help with mei and nengo

[Surfson]

Hi All. I am considering a sword that is for sale locally, and am a bit stuck on the mei and the date. It is a slightly machiokuri bizen koto katana with a nice koshizori and what looks like typical bizen hamon to me. It is slightly over 27" long and in fair polish (ok to enjoy). I only have a few poor photos from my cell phone, and am just posting the mei and date. The mei reads bishu osafune iye...... Looks like it could be nori, mori (the kazu form) or maybe sada to me. The date should help with this, but I am stuck on that too. I suspect that it is a variant date, and looks most like Ko-o in the period in which I think it was likely made (around 1400). Any ideas from the true experts as to mei, nengo and whether it is likely to be shoshin would be appreciated. I will point out that it is signed tachi mei. Cheers, Bob

[Peter Bleed]

The date looks to me like Sho-o gennen - 1652,

And I see the mei as Bizen Iemori

A pretty interesting signature, a full 70 years newer than my first impression. those eaily Shinto are a riddle!

Peter

[Surfson]

Thanks Peter. The nengo of sho-o is a reasonable likeness of what is carved, but I can't find a Bizen Iyemori that worked that late, at least in Hawley's, in which the latest one was a full century earlier. i suppose I will have to try to dig through the Nihonto Meikan. The other troubling fact is that the blade has a deep koshizori (sorry no photos), and by the late 17th century (i.e. Sho-o), most makers were producing fairly straight swords. Any other suggestions would be welcome! Cheers, Bob

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

The photo is quite fuzzy but i think it may be Kô-ô 康應

[Markus]

Jacques is correct. The date is Kôô gannen (1389). This makes the blade likely to

be a work of the 2nd generation Osafune Iemori, but also the 3rd generation is

possible because there exists a date signature of Ôei 11 (1404) from him.

[Surfson]

Thanks a lot Jacques and Markus. I had come to the same conclusion that you have made, and have found variants of Ko-o different from the ones listed in Hawley and similar to those on the nengo. I looked through the Bizen Taikan last night and couldn't find any examples of either generation. If either of you or anybody else on the NMB has access to books with oshigata of Iyemori that can help establish whether this example is shoshin, I would be very grateful. This appears to be a well regarded line, and it is hard to know whether his work was copied. I sometimes take comfort when faced with a sword having a mei that I think was unlikely to have been faked at the time or later. Cheers, Bob

[Markus]

Thats the mei of the Iemori dated Ôei 1 from my book Kotô-kantei.

Unfortunately the oshigata of tang of this blade is not that crisp.

 

[Jacques]

Hi,

 

Markus

 

I think it's the same sword than yours.

 

http://www.zentosho.com/2012shutten/post_16.html

[Markus]

Indeed Jacques. Thanks for the link!

[Surfson]

Thanks again Markus and Jacques, this is great information. The link from Jacques - is that an auction or sales catalog? The date looks nearly identical. Both examples from both of you are signed tachi mei, so this is also quite encouraging. The mei looks pretty good to me. Cheers, Bob

[Surfson]

Well, I bit the bullet and bought it at the auction, even though the one example that Markus and Jacques found differs in the mei from the one I bought. My hopeful guess is that they are different generations. I am in Japan right now but will try to take some photos and post them so we can have some more study with this blade. I'm hoping that it is shoshin (funny that the Apple word processor keeps wanting to change this to shoeshine!), but I will have to await a shinsa to get a more highly accredited opinion than mine (it looks to be very well made, in the style of late nambokucho biizen and quite healthy). Cheers, Bob

[runagmc]

Robert, this is stating the obvious, but if you can see any utsuri, that would go a long way in helping form an opinion about authenticity... obviously that doesn't mean it has to be there for the sword to be authentic...

 

This is taken from sho-shin.com on Iyemori, sandai...

 

IYEMORI(3) SHI-TOKU (t: OSAFUNE YOSHIKAGE, f: KOZORI MORIMITSU):

From KO-RYAKU 1379 to O-EI 1394. Thin, KO-KISSAKI,

shallow curved KO-DACHI. KO-ITAME, ITAME HADA mix has

JI-NIE and faint UTSURI, that spots along the SHINOGI.

Tightly defined KO-NIE, HOSO-width KO-GUNOME casts small,

even waves down the HA. Some with lively GUNOME-CHOJI BA.

Small KO-MARU, small KAERI. IYEMORI found in BUN-MEI 1469

and KYO-ROKU 1528, all late KOZORI smiths.

MEI: IYEMORI

BISHU OSAFUNE JU IYEMORI

[Surfson]

IYEMORI(3) SHI-TOKU (t: OSAFUNE YOSHIKAGE, f: KOZORI MORIMITSU):

From KO-RYAKU 1379 to O-EI 1394. Thin, KO-KISSAKI,

shallow curved KO-DACHI. KO-ITAME, ITAME HADA mix has

JI-NIE and faint UTSURI, that spots along the SHINOGI.

Tightly defined KO-NIE, HOSO-width KO-GUNOME casts small,

even waves down the HA. Some with lively GUNOME-CHOJI BA.

Small KO-MARU, small KAERI. IYEMORI found in BUN-MEI 1469

and KYO-ROKU 1528, all late KOZORI smiths.

MEI: IYEMORI

BISHU OSAFUNE JU IYEMORI

 

Thanks Adam. I looked hard for utsuri, but none jumped out at me. Nearly all of the other features of the description that you posted apply to this blade. The kokissaki, small kaeri and komaru, the "lively gunome choji" (with ashi) are all present and accounted for. What really sold me is the quality of the forging of the blade. The polish leaves something to be desired, with some irregularities, and may have some influence on the ability to visualize utsuri. Cheers, Bob