Looking for help with transation and identification

[pitu]

Hello!

Could you help me with translating this sign on a tanto?

Best regards

Piotr

[Gabriel L]

Kiku (imperial chrysanthemum) followed by "Tamba no kami Yoshi-" -something (cut off). Presumably Yoshimichi.

 

Kyoto branch. See here: http://home.earthlink.net/~steinrl/yoshmich.htm

 

PS for future reference the first character is a dead giveaway for this school. Super distinctive.

[pitu]

Thank you very much for your very comprehensive answer.

As this school was active for over 200 years is it possible to date this blade more precisely?

[Gabriel L]

Speaking in a purely general sense:

 

It is possible to date blades to specific smiths (or ID them as gimei, fake signature), if enough data is available.

 

The mei needs to be compared against recorded oshigata (tang rubbings & blade illustrations). That is just one aspect of the sword, however. The nakago (tang) needs to be evaluated, for its shape and patina and filing marks etc. The actual workmanship of the blade is key — the geometry, the pattern of the differentially hardened edge (hamon), the surface grain from folding (hada), and many other details.

 

Ultimately you can get an online opinion through good photos, and depending on who is giving that opinion it can be quite helpful. One can sometimes be confident that a blade is gimei, but to go the other direction and be confident (as a newbie) that it is genuine, one would typically want to send the blade to shinsa (professional appraisal, e.g. by the NBTHK or NTHK-NPO).

 

---

 

Speaking specifically about this blade:

 

Please post good photos. Some tips: do not use flash. Include a photographer's grey card in the shots (or at least a white background, e.g. sheet of paper) so we can color balance if necessary. Make sure you get the images in focus and without camera shake. Experiment with lighting to yield the most detail.

 

• 1. Overall shots of the bare blade, both sides. By bare blade I mean no mounts, fittings, habaki, etc. Make sure there is ZERO perspective distortion (i.e., shoot from directly above) so we can accurately judge the proportions, curvature, shape, etc.
  2. Overall shots of both sides of the nakago, again with zero perspective distortion. Aim for diffuse white lighting so we can accurately judge the color of the patina (the photo you already posted is decent enough).
  3. Detail shots of the kissaki (point). Try to get the hamon (hard white edge steel) in this area to show up, so we can assess its condition and style in this critical section.
  4. Detail shots of the hamon in several sections of the blade. Experiment with light to try and bring out as much detail and contrast as possible. Try aiming down the blade towards a light source, e.g. a light bulb.
  5. Detail shots of the hada (surface grain) if possible. Again, experiment.

 

Post measurements, ideally in cm:

 

• 1. Nagasa (edge length, measured in a straight line from the point to the munemachi, i.e. notch on the spine).
  2. Motohaba (width of blade at the machi, i.e. notches at base)
  3. Sakihaba (width of blade at the point, except I assume this blade has no sharply defined point section, so you can ignore this)
  4. Nakago length

 

With all that information... some of the collectors here might be able to give a better opinion than I could. As an exercise for myself I will attempt to ID which generation it might be based on the mei, assuming it is not gimei, and post my opinion; however, it will be just that, an opinion (and not the best one you can get here).

 

Regards,

—G.

[Gabriel L]

Sadly in my apparently very humble library I have no Tanba no Kami Yoshimichi oshigata at all.

 

I'll just add notes here as I work... the Nihonto Koza says that the generations all resemble each other, but gradually the hada becomes "muji" (too small to see) and "the hamon becomes uniform in tone... lacking in elegance... impression of both the ji and ha being too hard."

 

In Hawley's index, the second generation (ca. 1644-48) through sixth generation (ca. 1751-64) signed with both the kiku mon and the five-character TB(n)KYM mei. But it is not clear if the lack of kiku mon after that in the listings means that they stopped using it. Hawley's index is a little outdated and bare-bones in any case.

 

According to Sesko's index, there are not many 3rd gen blades extant. For what that's worth.

 

Looking for papered nidai+ examples online now...

 

Second gen (katana): http://www.samuraisword.com.au/html/yos ... aisho.html

Second gen: http://www.d8.dion.ne.jp/~y.noda/TANBA.html

Second gen? Looks distinct (and better) than the first two: http://www.samurai-nippon.net/V-905/

Fourth gen: http://new.uniquejapan.com/early-edo-ta ... -in-kyoto/

Fourth gen: http://www.busido.cz/en/odborne-clanky/ ... yoshimichi

Fourth gen: http://www.samuraishokai.jp/sword/13320.html

Some more fourth gens, comments: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=15603&hilit=yoshimichi

Fifth gen: http://new.uniquejapan.com/a-tanba-no-k ... wakizashi/

Fifth gen: http://www.tokka.biz/sword/yoshimichi5.html

 

Several gens, compared: http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/vogue33vv/8862176.html

 

Tried to read this one, but I don't think they specifically attribute a generation, and it doesn't seem to be papered. But a very similar mei to the blade in question, I labeled it ??? in the montage below: http://kendonews.at.webry.info/201304/article_190.html

 

So here's fun comparison I whipped up... probably the most convenient side-by-side now online, haha:

 

 

This is a small sample size and only includes some of the generations. But the fifth generation mei looks pretty good to my eyes.

 

I hope Markus will not mind too much if I post the relevant entry from his index?

 

Yoshimichi (吉道), 5th gen. Kyō, Shōtoku (正徳, 1711-1716), Yamashiro – "Tanba no Kami Yoshimichi" (丹波守吉道), civilian name "Mishina Tōshichirō" (三品藤七郎), he received the honorary title "Tanba no Kami" in the first year of Shōtoku (1711), there exist date signatures even from the Kyōhō (享保, 1716-1736) and Genbun eras (元文, 1736-1741)

 

That's all I got.

[Brian]

Gabriel....

Please don't stop posting. :D

Wow. The amount of effort you put into your replies is staggering.

 

Brian

[mdiddy]

That is one helluva mei analysis! Thanks for sharing this.

 

Will bookmark this for when I'm in the market for a Yoshimichi.

[Gabriel L]

Thanks guys. I have to make up somehow for the fact that I don't have the same experience, knowledge, or resources as some of you. EDIT: also, this is just a really good excuse for me to actually study a bit. Before today, my knowledge of this school was "Edo period, boat-shaped kanji, sudare-ba." Now I know a good bit more, which is always worth the effort.

 

I hope Piotr appreciates it... :lol:

[runagmc]

Hi Gabriel, the internet can be a very good resource when you can't afford a giant library, huh... :D