Signed, ubu, Fukuoka Ichimonji school, Kozon sayagaki. This will be an interesting blade to follow

[Lewis B]

Ticks many boxes for a potential collector of Ichimonji.  Certainly a rare, early tachi with Yoshimochi Nijimei. Starting price seems way under market. Are the condition issues dragging it down, tired, little ko-choji midare activity? The usual references offer minimal info about this smith.

 

https://www.aoijapan.com/tachiyoshimochi-ichimonji-school-nbthk-tokubetsu-hozon-token-nbthk-certificate/

 

YOSHIMOCHI (吉用), Kenchō (建長, 1249-1256), Bizen – “Yoshimochi” (吉用), Fukuoka-Ichimonji school, according to tradition a student of Sukeyoshi (助吉), there are relative many blades of Yoshimichi extant, most of the tachi have a slender, rather small and refined sugata and only a few are larger and have a wide mihaba, the kitae is a very dense and finely forged itame with midare-utsuri, the hamon bases on suguha and shows regular ko-chōji, in some cases he also hardened a pure suguha, blades which are dated around the Shōō era (正応, 1288-1293) are attributed to a supposed 2nd gen., the bōshi ist sugu with a ko-maru-kaeri, the tip of the tang is a kurijiri and the yasurime are katte-sagari, his niji-mei ist quite small and chiselled on the shinogi-ji of the tang, jōjō-saku ◎

[SteveM]

 Both Aoi's Japanese and English websites are mistaken. The Japanese website claims the sayagaki and polish were done by "the famous Hon'ami Kōkei", but Hon'ami Kōkei died in 1800 or thereabouts. And...I don't think he was particularly famous. He seems to be a bit obscure.  The English website is completely lost in translation, as it says the sayagaki and polish were done by Hon'ami Kōson. Anyway, the sayagaki has a date of 1990, so it couldn't have been written by either Hon'ami Kōkei or Hon'ami Kōson. The sayagaki isn't signed by the author. 

 

The sayagaki does say that the polish was done by "Kōkei" (光敬), who I presume refers to the living national treasure sword-polisher Ono Kōkei (小野光敬), who died in 1994. 

 

No idea about the condition of the blade. Looks OK from the photos. Ubu, signed, published in a very old book (Muromachi-era "Ōsekishō" 往昔抄), validated by the NTHK in 1980, and by NBTHK in 2020. One worth looking at in hand. The timing of the NBTHK papers makes me wonder if this sword maybe never quite got the approval of the old guard at the NBTHK.  

[nulldevice]

The blade looks like a good reference for a Yoshimochi signature but the blade itself looks quite tired. It looks like a lot of material has been lost on this blade near the motohaba which at first may appear as funbari, but I believe it is just lost material due to a lot of polishes. But as a historical piece, if you can live with the tiredness, you do get an ubu, zaimei tachi that is almost 800 years old. 

[eternal_newbie]

59 minutes ago, nulldevice said:

But as a historical piece, if you can live with the tiredness, you do get an ubu, zaimei tachi that is almost 800 years old. 

 

Suspect it may have been dumped by someone who was hoping it could go Juyo, being ubu zaimei Ichimonji, and decided to cut their losses when it failed a couple of times. But for someone who cares more about the historical value/significance, it could be a good pick up - assuming there aren't bigger flaws being hidden by the photography.

[klee]

I was quite confused as to why the starting bid price is so low.

 

Even without the confusion in translation, it s still an ubu signed Ichimonji.

 

Wouldnt this be a near guaranteed Juyo ??

[Rivkin]

In the auction it will go higher... 

However the prices of signed Ichimonji in suguha-like execution, tired - were never super-high.

This one is not really suguha, there is definitely plenty of choji and activity but its probably still not the most active blade in hand.

It may sound conspirational but I was always surprised by how large percentage of signed Ichimonji blades are actually less active compared to an average suriage one... or is it just my impression.

I am not sure its a great Juyo candidate, could be, but it looks like a nice blade anyway.

[Sebuh]

honestly a fan of this blade, if it came up in a month or so i probably might have gone for it

[atm]

545g is lightweight for it being nearly 75cm in length. I agree with others that it appears to be tired, and the weight suggests that it has lost a lot of material over the years. But zaimei and ubu would seem to be worth more than the auction’s low starting price. I’m guessing it will go for quite a bit more.

[PNSSHOGUN]

Certainly very interesting and a relatively small price for what it represents. If given a choice, I would prefer an O-suriage example that was healthier and possessed all the attributes the Ichimonji school is so revered for.  

[Bugyotsuji]

Can’t see ‘Fukuoka’ mentioned anywhere, though.

[nulldevice]

31 minutes ago, Bugyotsuji said:

Can’t see ‘Fukuoka’ mentioned anywhere, though.

Yoshimochi is passed down as the son of a Fukuoka smith and there is a Juyo 61 tachi signed that includes Fukuoka Ichimonji in the attribution. 
 

Earlier setsumei just tend to state his parentage and school lineage through his father and not make other mention of it. 

[nulldevice]

11 hours ago, Rivkin said:

In the auction it will go higher... 

However the prices of signed Ichimonji in suguha-like execution, tired - were never super-high.

This one is not really suguha, there is definitely plenty of choji and activity but its probably still not the most active blade in hand.

It may sound conspirational but I was always surprised by how large percentage of signed Ichimonji blades are actually less active compared to an average suriage one... or is it just my impression.

I am not sure it’s a great Juyo candidate, could be, but it looks like a nice blade anyway.

A comparatively subdued hamon to more flamboyant Fukuoka Ichimonji works is an important kantei point for Yoshimochi specifically. 

[eternal_newbie]

Just now, nulldevice said:

A comparatively subdued hamon to more flamboyant Fukuoka Ichimonji works is an important kantei point for Yoshimochi specifically.

 

There is a JuBi zaimei tachi by Yoshimochi in one of the Sano Museum sword appreciation guides which, if anything, is even more subdued than the one being discussed here. Almost Yamashiro in shape and hamon structure.

[Bugyotsuji]

Just had lunch in Fukuoka at the udon place called Bizen Fukuoka Ichimonji, and was explaining to one of the offspring that this name means more than just a random udon shop by the river.

[Gakusee]

Very, very tired…. Signs are everywhere: weight, jigane (with all the forging lines visible  all over the blade), hamachi narrowed down, hamon running off the edge in a few places. It must have been a very good blade once.
Yet, zaimei ubu Ichimonji…. so it has historic and other value…. 

[Jussi Ekholm]

As a historic enthusiast I might say who cares about the condition as it is such a rare signed tachi  Well that is of course slight exaggeration but I do think to me this is far more interesting than lot of the fine mumei Jūyō blades.

 

I have so far found 11 other signed Yoshimochi swords, and here are few of them

Jūyō Bunkazai owned by temple

Tokubetsu Jūyō owned by Tōken Nagoya Museum

Tokugawa donated tachi owned by Ise Jingū

Jūyō Bijutsuhin in private collection

Jūyō Bijutsuhin in Sano Art Museum

Jūyō Bijutsuhin in Tokugawa Art Museum

 

I have only seen 1 signed Yoshimochi tachi with Tokubetsu Hozon sold online. It was very short blade but in better condition. Still I think I might prefer this longer tachi in weaker condition over it. I must say I am totally out of clue when it comes to valuing items like these, as I could see this selling way more than it is currently listed. 

[JakeNYC]

On 4/20/2026 at 12:42 AM, Bugyotsuji said:

Can’t see ‘Fukuoka’ mentioned anywhere, though.

Also my concern. Why doesn't it say anything in brackets after "Yoshimochi" ?

[Rawa]

On 4/20/2026 at 5:00 AM, atm said:

545g is lightweight for it being nearly 75cm in length. I agree with others that it appears to be tired, and the weight suggests that it has lost a lot of material over the years. But zaimei and ubu would seem to be worth more than the auction’s low starting price. I’m guessing it will go for quite a bit more.

Exactly.

[eternal_newbie]

2 hours ago, JakeNYC said:

Also my concern. Why doesn't it say anything in brackets after "Yoshimochi" ?

 

The only Yoshimochis of note are Fukuoka Ichimonji so it doesn't need to be qualified here. If they thought the mei was legit but belonged to some other, less well-known Yoshimochi, then they would add a qualifier in brackets.

[Lewis B]

While still retaining a decent motokasane measurement of 0.61cm the hamachi is almost non existent. The motohaba is quite narrow too at 2.55cm. The offset at the hamachi and munemachi is a little concerning. Even so a couple of bids have been placed for the sword and it'll sell because it has a signature, NBTHK papers authenticating the Mei and its ubu. 

Edited April 24 by Lewis B

[Sebuh]

sold for 3,403,000

bit of a bidding battle towards the end

 

now do I want to ask the question and rattle the snake. 

 

is it worth it? 

[Katsujinken]

Historically significant, yes. An interesting specimen!
 

But very, very tired. Basically nothing left at the hamachi. Others have articulated it well. 
 

This is never going Juyo because it’s not a Juyo sword, so I think $21k USD is a fine price for what it is… if it’s what you want. 
 

I hope the buyer was able to do their own accurate translation of the site and papers. With LLMs now there’s no excuse.