Markus

Noooooooo (please imagine flying birds from my house, hearing my cry;)

Well, badly (unaesthetically) shaped kissaki does not mean always Chinese fake. Just stumbled over this one... http://www.samuraishokai.jp/sword/09127.html (This post does not criticize the sword in question nor does it bear any discussion base for authenticity or not. Just wanted to show.)

Are you referring to the one on the right? The design needs no more refining. It is a dynamic representation of the Musashino motif as its best, interpreted according to the aesthetical principles of iki as expected from the Akasaka school. BTW: I have an identical piece in my collection http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iki_(aesthetic_ideal)

Hi Ford, Here are some additional pics from the "Shinsen Kinkô-meikan". I dont want to lean too far out of the window, but I think there is the possibility that your (the very left) mei is a gimei (wow, how politely expressed;) ). My assumptions base on the character for "katsu", because it is too "straight", whereas the moon radical to the left of the shôshin mei is always a bit slanted. And also (力) radical to the very bottom right of the right radical (劵) seems too big. Well, just speculations so far...

Hi Brian, This is a poem of Takarai Kikaku, one of the best pupils of Matsuo Bashô. It was intended for praying for rain, and reads: "Yûdachi ya ta o meguri no kami naraba" (夕立や田を三めぐりの神ならば) "If I was just the god responsible for the evening shower and the fields."

Forgot to mention... In my opinion, the translator did a good job and experience had me shown that at projects of the scope of a "Tsuba, an aesthetic study", it can be hard to hit all the nuances on the head for each sentence and paragraph. But it is very interesting and informative that we are "working" now at exactly those "nuances", and it is always a good thing to leave things not untouched but revise them for an overall improvement. This reminds me of the saying "権威の謬説は一世紀を誤まる", "A wrong theory of an expert leads astray a century".

Hi Ford. For a supplementation to this thread, I checked the Japanese "Tsuba-geijutsu-ron", or rather the chapters on Ônin- and Heianjô-zôgan. In chapter 6 "Heianjô-zôgan tsuba", the corresponding passage reads: "When comparing the shinchû-zôgan of Ônin and Heianjô, we can see that at the former, the decorative elements (i.e. the mon) are produced just via casting (lit. it reads "by putting it into a mould"), whereas the latter show also some additional carvings on the mon." I think I found the corresponding passage in chapter 5 "Ônin-tsuba". Here it reads: The suemon of Ônin-tsuba is different to those of Heianjô-zôgan-tsuba, namely in the way that various casted and differently sized mon are combined and set onto the tsuba (lit. just "combined and set", suete aru 据えてある). But it was just the time when the arrangement and combination of such mon showed a considerable progress. Regarding pieces with ten-zôgan, it is said that this mostly concerns early pieces, but there is no such a chronological discrepancy. Towards the rim, a concentrical linear element is applied, and in between, rows (four at old pieces) of ten-zôgan are inlayed. These dots are small and in relative close formation on older works, but get larger and more sparse as time went on." So the Japanese text does not mention literally that the ten-zôgan elements are cast. Well, I must admit that I don´t have the English version so it is possible that I just don´t got the right passages.

The last time I bought a tsuba at Finesword, they responded as far as I remember after two days. But you can also try to contact them via the site of Choshuya, referring that you try to buy something of their Finesword section.

Hi Vaidas, Thanks for the clarification. It´s always better to know a bit of background for giving an advice. Don´t withhold, this is exactly why this sub-section "Military Swords of Japan" was opened.

On the basis of the sugata (i.e. the shallow sori, the length, and from the position of the signature on the tang I assume it is not [at least not much] suriage), I wouldn´t say Kanbun but somewhere close. This in combination with the accentuated gunome repetitions which allude with much phantasy somewhat to sanbonsugi, I would go for Shitahara, which leads finally - with incorporating the parts of the signature (namely a "Yasuyoshi" [安吉] and the remnants of a 大 which could also be a 太) - to Tôta Yasuyoshi (藤太安吉), who worked around Enpô (1673-1681). Just my 2c so far and maybe far-fetched.

Hi Vaidas, I think the question is: are you collecting military swords and naval dirks in special? The fittings or rather the condition looks quite nice, but the question above decides anything about the price. My personal opinion, for 350.000 you will find a more, let´s say "interesting" piece, even in katana length with mounting, where much more can be seen on the blade (from the point of view of a nihontô enthusiast and collector ).

I think that hits it on the nail, because the tsuba uses the character (奥) for "Oki", and Kotetsu used this from Meireki 2 (1656) to Manji 4 (1661). Afterwards, he used the character (興). So when we follow the theory that he went to Edo quite early in the Meireki period (1655-1658), this tsuba comes exactly under what I would say as "transitional period" from katchûshi to tôshô. This tsuba is also depicted in the "100 Tsuba and Sword Accessories" from where I know it, and interestingly, it is exactly depicted beside of the namako-sukashi of Musashi.

Hi Vaidas, the translation of No.492 reads as follows: "The dagger mounting (tanken-goshirae) seems to be for a naval officer of either the grade of a naval field or company officer. The saya is of a blueish samegawa, and the fittings show a cherryblossom motif, which are all in all elaborately executed. The habaki bears kebori carvings of the two characters "chû" and "kô" (loyalty and filial piety), and one might feel the spirit of the naval officer when being at the front with this dagger at the waist. The mounted blade is of a classical, old style unokubi-zukuri, and the hamon is a noble suguha. The signature reads "Yamato no Daijô Kunitake", and was probably engraved with an emphasized meaning of "the Warriors of the Land of Yamato". The condition of both the blade and the mountings is very good."

Hi Barry, The white kanji above the part John explained read as "same-seishiki" (鮫制式), which means about "for mounting in same". Probably the saya was one of the samezaya of naval swords.

I know the piece so I´m out of the race.

I fully agree with Rich, and the piece in question reminds me on this one: http://www.e-sword.jp/sale/0810_6022syousai.htm So probably a mid to late Edo tôshô...

I wouldn´t insist upon that the person in question was important.

Hi Tyler, FYI: the other side of the tang starts with "makari-mochi Hosoi ...", the rest is unfortunately illegible. "Makari" is a prefix which emphasizes the following verb, therefore the fragments of the beginning could be translated as "proudly owned by [a certain] Hosoi ...", or "the proud owner Hosoi ...", followed by the illegible part. The left column is a date, namely "Meireki gannen hachigatsu-kichijitsu", "a lucky day in the eighth month of the first year of Meireki (1655)".

Hello Dirk, Although the third character on the right is nearly lost through the mekugi-ana, my reading would be:

This is a dating: Shôwa tsuchinoe-tora fuyu (昭和戊寅冬, Shôwa, year of the tiger [1938], winter)

Well, those who tried to participate did, and so I will solve this kantei. The artist ist Imai Nagatake, and the piece is signed: Imai Nagatake (今井永武) [kaô] - Ansei kinoto´u chûshû (安政乙卯仲秋, "Ansei, year of the hare [1855], eighth month") Yes, he was a student of Gotô Ichijô, a passionate waka poet, lived and worked in Kyôto, born 1818 and died 1882. As it is hard to pin it down to a certain artist with more techniques shown, I will give atari to Ford, Jean, and Curran. Now, how does one come to this artist. First, the raw material: iron, shakudô, suaka, shibuichi, yamagane, brass ... (I´ve tried to get the blueish-black shakudô, so that it is dinstinguishable from iron) I think everyone got the shakudô, and this precludes before (nearly) all tankô artists. What remains is (in a chronological manner) Ko-Kinkô (as John said), Gotô and sidelines, followed by the kinkô artists of the Edo period, the machibori group, and the metalworkers of the late Edo/bakumatsu period. Second, the interpretation: sukashi-tsuba or ita-tsuba Third, the shape: It shows a hardly accentuated mokkô-gata, with a very slight tendency towards aori. This in combination with the thinness and the ubu nakago-ana pins it relative quickly down to one of the late Edo/bakumatsu kinkô artists, especially to Gotô Ichijô who was (among others) renowned for such a shape. As Reinhard pointed out, such pieces were made at the beginning with old Momoyama works in mind, and so is the interpretation of the surface. Hawley mentions an interesting note, namely that "this artist kept more to the classical style and designs of the early Gotô Ichijô school". This tsuba is such a piece right out of the textbook. What was at the back of my mind with this kantei was, to present for a change once more a softmetal tsuba, because we already had some iron and sukashi works in the past. I think it was not that hard to vote for Ichijô or his school, and I must admit that I am very fond of the shape he and his school (and of course other contemporary artists) applied. As a comparison, I would like to add a picture which was shot under different lightning, with the result that it could be very easily mixed-up with iron. FYI: I´ve bought this one on the following site: http://japanesesword.de/ Fortunately, I recently had the chance to look at it hands-on, but there is more nice and reasonable prices stuff there so please take a look. for your interest.

At the moment, (of course ) Ford is right on, but not atari. Well, I must confess that with a certain motif showing more techniques, it is quite hard to pin it down to a certain artist. As my fellow countryman used to say, "I´ll be back".

I think I missed some simleys at your first reply.

Hi Pete, How´s that quick bid coming?

Hi folks, As its quite a time since the last kantei, I would fill the gap and provide you with a new one. At first, I would just like to give you the pictures, allowing you to soak in the workmanship and execution of the piece. I am sure there are some out there which could pin this one down to at least the school at once, so I suggest to withhold or to use the spoiler function. It measures 8,0 cm in the width, and 8,5 cm in the length. The thickness at the rim is 0,35 cm.