Mumei TH Naoe Shizu became Mumei Shizu after passing Juyo?

[YourBabyBjornBorg]

I was talking with my Nihonto friends, and this topic came up. Was there an example, or did I just dream it 

 

I know there was a 7th TJ Den Shizu that was previously a Juyo Naoe Shizu, but were there TH examples? Thank you all for your help!

[Rivkin]

I am bad with keeping stats or researching sales, but kantei-wise it is not quite unusual. Or for that Mino Kanenobu shooting into Naotsuna, 

[eternal_newbie]

2 hours ago, Rivkin said:

I am bad with keeping stats or researching sales, but kantei-wise it is not quite unusual. Or for that Mino Kanenobu shooting into Naotsuna, 

 

Rivkin is correct, it is quite commonplace for high-level Mino (Naoe Shizu, Tametsugu, later-gen Kaneuji) to change attributions when a blade moves up in ranking, whether from Hozon, TH or Juyo. Often this can be because the polish has changed, exposing more nie/activities in the hamon that point to a stronger Yamato influence (moving to Yamato Shizu, or Shizu proper) or stronger Soshu influence (moving to the Sa or Hasebe schools) than previously thought. Or the shinsa panel has changed and there's a new consensus on which particular set of traits is most dominant in the blade.

 

In the case of Mino Tametsugu, there are even cases where a sword got reattributed to Masamune, which, assuming you bought it at a price appropriate for a Tametsugu, would be like striking the lottery.

[YourBabyBjornBorg]

59 minutes ago, eternal_newbie said:

 

Rivkin is correct, it is quite commonplace for high-level Mino (Naoe Shizu, Tametsugu, later-gen Kaneuji) to change attributions when a blade moves up in ranking, whether from Hozon, TH or Juyo. Often this can be because the polish has changed, exposing more nie/activities in the hamon that point to a stronger Yamato influence (moving to Yamato Shizu, or Shizu proper) or stronger Soshu influence (moving to the Sa or Hasebe schools) than previously thought. Or the shinsa panel has changed and there's a new consensus on which particular set of traits is most dominant in the blade.

 

In the case of Mino Tametsugu, there are even cases where a sword got reattributed to Masamune, which, assuming you bought it at a price appropriate for a Tametsugu, would be like striking the lottery.

 

Thank you, Mr. Rohan! I was under the impression that NBTHK would not change their attribution when upgrading to a higher paper, but I guess I was too naive. I was also not aware of that Tamatsugu-Masamune upgrade instance. Very interesting! 

[Lewis B]

1 hour ago, eternal_newbie said:

In the case of Mino Tametsugu, there are even cases where a sword got reattributed to Masamune, which, assuming you bought it at a price appropriate for a Tametsugu, would be like striking the lottery.

 

This is correct. I know of a sword with a Kanzan sayagaki attributing it to Norishige but mentioning Masamune. It had kinzogan mei for Norishige that had been removed (but still visible), I assume because the owner was trying for Masamune. It got Tametsugu at Juyo in the 70's. 

 

 

 

[nulldevice]

2 hours ago, YourBabyBjornBorg said:

 

Thank you, Mr. Rohan! I was under the impression that NBTHK would not change their attribution when upgrading to a higher paper, but I guess I was too naive. I was also not aware of that Tamatsugu-Masamune upgrade instance. Very interesting! 

The NBTHK has no problem upgrading swords from TH to Juyo, Juyo to TJ, or even Juyo to Juyo if a sword is resubmitted down the line. 
 

There are many such examples of swords changing attributions. These are just some Juyo / Juyo and Juyo / TJ “upgrades” I’ve seen

 

Tametsugu -> Norishige

Naoe Shizu -> Shizu

Morikage -> Chogi 

Kashu Sanekage -> Go

Sanekage -> Naotsuna

den <smith> -> <smith>

 

And many many others. 

 

 

[nulldevice]

On Tametsugu specifically it’s interesting because he has very few signed pieces, and also zero swords at TJ. But when a “Tametsugu” is deemed good enough it gets an “upgrade” to some other Soshu smith at TJ.

 

What that’s essentially done is concretize Tametsugu as a lower tier Soshu smith (which according to Fujishiro and other rankings he is) without allowing his stuff to just naturally pass into TJ as a Tametsugu. 
 

Instead he almost has this fate where the NBTHK has said without saying “Tametsugu cannot go TJ” because if it is that good, it must be some other smith. I don’t personally like this view when we’re dealing with 99% mumei blades because were no longer classifying a smith based on his traits but rather a tier system using names as placeholders rather than numbers with 0% certainty who actually made the sword other than it was made by a Soshu master. 

[Lewis B]

2 hours ago, nulldevice said:

On Tametsugu  according to Fujishiro and other rankings he is) 

Apparently Jo saku which is surprising given the evidence of attributional fluidity with Norishige and Go. Or as in my example, Masamune, with a strong Mino influence.

[eternal_newbie]

2 hours ago, Lewis B said:

Apparently Jo saku which is surprising given the evidence of attributional fluidity with Norishige and Go. Or as in my example, Masamune, with a strong Mino influence.

 

It's precisely because of this fluidity that he's only Jo-saku; Fujishiro's ranking is relative to peers within the same school(s) and timeframe. Tametsugu, hailing from Etchu, apprenticing under Norishige and moving to Mino means he's evaluated alongside Shintogo, Masamune, Sadamune, Yukimitsu, Norishige, Go and Shizu, and will necessarily be found wanting by comparison.

 

I would dare to venture that in a sense this is a self-reinforcing delineation, in that it's likely some lesser Go and Norishige works have been attributed to Tametsugu because they're judged as not up to the usual standards of the grandmasters; similarly, I wouldn't be surprised if a few of the lower-end works attributed to those two are in reality the higher end of Tametsugu's handiwork.

[nulldevice]

51 minutes ago, Lewis B said:

Apparently Jo saku which is surprising given the evidence of attributional fluidity with Norishige and Go. Or as in my example, Masamune, with a strong Mino influence.

 

40 minutes ago, eternal_newbie said:

 

It's precisely because of this fluidity that he's only Jo-saku; Fujishiro's ranking is relative to peers within the same school(s) and timeframe. Tametsugu, hailing from Etchu, apprenticing under Norishige and moving to Mino means he's evaluated alongside Shintogo, Masamune, Yukimitsu, Norishige, Go and Shizu, and will necessarily be found wanting by comparison.

 

I would dare to venture that in a sense this is a self-reinforcing delineation, in that it's likely some lesser Go and Norishige works have been attributed to Tametsugu because they're judged as not up to the usual standards of the grandmasters; similarly, I wouldn't be surprised if a few of the lower-end works attributed to those two are in reality the higher end of Tametsugu's handiwork.

 

Yup. There are periods of Japanese history where Tametsugu would IMO easily place as Sai-jo saku if he wasn't competing against the traditionally held cream of the crop GOATed swordsmiths. 

 

Frustrating even when you deal with Soshu-den in general where its 97% mumei works to begin with. Its all a nebulous mess when work starts crossing over.

 

Roughly (and probably wrong as this is from my own brain without verifying zufu translations) speaking:

Tametsugu with lots of sunagashi and some masame tendencies = den Shizu/Shizu

Tametsugu with top-class nie and strong tempered boshi = den Go/Go

Tametsugu with a narrower hamon (not overly flamboyant) but excellent nie with a bit more standing hada = Norishige. 

 

Once his work crosses this threshold of certain parameters of quality and hataraki being met, it can no longer be Tametsugu and must be something else at TJ level. 

 

Honma Junji writes in his Soshu-den Masterpieces book:

Quote

 

Regarding Tametsugu: Though he is Yoshihiro’s son, the workmanship quality is generally like Kaneshige. However, there is Echizen character at the edges, and unlike Kaneshige, the bōshi is not dull. Superior works are tempered strongly at the tip with much nie and hakikake, appearing like the Gō group.

 

 

Edited Friday at 04:33 PM by nulldevice

[eternal_newbie]

16 minutes ago, nulldevice said:

Regarding Tametsugu: Though he is Yoshihiro’s son, the workmanship quality is generally like Kaneshige. However, there is Echizen character at the edges, and unlike Kaneshige, the bōshi is not dull. Superior works are tempered strongly at the tip with much nie and hakikake, appearing like the Gō group.

 

Kaneshige (Kinju) is another interesting comparison to Tametsugu. Despite occupying more or less the same niche (from the northern areas, picked up Soshu influence, moved to Mino, has no works above Juyo) he is rated Jo-Jo-saku by Fujishiro, compared to Tametsugu's Jo-saku.

 

Because Kinju worked almost entirely in the proto-Mino style and is considered a Mino smith through and through, he is judged alongside only other Mino smiths (Shizu, Tametsugu, Naoe Shizu, later generation Kaneuji) and so has a "higher" ranking than Tametsugu despite their work being roughly on the same level, as within the Nanbokucho Mino smiths only the craft of Shizu stands above that of Kinju.

[Lewis B]

15 minutes ago, nulldevice said:

 

. A bit more standing hada

 

 

Would that equate to o-hada? 
 

how would you interpret this Juyo zufu

• Shape (Keijō): Shinogi-zukuri, Mitsu-mune. The width is standard, there is a gentle curvature, and the Chu-kissaki (medium tip) is elongated.
• Forging Pattern (Jitetsu): Itame-hada mixed with Mokume-hada, becoming large-grained (Ō-hada) with running patterns (Nagare) in places. The Ji-nie is abundant, and Chikei activities appear well.
• Hammon (Temper Line): Asugu-ha style with a gentle wave-like pattern (Notare). There are frequent Sunagashi activities, and it is deep with Nie. Kinsuji lines appear prominently.
• Bōshi (Temper pattern in the tip): Midare-komi (irregular), slightly frayed (Hotsure), with a sharp turnback (Kaeri).
   

[nulldevice]

57 minutes ago, Lewis B said:

Would that equate to o-hada? 
 

how would you interpret this Juyo zufu

• Shape (Keijō): Shinogi-zukuri, Mitsu-mune. The width is standard, there is a gentle curvature, and the Chu-kissaki (medium tip) is elongated.
• Forging Pattern (Jitetsu): Itame-hada mixed with Mokume-hada, becoming large-grained (Ō-hada) with running patterns (Nagare) in places. The Ji-nie is abundant, and Chikei activities appear well.
• Hammon (Temper Line): Asugu-ha style with a gentle wave-like pattern (Notare). There are frequent Sunagashi activities, and it is deep with Nie. Kinsuji lines appear prominently.
• Bōshi (Temper pattern in the tip): Midare-komi (irregular), slightly frayed (Hotsure), with a sharp turnback (Kaeri).
   

 

 

O-hada (large grained hada) and hada-dachi (standing hada) aren't the same. You can have a ko-itame hada or regular itame-hada that is standing but not large in form. Shintogo tanto often display this characteristic of very fine ko-itame that is also standing with tons of chikei. From what I've gathered and am still trying to learn is that clarity of steel and nie formations such as chikei can result in a standing or prominent grain unrelated to the size of the grain itself. A lot of early Soshu (Shintogo, Yukimitsu) show these traits as well as some Masamune and Sadamune. Outside of Soshu-den, we see schools like Aoe and Awataguchi also showing these traits as well as others. 

 

On the flip side, scanning the translations of the Zufu that I have, o-hada and hada-dachi are linked more often than not. So while its not a requirement to have big grain to have standing grain as seen above and in the example below, there is a trend that o-hada tends to also be standing by nature more often than not. 

 

Take this one for example:

Quote

Jūyō-tōken at the 33rd jūyō shinsa held on March 25, 1987

Tantō, mei: Kunimitsu (国光)

 

Measurements

Nagasa: 21.9 cm

Sori: uchizori

Motohaba: 1.9 cm

Nakago-nagasa: 9.5 cm

Nakago-sori: 0.1 cm

 

Description

Keijō: hira-zukuri, mitsu-mune, fukura-kare, uchizori.

Kitae: ko-itame well-worked and standing, thick ji-nie, abundant chikei, clear steel color.

Hamon: ito-suguha, brilliant well-developed ko-nie, fine kinsuji.

Bōshi: straight to ko-maru.

Nakago: ubu, kurijiri, shallow katte-sagari yasurime, one mekugi-ana, two-character mei below the mekugi-ana in the center of the sashi-omote.

 

Explanation

Shintōgo Kunimitsu (新藤五国光) is the de facto founder of Sōshū-den, and it should be considered a great achievement that he trained three master smiths—Yukimitsu, Masamune, and Norishige—in his school. Kunimitsu's workmanship appears at first glance similar to Awataguchi work, but the prominent chikei and kinsuji displayed in the ji and ha identify this smith.

His hamon specializes in suguha, and he produced varied types including ito-, hoso-, chū-, and hirosuguha. He is ranked alongside Fujishirō Yoshimitsu (藤四郎吉光) as a master of tantō. This tantō is a typical work showing his ito-suguha, and was handed down in the former Count Ogasawara family.

 

Edited Friday at 05:38 PM by nulldevice

[eternal_newbie]

You can think of 'standing' hada as having a bunch of nie and grain activities that give the appearance of a 3d-textured surface (i.e. the texture appears to "stand out" of the polish); it can do this while still being quite compact and fine-grained.

 

O-hada on the other hand just means that the grain structures are wider and/or looser than average; they can be this way while remaining 'flat' in terms of texture. For example, "mokume with areas of o-hada" would mean that in some areas, the whorls in the steel grain are noticeably larger in diameter, and possibly become somewhat irregular-shaped in the process.

[Jussi Ekholm]

Some very good posts in the thread. I admit I am often puzzled by mumei high end attributions.

I believe there are

Jūyō 15 Naoe Shizu - TJ 7 Shizu

TH Tametsugu that I believe passed as Shizu in Jūyō 71

Jūyō 23 Naoe Shizu - Jūyō 65 Shizu

Jūyō 20 Yamato Shizu - TJ 15 Shikkake

Jūyō 36 Shizu - TJ 25 Yukimitsu

 

These are Shizu related items that I know have shifted in attribution.

 

[YourBabyBjornBorg]

10 hours ago, Jussi Ekholm said:

Some very good posts in the thread. I admit I am often puzzled by mumei high end attributions.

I believe there are

Jūyō 15 Naoe Shizu - TJ 7 Shizu

TH Tametsugu that I believe passed as Shizu in Jūyō 71

Jūyō 23 Naoe Shizu - Jūyō 65 Shizu

Jūyō 20 Yamato Shizu - TJ 15 Shikkake

Jūyō 36 Shizu - TJ 25 Yukimitsu

 

These are Shizu related items that I know have shifted in attribution.

 

 

Thank you very much, Mr. Ekholm! Your examples are greatly helpful, especially that TH to Juyo one!