Sayagaki Translation Help

[M Ubertini]

Hello,

 

Can anyone translate this Sayagaki?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Matt

 

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/40/img1515ej.jpg/

[kunitaro]

長門国顕国

但生茎無銘也　同工長州安吉子ト傳ヘ制作年代ハ応永頃

本作ハ地刃ガ同工の特色を示し野趣アリテ滋味豊也

 

Nagato no kuni Akikuni

Ubu-Nakago Mumei, This smith is a on of Choshu Yasuyoshi,

Jidai : Oei period.

This sword is showing typical activity of Ji and Ha by this smith.

Rich rustic taste.

[M Ubertini]

Interesting. The NBTHK attributed it to the Hirado Sa group, then Tanobe Sensei brought it down to the smith level after the fact. Does this happen often?

[kunitaro]

Hirado Sa school is almost same as Choshu (Sa) school. Nagato Akikuni a son of Choshu (Sa) Yasuyoshi (smith name)is better than Just Hirado Sa school ?? I think that Tanobe sensei looked at the blade deeper than NBTHK Shinsa.

Big name Sa-monji (Oo-Sa) is different.

[M Ubertini]

Tanobe Sensei has this smith as son of Yasuyoshi on the sayagaki. That puts him as a sai-jo saku smith, however, Tanobe also puts the nengo to Oei, which based on my research is 3rd generation. Still Jo-saku. Would the sayagaki infer this is first generation?

[kunitaro]

No,

Mumei attribution is not use for study of like Signed sword

When they say that Hirado or Choshu Sa school (or Akikuni) from Oei priod.

Try to find out WHY they attributed in that way. Sugata and activities.

and If you are interested in Sa.

try to see the original signed Sa blade with your eye ( in you hand if its possible) then you can see.

[Eric H]

This is a interesting evidence how opinions among academics can change over time. The sayagaki by Tanobe sensei, according to the translation, attributes the sword to Nagato Akikuni, to be a son of Choshu Yasuyoshi.

 

The following article is an excerpt from TB No. 592 - Nihon-Koto-Shi

16. Nagato Sa

It is the commonly accepted theory that a son of Samonji, Yasuyoshi moved from Chikuzen Province to Nagato Province and then Akikuni became his student. ‘Kokon Mei Zukushi’ says that Akikuni was a student of Samonji. Yasuyoshi is also called Sa Yasuyoshi, therefore, this Samonji must mean Sa Yasuyoshi in ‘Kokon Mei Zukushi’.　There is no extant tachi of Yasuyoshi with a mei, but many tanto with mei exist. The theory that Yasuyoshi was a son of Samonji may be accepted, considering his workmanship. There is a possibility that there is another Yasuyoshi, who belongs to the Sa school, inferring from the extant tanto with the mei of Yasuyoshi in a different style.

The Oei Era is the earliest production year of Akikuni, but there are his later works with production years of the Eikyo and Kakitsu, so there may be two or three generations of Akikuni. He tempers hamon based on gunome and occasionally sugu-ha with hotsure, but it is difficult to affirm his direct relation with 1st Yasuyoshi.

 

The Nihonto Club Swordsmith Index list dates of several Akikuni which are not in accordance to the above dates.

 

Some pictures of this interesting sword would be very welcome.

 

Eric

 

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Eric,

 

It's not that simple :

 

http://tinyurl.com/bplrm3x

[Eric H]

It's not easy to make up a mind on informations that are partly contradictory. However I trust above all to the unrivaled knowledge of recognized Japanese Scholars. Nevertheless some more informations about Sa Yasuyoshi and Akikuni.

http://www.sho-shin.com/sai2.htm

http://www.sho-shin.com/sanyo24.htm

 

Eric

[M Ubertini]

I will post some pics as soon as I get back home. Interesting sword!

 

As for the generations of Sa YasuYoshi and Akikuni, the Nihonto Koza recognizes at most 2 generations of Akikuni, the second being the son of Shodai Akikuni, however, it was noted that there could be just one and no real distinction was made between the two. The first Akikuni learned from Sa Yasuyoshi, the son of Samonji, but was the son of Nidai Sa Yasuyoshi. The Koza also has plenty of oshigata for Akikuni, which none are earlier than Oei, contraditicting the earlier dates stated previously, so the info from Shoshin may be on the money. The Nihonto Koza also had an Shodai Akikuni, Juyo Bunkazai shown.

 

On another note I found an Oei Akikuni on this website, http://www.choshuya.co.jp/1/0806/member_frame_sword.htm Pretty much just like mine. You'll see later.

[M Ubertini]

Here is a photo of the Nagato no Kuni Akikuni. This was before the touch up polish before I sent it to the NBTHK. Thought?

 

http://postimage.org/image/pb7vqs3eb/

 

Matt

[Eric H]

The first Akikuni learned from Sa Yasuyoshi, the son of Samonji, but was the son of Nidai Sa Yasuyoshi

 

Why then the name Akikuni if he was the son of Nidai Sa Yasuyoshi ?... there is already a 3rd. gen. Yasuyoshi

 

According to the Sesko Lexicon:

The 2nd gen. Yasuyoshi 1381-1384

The 3rd gen. Yasuyoshi 1394-1428

 

Akikuni 1st gen. is with working date 1394-1428

 

Anyway In the Nihon-Koto-Shi by Honma Junji, first published in 1958, Akikuni 1st gen. is explicitly named as a student of Sa Yasuyoshi.

 

Thanks for the pic and congratulations to you for this fine sword you own.

The choshuya sword, a Wakizashi, is erroneously referred to as Katana, if it were a Katana, it would cost much more.

 

Eric

[M Ubertini]

Erik,

 

Thank you. My sword originally had Tokubetsu Kicho papers from the NBTHK before the blue papers came started. Even though it was mumei and attributed to the Hirado Sa group, i thought it would go Toku Hozon in a heart beat since I had a previous Hirado Sa tanto that i recently parted with that Tanobe sensei gave TH and the sword was excellent. When this sword only got Hozon I was a little disappointed thinking that maybe it was because the nakago was short, or not in a better polish and they just confirmed the attribution. When it returned with the sayagaki from Tanobe with different kanji from Hirado Sa, I needed to find out what it said and the result Shodai Akikuni. So, I am going to re-submit it for Toku Hozon shinsa in a couple of years and we'll see what happens. They can't argue with Tanobe sensei

 

Matt

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Eric,

 

It seems you lack references about Yasuyoshi and followers. Honma Junji sama says (Nihonto Koza) that the founder of the Nagato branch can be either the same as Chikushu Yasuyoshi or a different person. He says also there is a clear problem as to which is correct.

 

About Akikuni, the oldest sword by him is dated in Oei.

 

As already said, it's not that simple.

 

 

 

 

They can't argue with Tanobe sensei

 

 

The most knowledgeable man can be mistaken, the opinion of a panel of experts is always preferable than a single man's one.

[nagamaki - Franco]

If not mistaken Oei is at the beginning of the Muromachi period is it not, and, if so, it might be advisable to go read the NBTHK guidelines for Tokubetsu Hozon and mumei Muromachi period swords before wasting time and money chasing after a better paper. And while Tanobe sensei's sayagaki provides much welcomed additional detail and insight here, is he really elevating the importance of this sword to the next level, hmm?

[M Ubertini]

Good point, however, my previous tanto was mumei and Oei and received Tokubetsu. Attributed to same school (Hirado Sa), so thinking that the added info from Tanobe would help. Also, there are Juyo blades by this smith from Oei or later, but signed.

[Eric H]

I don‘t have the Nihon to Koza, all I know that this extensive work dates from the mid 1930-ties and was later translated by Afu Watson...btw who is the author?

The Nihon-Koto-Shi was as previously mentioned published in 1958. That said, 20 years more of research is involved in Honma sensei‘s work.

 

The site you have provided is very interesting, there are listed 2 Akikuni, one to be the son of Sa, the other the son of „another“ Akikuni, and what is most surprisingly, both had the working period in Oei 1394-1428.

 

Seems to be difficult to understand...

 

Eric

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Eric,

 

...btw who is the author?

 

reread my last post...

[Eric H]

Well, both works are by Honma Junji sensei, as said the Nihon-Koto-Shi (History of Koto) is the later edition that eventually includes new findings about genealogies.

 

The sayagaki by Tanobe sensei is precious as he writes these opinions on swords that are Tokubetsu Hozon quality or higher...and it adds to the value of the sword.

 

Eric

[kunitaro]

I think that The Blade is more important than Sayagaki and papers.

Especially for mumei blade, it is important to understand of Why (or Which parts of Activities or Sugata ) leaded attributing to Oei period and Nagato Akikuni by Tanobe sensei or Hirado Sa school by NBTHK.

What do you think ?

 

And Un-Signed blade from Muromachi period or younger will not get Tokubetsuhozon.

(except special characteristic recognizable Hoimono or something by high ranking smith in very good condition)

It is written in the regulation for Shinsa of NBTHK.

* NBTHK Dai 16 jo, no.1,SHINSA KITEI (Judgement criteria )

(Tokubetsuhozon) 1-(5)

[Eric H]

And Un-Signed blade from Muromachi period or younger will not get Tokubetsuhozon.

Kunitaro san,

 

In this context is the Nanbokucho period (1331-1393) an integral part of Muromachi?

 

Eric

[kunitaro]

Sayagaki of Tanobe sensei is saying that the blade is from Oei period.

and he knows that Mumei blade from Oei period will not get Tokubetsihozon.

 

it is not meaning the blade is not good. just mentioning regulation of Shinsa.

 

however, It is good to have self opinion with reason, if we don't agree with Sayagaki or Hozon paper.

also, need reason to agree with them as well.

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

In this context is the Nanbokucho period (1331-1393) an integral part of Muromachi?

 

In swords history, Nanbokucho is a separate era. In Japan history, Nanbokucho is included in Muromachi era.

[M Ubertini]

Hi!

 

Sayagaki of Tanobe sensei is saying that the blade is from Oei period.

and he knows that Mumei blade from Oei period will not get Tokubetsihozon.

 

Here is the tanto I had for a long time that I sent for shinsa in old polish that was Oei, mumei and received Tokubetsu. Same school originally attributed to the katana. So it is possible as long as the sword is Ubu and from an important school such as this one.

 

http://www.nihontoantiques.com/fss507.htm

 

In regards to why this was attributed to Nagato Akikuni, consulting the Nihonto Koza and seeing a few examples, 2 katana, 1 wak and 1 tanto, I can see where Tanobe sensei would draw the conclusion. The Hamon generally hoso-sugu with shallow notare, itame with nagare and masame and O-Hada. Tons of Ji-nie. All examples I saw were on point to my little knowledge. When I bought this sword, I thought it was obvious Sa school, O-suriage and late Kamakura or Nanbokucho, but Tanobe said it was ubu. That makes sense due to the fact that this would make this an uchikatana, deep sori with short nakago exemplified by nakago of this particular smith and others of this time period.

 

Anyway just my thoughts.

 

Matt

[kunitaro]

They changed regulation a few time in the past.

Heisei 18, Feb 13th

Heisei 23, Mar.  10th

Heisei  23, Aug. 1st

and I heard from Tanobe sensei about this matter a few years ago.

so, it must be changed at Heisei 18 (2006)...

This is link (maybe only in Japanese ?)  P-11

http://www.touken.or.jp/pdf/touken_shin ... -07-03.pdf

 

If it is Nanbokucho, you can try Juyo shinsa.

so, this is the point of study. 

[Eric H]

I have looked at the mentioned passus. If I‘m not totally wrong (caused by bad www translation, then please apologise) it says that mumei works of the Muromachi and Edo period will pass Shinsa as Tokubetsu Hozon, given that they are masterpieces by famous toko and in excellent condition.

 

Eric

[kunitaro]

i explain only red line and blue line.

" Tadashi " is meaning "however or but"

 

Blue line

1. tadashi (however)　those can not be object (of tokubetsuhozon) bellow.

(5) Un-signed from Muromachi and Edo period.

 

Red line.

TADASHI xxxxx BAAI GA ARU.

meaning is "Rare Exception"

"However, If it is recognized as a master piece of famous smith in excellent condition." it could be exception."

 

Tanobe sensei said that it might be given Tokubetsu hozon, If there is typical Horimono such as Oei Bizen, or Umetada Myoju work in very good condition. normal un-signed blade will not get Tokubetsuhozon.

 

Please don't take it personal,

I am trying to share this new regulation for up dated study.

 

And Un-signed Nanbokucho blade can be Juyo or Tokubetsu-Juyo,

however, new regulation said that it need to be Tokubetsuhozon to enter Juyo shinsa now, Hozon balde need to get Tokubetsuhozon before enter Juyo shinsa.

No more discount for Kicho/TK/KTK.

[Jean]

Excellent Kunitaro sama.

[Eric H]

"However, If it is recognized as a master piece of famous smith in excellent condition." it could be exception."

Well this is exactly the confirmation of what I have written in my comment. Thanks

Conclusion: The Nagato Akikuni Katana, Oei period, with Sayagaki by Tanzan, is a prospective candidate for Tokubetsu Hozon.

 

Eric

[kunitaro]

Sorry Erid san,

Just make it clear for other people.

 

and (4) is also interesting.

(4) Re-Tampered. however, If it is extremely important famous smith's signed blade could be possible issued Tokubetsuhozon, with proviso that descried as re-tempered.

 

I have seen a signed Kagemitsu tanto with Hozon paper with proviso that saying re-tempered.

Re-tempered Kagemitsu, kanemitsu class (in good condition) will get only Hozon.

Re-tempered Masatsune, Tomonari class (in good condition) will get TK.

not 100% though.