Who was Ujitsugu of Tosa Province?

[robsawitski]

Hi Everyone,

 

This is a carry over from my post in the translation forum. Thanks to help from Morita-san (I would have never been able to identify the kanji without your clarification), Jean & Veli (who directed me on the structure of the elements of the mei), Mark J. & Jamie D., I was able to translate the mei on the wakazashi I bought over the weekend. Thought it might be time to move the conversation from translation to period of time.

 

The mei says, "Ujitsugu of the Tosa Province" which is on Shikoku island.

 

Veli sent me some info from one of his books that list three different Ujitsugus from Tosa. One is from 1661, another from 1844, and the last from 1848. I have no idea which one made this wakazashi.

 

I'd love some help figuring out which Ujitsugu made this wakazashi. It's a really cool piece and I'd love to understand everything I can about it. [by the way, this is only my second nihonto. The first was a WWII gunto that I traded for the wakazashi.] I currently have only three books, and none of them mention anything about Ujitsugu, which leads me to believe he wasn't one of the famous smiths of Tosa Province.

 

I've attached a few photos below to show the sugata, nagato, mei. If you wouldn't mind, please point in the direction I should go to learn about this smith and when he made this blade.

 

Also, from my studying, I have a specific question about the mei. If the nihonto was worn blade side up in the obi on the left hip, the mei would not face outwards. Shouldn't the mei be on the other side?

 

Anyway, I appreciate any help and guidance you could give to a very, very novice nihonto fan.

 

Thanks,

Rob Sawitski

[Grey Doffin]

Hi Rob,

According to Hawley's Big Brown there was a smith who signed, "Toshu Ju Kuzume Ujitsugu" working around 1848. This smith didn't make it into any of the references in my index so I have no oshigata to compare your sword with. I can think of 2 possibilities to explain the mei being on the tachi side (which is quite unusual for the time). Maybe this Ujitsugu liked to be different and sign goofy, or maybe this is a gimei (fake signature) put on the tachi side to help the unsuspecting customer believe this is an early blade.

I suppose someone could say maybe this is an early blade by an unrecorded smith that should be signed tachi-mei but the sugata (shape) is more recent. This looks Sue-Koto (16th century) at the earliest to me, and late Shinshinto is just as, if not more, likely.

OK; someone disagree and prove me wrong.

Grey

[robsawitski]

Hi Grey,

 

If it helps, the blade is 37.5 cm (14.75 inches) from the tip to the start of the nakago (i.e. I don't know the term for the notch that begins the nakago, but that is what I'm talking about). It seemed pretty short compared to other wakazashi on the display table. I actually thought it was a big, beefy tanto.

 

Also, the blade seems wide to me (not that I have seen a lot of nihonto). It's 3.18 cm (1.25 inches) at the widest point, which is just before the start of the nakago.

 

Additionally, there doesn't appear to be any separation line at the kissaki.

 

And last, there is no ridge line at all.

 

I appreciate the help.

Rob Sawitski

[Jamie]

Rob,

The Notch is called the Mune Machi.

 

Look here for a diagram of Terminology.

http://home.earthlink.net/~steinrl/glossary.htm

[cabowen]

There is a Ujitsugu smith from Tosa listed in the Meikan as working in the Shinshinto period. The Meikan lists his signature as Doshu Katsumoku ju Ujitsugu 土州葛目住氏次.

 

While difficult to say from the photos, the nakago patina sure looks older than Shinshinto....Curiously, when I first glanced at the nakago and sugata, it struck me as Kaibu work...According to the Meikan, there were two koto period smiths in Kaibu who signed Ujitsugu.....possibly one may have later moved to Tosa?????

[robsawitski]

Thank you for the information.

 

I've attached a few more pics of the nakago to provide a better look at the patina. Sorry for the background (the railing on my deck). It offered the best light this morning to take a few pics before leaving for work. The pics show do a good job of showing what I see with my eyes when I look at it in terms of color.

 

I'm really struggling with what to do next and would appreciate a suggestion of what to do. I'm willing to do my own research (I certainly don't expect you folks to look all this stuff up for me.) What I know so far is the following:

 

1. The mei says, "Ujitsugu of the Tosa Province." This mei appears in Hawley's reference book and suggests the blade may have been made in 1844.

 

2. The may is on the tachi side. This may have been done to make the blade seem much older than it really is, or it may be old. But, the sugata suggests it isn't tachi-old.

 

3. The patina on the nakago suggests the blade is much older than 1844.

 

4. The nihonto is 37.5 cm long from tip to the start of the nakago (a rather short length?). And it's 3.2 cm wide at its widest point which is just before the start of the nakago (a rather wide width?).

 

5. As far as I can tell, the file marks (which only appear at the top of the nakago on each side) run parallel with the blade, as opposed to diagonal or perpendicular. Is this a clue to school style or date?

 

6. The hamon is straight, no waves or unique patterns.

 

7. There is no defined ridge line along the blade. The blade simply makes a slow, gradual taper towards the cutting edge.

 

8. There is no defined separation line at the start of the kissaki.

 

What should I do next? Any suggestions? Would shinsa at the October show in Minnesota be appropriate?

 

Rob Sawitski

[cabowen]

I received your email and would highly recommend submitting this to shinsa. That is an excellent way to get a professional opinion. Posting pictures will not lead to a definitive answer; in hand viewing by a team of experts is your best bet....

 

If you have any questions about the shinsa, see the link below and feel free to email me with any questions you might have...

[Jean]

What surprises me is that I can't see the yasurime, for a shinshinto blade, it should be visible...But the fact that I am on my ipad explains perhaps why. The mekugi ana is drilled ...

[robsawitski]

Jean,

 

I'll add a better photo later tonight of the file marks (at least I think they are file marks). They run parallel (which seems pretty strange to me) to the nakago and are only at the top (i.e. just below where the tsuba would sit). I cannot see any file marks below the peg hole (sorry, I'm learning the terminology, please bear with me). They only run about an inch long.

 

Thanks,

Rob S

[Jean]

Terminology will come after time, it is not important as long as you describe well what you see.

 

these details are very important. How come there are no yasurime (filemarks) visible around and under the peg hole (mekugi ana),this sword is supposed to be only 150 years old...

 

Yes shinsa is a good solution.

[robsawitski]

Oops. I was wrong about the file marks. I just looked at it again under a magnification glass and they look too random to be file marks. They appear to be faint grain lines (it looks much more like the grain in a piece of wood than set spacing you'd see with a file, and they are faint). There was no way to photograph this.

 

So, for discussion, what does it mean when there are no file marks?

 

Thanks,

Rob Sawitski

[cabowen]

It could mean an older blade that has enough rust on the nakago to obscure the file marks.....They may have been very shallow to begin with.

[Grey Doffin]

Or could it mean, also, that the nakago was finished with a tool that might be called "sen" (correct me if I'm wrong) that shaved the nakago, not filed?

Grey

[cabowen]

Or could it mean, also, that the nakago was finished with a tool that might be called "sen" (correct me if I'm wrong) that shaved the nakago, not filed?

Grey

 

That is correct but I didn't want to get into that as it is very rare and usually only seen in archaic work....

 

This blade has a very country air to it- I suppose it is possible it was shaved rather than filed but I very much doubt it....

[robsawitski]

Hi Everyone. Thank you for all your assistance. Sounds like this blade is a bit unusual - possibly older, possibly newer. Hard to say.

 

I'll take Jean's and Chris' recommendations on the shinsa. It's a really neat blade and I'm excited to know its story. I've contacted Chris to understand what I need to do for the shinsa.

 

If anyone has any other thoughts, I'd welcome them.

 

Otherwise, I'll submit it for shinsa at the October Minnesota show and see what happens. I'll post an update after the show for those interested and for those who may run across another Ujitsugu of Toshu.

 

You know, it seems like a database with mei (signatures) and sugata (shapes) would be very helpful. Does something like this exist? I see the SWORDSMITH DATABASE above but can't seem to access it. Is that what's in this database?

[Jamie]

http://nihontoclub.com/search/node/Ujitsugu

[robsawitski]

Hey thanks Jamie. Every little bit helps.

 

I pasted the two ujitsugu mei side-by-side. Some similarities but overall, way different. It's obvious the two mei are from two different smiths.

 

It would be great to have access to all the different mei pics people have collected over the years. When you see them side by side, it's very helpful.

 

I'll try and figure out a way to post the two side-by-side.

 

Thanks again Jamie, now I owe you two beers.

 

Rob Sawitski