"Kuniyuki" tanto - gimei, but is it still Rai?

[Marius]

Dear All,

 

Some time ago I have acquired an interesting tanto, presumably a koto piece. It is signed Kuniyuki, most likely gimei. Still, I have been told that it exhibits the characteristics of a Rai school work.

 

Here are some pics, sorry for the quality:

http://gallery.me.com/mariuszk/100365

 

I would ask you for your opinion - is it koto? Is it Rai? What is it?

 

I like it, but I am not an expert. Your opinions will highly apreciated.

 

Best regards

[paulb]

I am doing this from memory so might be wrong but impressions from your pictures are as follows:

1. It is a very good looking Tanto. However the exagerated curve in the Nakago tends to be associated with slightly later Rai Smiths such as Kunitoshi and Ryokai rather than Kuniyuki who was very early Rai (I think the founder).

2.One indicator of Rai work is Rai-hada which are patches of dark grainless steel in the the jigane. I cant see any indication of this in your blade.

3. Typical hada is tight ko-itame with some masame running through it. I'm not sure but I think your blade shows this.

4. A strong indicator of Rai work is Nie in both hamon and particularly in the hada where it can form nie-utsuri. This can be hard to see and very hard to photograph but once you get the light right it hits you in the eye. The habuchi should also be bright.

 

As said above this is a good looking blade and I think you did well at the price. It has strong Yamashiro characteristics in terms of shape hamon and hada.

It appears to be of the period (mid Kamakura-ish) and overall an attractive work.

hope this helps, when I get back to some books I will look through to confirm the points about the shape and if different will come back to you.

regards

Paul B

[Marius]

For those of you, who don't like to open endless webpages here are some pics of the tanto. Sorry, I should have done it in ther first place...

[paulb]

sorry something I missed. The boshi appears to be O-maru which is rare in rai work (more typically ko-maru) The enju school in Higo developed out of the Rai school and their work is very similar, one of the main distinguishing features that differentiates their work from Rai is that they produced O-maru boshi.

It might be worth looking at Enju work to see if there are any other indicators.

[Ted Tenold]

In Rai and Ryokai, one would look for tighter more qualitative jigane and hada with not so much running masame. One would also see mitsumune more commonly and this one looks like Iori from the images.

 

However it does show Yamashiro influence so that, along with shape and the with the other characteristics would lead possibly to very late Ryokai work after the school moved to Bungo province becoming "Chikushi" (or also Tsukushi) Ryokai.

[Marius]

In Rai and Ryokai, one would look for tighter more qualitative jigane and hada with not so much running masame. One would also see mitsumune more commonly and this one looks like Iori from the images.

 

However it does show Yamashiro influence so that, along with shape and the with the other characteristics would lead possibly to very late Ryokai work after the school moved to Bungo province becoming "Chikushi" (or also Tsukushi) Ryokai.

 

Thanks, Ted :-)

 

It is mitsu mune. It is indeed itame hada with masame running through it. To my untrained eyes the hada does look tight, but I may be mistaken. I shall have to produce some high resolution pictures. I can see no utsuri (not that I would recognise it if I saw it).

 

I see also two/three spots of darker, grainless steel (not shingane, though They are small. One is on the omote, two on the ura side.

 

BTW, the boshi is hakikake and the hamon is very thin and very bright indeed. It consists of ko-nie. there is no ara-nie, whatsoever.

 

Now, that is a puzzle (at least for me

 

Best regards

[Darcy]

I don't think there are any signed Kuniyuki tanto just off the top of my head. Stuff from that period is rare to non-existent. You see them popping up in the beginning of the late Kamakura, after this smith's period.

 

How long is the blade?

 

It's hard to get a good handle on the sugata because you're shooting down with the tanto pointed away from you. Stand with the blade going across your body and it won't distort because the average difference in distance of each part to the camera is smaller.

 

Machi was moved up 3/4 of an inch I guess, the bottom holes are probably original.

 

I think the yasurime should be kiri, can't make them out.

 

Rai hada is just core steel showing through because the blades tend to be thin skinned. I have owned three swords by Rai Kunitoshi and Niji Kunitoshi. None showed any Rai hada.

 

Hada of a Rai piece is generally fine and beautiful, top quality. Lots of ware showing through on your piece. The hamon on a well made suguba Rai piece should be very even and expect a turnback that may be medium to fairly long.

 

See:

 

http://www.sho-shin.com/sanji2.jpg

 

In particular your hamon flares through the boshi, and is different on both sides. Looks like lots of hakikake in there.

 

Consider the overall shape of masame turning up through the kissaki, this is the source of the underlying structure of the hakikake.

 

The hamon is pretty deep, moreso than a Rai blade would be I think.

 

All told what I am looking at makes me think of a Yamato blade rather than a Yamashiro blade. If the style were closer to Rai the faker would likely have put a Rai Kunitoshi mei on it. I think when going to an older smith in this line before the school evened out its form they are going for the fudge factor of having no examples to compare to, and that the older style of Rai shows features in the hada and hamon more similar to this. Just guessing.

 

As Ted points out could be one of the descending schools from Rai that loses some of the standard form and some of the skill, and some of these pick up some Yamato I think. Would have to look at the books.

 

I think it is a legit old tanto that is worth having the mei removed and sent for papers. Furisode nakago is supposed to nail it fairly close to or in the Kamakura period.

[Marius]

I think it is a legit old tanto that is worth having the mei removed and sent for papers. Furisode nakago is supposed to nail it fairly close to or in the Kamakura period.

 

Many thanks Darcy :-)

 

All pictures of this tanto have been made by the previous owner. I will produce some hopefully better photographs and I will post them here. I won't match the quality of your pics, unfortunatelly.

 

Here are the measurements of this tanto as described by the previous owner:

Total length is 29.8cm or 11 7/8 inches and the cutting edge is 20.7cm or 8 1/4 inches. I will come back with more measurements soon.

 

Best regards

[Guest reinhard]

The two most famous Kuniyuki (Kyo Rai and Yamato Taema) can be excluded by the signature as well as Echizen Rai Kuniyuki and Mino Senjuin Kuniyuki. There have been some more smiths working under this name during Koto-period, but they are of no particular interest. Since the nakago is shaped in a form typical for Rai Kunitoshi and tries to appear like a Rai tanto, the mei is most probably gimei.

 

reinhard

[Marius]

Dear All,

 

here are the pics of the sugata. Any comments?

 

For those who want to see more, here is my site:

http://gallery.me.com/mariuszk#100365

 

Comments will be highly appreciated - a beginner has to learn continuously

 

Thanks for looking and best regards

[Darcy]

It is a nice sugata and typical of a Kamakura piece.

 

I think you should send it to Bob Benson for his kantei. He will probably tell you to remove the signature and submit it to shinsa and he will in this likely give you a good opinion about the school.

 

He can remove the signature for you and repatinate the nakago. The cost for this is minimal. It was probably made mumei. I'm curious to know how it works out and what your further decisions are, so please keep us posted.

[Marius]

It is a nice sugata and typical of a Kamakura piece.

 

I think you should send it to Bob Benson for his kantei. He will probably tell you to remove the signature and submit it to shinsa and he will in this likely give you a good opinion about the school.

 

He can remove the signature for you and repatinate the nakago. The cost for this is minimal. It was probably made mumei. I'm curious to know how it works out and what your further decisions are, so please keep us posted.

 

Dear Darcy,

 

many thanks for the advice. I know that Bob's kantei would be very valuable indeed and that it might be worth to submit the sword to shinsa.

I would love to have somebody knowledgeable to assess this blade, something which is impossible with pictures only. But, apart from the bureaucratic hassle of sending this tanto abroad (I would have to get an export permit), I would not quite like the fake mei to be removed. Here are two reasons:

 

1. I don't quite trust "repatination". OK, I am not an expert, but I think one cannot easily replace patina which has developed over hundreds of years. I have learned this reading about tsubas, this should apply to nakago as well. I am sure Bob would do a marvelous job, but I would be simply afraid that it would to an extent spoil a good nakago.

2. I also think the policy of NTHK and NBTHK not to give Hozon to gimei blades (am I right, that is their policy?) is bad as it encourages people to remove fake signatures. This is (in my opinion) a bad thing for blades where the fake mei is really old and part of the blades's history. Why not give an attribution and state that the signature is fake but the sword good?

 

It is just that I don't mind a gimei blade as long as it is a good blade (like this "Masamune" recently on eBay). Just a thought of mine...

 

Brst regards

[Brian]

Mariusz,

 

So as not to cause a debate we have covered at length before...I think the reason given for your point #2 is that many/most of these fake signatures were not done at the time of manufacture, but were done much later by the fakers. Not as the original artist intended, and therefore are misrepresenting the sword. Lots of debate about it, but it the accepted practice and for valid reasons.

However there are many collectors who are happy to keep the gimei signatures on their blades, and appreciate the sword for what it is.

 

Brian

[Marius]

So as not to cause a debate we have covered at length before...I think the reason given for your point #2 is that many/most of these fake signatures were not done at the time of manufacture, but were done much later by the fakers. Not as the original artist intended, and therefore are misrepresenting the sword. Lots of debate about it, but it the accepted practice and for valid reasons.

 

Brian,

 

Lazy bum that I am, I have not searched the NMB for this topic. Sorry about that. I shall be more diligent in the future.

 

I shall also look for discussions about the impact of a signature removal on the nakago. On the other hand, if Darcy says I might want to consider doing it, I should be more confident that it won't hurt the nakago. My apologies to Darcy.

 

Best regards