WAKIZASHI

[When Necessary]

I think @Jacques is right.

Looks different to me.

[David Flynn]

The middle one is in Soshu script.  Many smiths used both types.

[Bryce]

G'day Dee,

I would say the mei is well within the limits of variability you see in Gassan Sadakazu's work, especially when you consider the low resolution photo of the rusty nakago we are working with.

This tanto is definitely worthy of a closer look. The horimono looks strange, because at some point, someone has taken to the blade with a sander and worn it down. It is hard to say from these photos what damage has been done and how much value is left in the blade, but I stand by my opinion that this tanto could very well be shoshin.

 

Jacques are you saying that in general Gassan Sadakazu's mei have some peculiarities or just this particular example we are looking at in this thread?

Cheers,

Bryce

[Lareon]

I agree with Bryce, the mei is close enough to warrant a deeper look or at least better pictures, the remnants of the kokuin of Sadakazu is also a good indicator in my eye although i have also seen gimei kokuin for Sadakazu multiple times. As for what is left of the blade. It is damaged but if it was mine and real i would still send for shinsa and polish (easy to spend someone elses money though)

As for the negatives on the mei, there are definitely some discrepencies. The san kanji is definitely not typical Sadakazu. 
If i was a betting man i'd probably go gimei

[Jacques]

Quote

I would say the mei is well within the limits of variability you see in Gassan Sadakazu's work

Wrong, there is nothing in this mei to suggest that it is by Sadakazu. This mei is engraved clumsily, whereas Sadakazu's is very regular, and there are obvious errors (red circle). As for the rust and wear of the mei and yasurime, they are highly suspicious for a tanto from that period.

[Lareon]

for me the san is the biggest indicator. 

It's missing a strike on the left, the middle is horizontal instead of angled and the right hand stroke is vertical isntead of a curve

[Lareon]

[Bryce]

G'day Guys,

Great discussion. Below I have included the other photo of the mei that Gordon posted. You can see it gives a different perspective of the kanji. As I said earlier, we are looking at a fuzzy photo of a rusted nakago, so we can't be sure that what we are seeing is an accurate picture of the mei. In regard to the missing tagane in the "san" kanji, both Gassan Sadakazu and his son Sadakatsu are a little "cavalier" in their use of them. They add them or not depending on whim. Remember, this is all chiseled by hand, so no two mei are exactly the same. You have to look at the way the kanji are constructed, rather than looking for exactly, identical copies.

Cheers,

Bryce

PS Jacques in regard to the rust, where I live steel can get that rusty in under a year, let alone 150 years.

 

 

[Jacques]

@Bryce 

Nice strawman... Angle is still wrong. What about tagane makura ? 

 

Quote

this is all chiseled by hand, so no two mei are exactly the same

Totally wrong!  You've never seen engraving a mei. They can be identical with exactly the same number of hammer blows.

 

[Alex A]

Curious Jacques. Are you saying you wont find papered swords by that smith at roughly the same time (which i haven't studied in particular) with lets say what appears to be an oddball stroke?. As in say machine stamped style?

[Lewis B]

58 minutes ago, Alex A said:

Curious Jacques. Are you saying you wont find papered swords by that smith at roughly the same time (which i haven't studied in particular) with lets say what appears to be an oddball stroke?. As in say machine stamped style?

I think he's saying the chiselling technique is so precise after you've chiseled the same kanji on nakago countless times, over many years, that it does appear like its machine-made. I have several kitchen knives by a swordsmith with hand chiseled Mei and they would be hard to differentiate without the aid of a magnifying lens, such is the muscle memory acquired over many years. Differences would only be discernable if a different style of chisel was used. Or if its daimei......

[Alex A]

41 minutes ago, Lewis B said:

. Differences would only be discernable if a different style of chisel was used. Or if its daimei......

 

As i said, don't know this smith but have noticed subtle differences in mei of other smiths, with blades made at the same time and papered. Maybe this smith has an outstanding reputation for highly accurate mei?, i don't know

 

I guess we have been around this issue many times here. Im always open minded to the odd variation for one reason or another so don't assume a mei will always be as if machine stamped accuracy.

 

Just to add, im not talking about mei that are miles off, just the odd stroke that is a bit oddball.

 

[Jacques]

Quote

Or if its daimei....

Not even, that's why daimei have deliberate differences (Kunisada for example). You still haven't answered the question.

 

What do you think about this one ?

[Bryce]

G'day Jacques,

The oshigata above is a daimei by Gassan Sadakatsu for his father Sadakazu.

In regards to every mei being identical, here is a collage I put together of eight Sadakazu tanto mei done in this same style, all around the same time. All of these blades are papered to Sadakazu. Are they identical - definitely not.

Cheers,

Bryce

 

[David Flynn]

Bryce, the Oshigata Jacques supplied and you claim to be Daisaku, is it papered?  If so, is it papered Daisaku?  If not please stop claiming some swords are Daisaku.  The Daisaku argument has been going on for Millenia.  I have had this argument with Chris Bowen, over Shigetsugu swords. Most collectors I've met over time, will guess certain late produced swords of a smith, with known students are Daisaku, however, unless the Sword Socs. paper as Daisaku, one must accept them as Shoshin.

[Bryce]

G'day David,

It isn't an argument it is a simple fact. Daimei/daisaku swords are accepted as shoshin. 

Cheers,

Bryce

[Jacques]

Quote

The oshigata above is a daimei by Gassan Sadakatsu for his father Sadakazu..

Right (you own Fujjishiro's shinto hen) but how can you see it's a daimei ? 

 

I've a big doubt the third (from left) on the above line is a Sadakazu from Meiji...  

https://eirakudo.shop/token/tachikatana/detail/838671

 

I'm waiting for an answer to my asking 

[David Flynn]

Bryce accepted by whom?  As far as I know, if a sword soc. is convinced it's Daisaku, they will either knock it back or paper it as Daisaku.  Why not use "Probably" instead?   

[Bryce]

G'day Jacques and David,

I don't own any Fujishiro books. Do you accept that it is possible to recognise a person's handwriting? It is exactly the same with nihonto mei. My sole nihonto focus now is pretty much just Gassan Sadakazu and Gassan Sadakatsu. I look at examples of their blades nearly every day and have done so now for about 5 years. To me, the fact that the oshigata Jacques posted is of a blade signed by Sadakatsu for his father, rather than signed by Sadakazu himself is as obvious to me as the difference between night and day. I have a hard time believing you guys can't see it as well.

 

Previously I have posted about a blade signed Gassan Sadayoshi, which has a Tanobe sayagaki, stating it is actually a work by Sadakazu and also a blade signed Sadakazu, with a Tanobe sayagaki stating it is actually a work by Sadakatsu. I shouldn't say daimei are accepted as shoshin, they actually

are shoshin.

Cheers,

Bryce

[Alex A]

I get why Jacques has noticed the 3rd example. It does appear oddball and a bit clumsy and most folks would be suspicious.

 

Though if papered, i guess it is what it is. From memory, think someone pointed out years ago that if a sword is bang on but the mei a bit off in one way or another, it may still paper.

 

I could see how this could be the case. Its not an exact science, so to speak. Busy Shinsa etc etc etc.

 

Actually, this can be the case as have owned such a sword, do forget sometimes.

[Alex A]

Just to add and finally my own personal conclusion to all this, once and for all.

 

With regards Papers and mei, there are always going to be OUTLIERS.

 

Though it has to be said. If your buying a sword by a big name smith, even if its papered, most will scrutinize the mei for accuracy and want it near as dam to the books/norm.

 

 

[Brian]

The above all considered, I have a ton of respect for those who pick a very specific theme and focus on just that, learning as much as they can about one particular school or smith or style.
I give them a lot of credit when it comes to info, since it's easier to study one topic instead of trying to know them all, and these guys often pick up stuff even the experts/NBTHK etc etc might now.
For example Roger when it comes to Hizento, and our members like Bryce here studying these 2 smiths, and other members studying Natsuo, etc.
Infallible, of course not. But credit where credit is due.

[Alex A]

Aye, seeing what comes up on various sales sites etc over the years and compiling and studying, one could learn a lot and every so often raise an eye brow, so to speak.

 

Also, to be fair, at times it must give a Shinsa team an headache

[Bugyotsuji]

The Shinsa team look at about 6,000 blades a year, I once heard. Some days when you are not feeling too sharp yourself…

[Jacques]

 

Quote

My sole nihonto focus now is pretty much just Gassan Sadakazu and Gassan Sadakatsu.

And you are unable to describe the characteristics that these two smiths have in common. 

You still haven't told me how you knew it was a daimei.

[2devnul]

3 hours ago, Brian said:

For example Roger when it comes to Hizento

Like in my example. Roger honestly gave up on judging if it is genuine 3rd Tadayoshi or Gimei. He can't be sure, especially without having sword in hands. 

On the other hand @Jacques gave his Gimei judgment based on few pictures, so ...

 

5 hours ago, Alex A said:

Though if papered, i guess it is what it is. From memory, think someone pointed out years ago that if a sword is bang on but the mei a bit off in one way or another, it may still paper.

And mistakes (both giving a paper or call it Gimei) may happen, right? 

[Alex A]

Mistakes must happen, Adam............that's humans.

 

When you think about it, the only real way to be sure a smith signed a sword is to have been there and watched it happen, other than that its all probability, some a lot more probable than others.

 

 

[Bryce]

G'day Jacques,

To add to what Adam said about Roger and Hizento mei, most examples of Gassan Sadakazu/Sadakatsu mei are easy to pick, but there are a small number where it isn't immediately obvious. We are dealing with humans here, not machines, so there is variation. There is no single thing that differentiates or unites the two, it is the sum total of a large number of characteristics. If I use the oshigata that Jacques posted, which I have already said was signed by Sadakatsu and sandwich between it and another Sadakatsu mei one actually signed by Sadakazu, you can see the differences. So Sadakazu in the middle, Sadakatsu each side.

Cheers,

Bryce

 

[Bryce]

Actually, maybe this is a better way of showing the comparison. I replaced Jacques oshigata, with the photo of a Gassan Sadakatsu katana dated Taisho 10 (1921).

Cheers,

Bryce

 

[Jacques]

Bryce, 

 

You still haven't answered my question, and I'll tell you why: You don't know the answer. For someone who claims to be an expert on these two swordsmiths, that's a bit silly.

 

An oshigata is not a photograph; there are things that cannot be seen.