I would think Kaga might also be a possibility, however Kaga is part of Hokurikudo and having masame in the ha lending to sunagashi, kinsuji, etc., would be expected. From your images, I cannot see any evidence of this.

[Jean]

Ted, agreed, I have thought of Yoshii too but that means that the blade is gimei.

 

I am going to inquire about the utsuri which was not mentionned in the description.

[Ted Tenold]

Jean,

 

All of our opinions are obviously just observational wanderings. What I'd recommend is that if this is a potential purchase, kindly ask the seller if they will guarantee the old NBTHK papers will upgrade to current equal level papers to the same attribution. That's really where the rubber meets the road.

[Jean]

That's really where the rubber meets the road.

 

This one, I will copy it in my secret book as typical American expression :D

 

It is not a purchase, I had thought of a swap, but when I saw the pictures I knew it at once, too much doubt ....That why I insisted on your giving your thoughts ...

 

Maybe good or not, who knows but I won't take the chance

[Eric H]

Jean, I'd like to add some other pics of a Moroha-Tanto, shumei Kagemitsu, whose hamon has very close similarity to yours, but I believe is of a later jidai. The picture is from Internet and is "stretched". Nagasa 22.3 cm.

In all oshigata samples provided in the kage kanji, the "upper box" is "smaller" than the "lower one"

The shumei shows the "upper box" also equal relative in size as in yours, fortuity ?, or is it the normal way to write this kanji.

Eric

[Jean]

Thanks a lot, you are very usefull my friend. As Shumei, of course, it is not the genuine mail, but the blade in itself is very interesting and furthermore a sue Bizen Kagemitsu ....

[John A Stuart]

Jean said, " I won't take the chance "

The tanto and provenence is interesting, but, I think you have made a wise choice, Jean. John