photo kantei/treat

[Jean]

I'll get the answer when I am back from holidays without any PC and hardly a phone

 

O Sa is the best guest, suguta, nakago, boshi

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

Yukimitsu isn't a bad idea either (would have been my second choice), as his tangs resembling a little too long for the blade and Furisode-like can match both with the Nakago Sugata of the given blade and the blade lenght given by Darcy, A larger available choice of hamon might be a plus against Samonji too, but still Nakago sori position and tip shape still don't convince me totally for Yukimitsu (as the boshi).

 

I support the Samonji student idea because of the "spearhead" Boshi, the feeling the mihaba slightly narrow and because it looks like Machiokuri, hence needing to add lenght to the already quiet too long (for O-sa but feel for Yukimitsu too) Nagasa. In Nanbokucho Samonji students adhered to the period requirements, so I hope one of them made this blade slightly longer then his master.

 

This considering all smaller details being accepted as ok for both, as I absolutely can't pick up one of the two by the mere quantity of nie or details as such, even with the best monitor under the heaven (and new eyes). Nothing to be charged to Darcy's pictures, just not enough exposure on my part to such a level of blades.

 

If the blade turns out to be NOT machiokuri, well, then I've a problem.

[Jacques D.]

Hi,

 

O-Sa,

 

 

Of course it is only one sample.

[takakage]

ko itame, brigth nie, boshi and long kaeri for me looks like SA

[Brian]

I'm not sure the hamon matches though, and I am still looking for that defining characteristic that Ted and Darcy mentioned, plus the other hints that he gave.

 

Brian

[Darcy]

Starting with the nakago, we see the curved shape that is found most usually on Kamakura period tanto worn likely towards the back. (Clue number 1). The hamon descends deep into the nakago (Clue 2), and that in combination with the long feeling of the nakago and the second mekugiana (Clue 3) tells us that the nakago is machi-okuri. The nagasa is long at 26.8cm (Clue 4). Adding the machi okuri with the nagasa tells us that the tanto has a Kamakura sugata including nakago with an extended size: a Nanbokucho feature. So now we're looking at the Kamakura/Nanbokucho period border extending into Nanbokucho. Later in Nanbokucho and you expect the wider hirazukuri wakizashi type and earlier you expect standard Kamakura size. The nakago does appear to be furisode but as noted above, it could also be that it was bent into this shape at a later date as the curve on the mune is not smooth. That would still keep us, all else considered, in early Nanbokucho.

 

The wide hamon of vivid nie with kinsuji, kind of a gunome mixed with notare, and the presence of chikei throughout the piece should bring one straight to Soshu den. Yamashiro den would be expecting a typical piece like this to be in suguba with finer nie and a short turnback.

 

The tanto of Yukimitsu are usually suguba done in Shintogo style, with a narrow hamon filled with nie and small activities. There are though some that are in a gunome style and Yukimitsu can be a good answer given the fact that he is accepted to have a wide range of styles.

 

The key kantei element in this piece is the kaeri, the turn is sharp in togari and the return along the mune is very long. It forms a shape similar to jizo boshi which is a feature of Sa. This brings one immediately to the Sa school. Whenever you see a Kamakura-looking tanto with an extended turnback, think about Sa right away. This is a very key kantei point, usually Kamakura period tanto and those in this form will have a small elegant turn, where Samonji made these long turnbacks and his students followed him in it. Thinking about Sa and his school is confirmed in the wide midareba hamon composed of gunome and notare mixed, and in particular because it widens as it progresses to the boshi. This is another feature of the school. So in judging between a Yukimitsu in the more unusual midareba style (for tanto) and an unusual boshi for Yukimitsu vs. a typical boshi for Sa school and typical hamon, the favor should be given to the Sa school.

 

However, the overall quality and excellence of the kitae here could lead one to Yukimitsu. This is actually an unusually high quality blade and for that it could lead one to Sai-jo saku smiths as a result. But the features in this case bring one to the right answer for school being Sa.

 

Because the piece is extended in size, it is fair to depart Samonji (who does not make extended length pieces in general) and look at his immediate students. Getting here I would give atari (student of Sa).

 

The earliest dated work by the students is Yukihiro (1350), and Yukihiro is considered to make the work that is closest in style to Samonji. The NBTHK has written that Yukihiro fully absorbed the style of Samonji, and that he is the most skillful student of Sa. Furthermore it is likely that he made daisaku as they've compared the signature on some Sa with the signature of Yukihiro and found that they match well.

 

So from the outstanding quality of the piece, the very clear kitae, and that it does not adopt the hirazukuri/wakizashi style of later Nanbokucho period tanto, the evidence points to the best and earliest student of Sa, which happens to be Yukihiro, and a very remarkable example in his repertoire.

 

Getting to Kamakura/Nanbokucho Soshu is a very good answer. Nailing the Sa school is an excellent answer because it is rare, good examples hard to come by, so it can be off the radar. Getting to Sa Yukihiro is very good.

 

Excellent answers all around and a good accompanying discussion.

 

I had come very close to buying this myself a long time ago so it was very nice to see it in the hand. It's an awesome piece and I regret very much not pursuing it. The NBTHK has singled it out as one of the best works by Sa Yukihiro, which makes it one of the best Sa school tanto that exist. I'm very glad to have it for the book.

 

Ted might have a couple additional comments about the kantei of this piece...

 

About the lighter colored area in the jihada, it seemed to be some kind of issue with the polish of the blade as far as I could tell, it wasn't an artifact of the photography.

[Guido]

However, the overall quality and excellence of the kitae here could lead one to Yukimitsu. This is actually an unusually high quality blade and for that it could lead one to Sai-jo saku smiths as a result.

...

Nailing the Sa school is an excellent answer because it is rare, good examples hard to come by, so it can be off the radar.

That's exactly what happened when I answered "Yukimitsu", despite the Boshi and other features. I can't remember ever seeing a Sa school blade of this outstanding quality, so I went for another smith within the time period / style who sometimes departed from the more common Hamon in that bracket.

 

Not that I ever will become a huge fan of photo Kantei , but this is indeed an excellent example of where one can go astray if it's not a "typical" work, second-guessing oneself into the wrong answer.

 

I'm looking forward to your new book!

[Darcy]

Guido, that's the overthinking thing that I tend to do ... I wrote up the correct answers for the first couple of Aoi Art kanteis I did here and then went on to give incorrect answers... it's really hard to not overthink.

[Brian]

Not having done much in the way of real "in hand" kantei..but I would imagine that these same factors shown here, and the overthinking aspect (as well as items that are slight deviations from the norm of a smith) would just as likely present themselves in regular kantei.

Although in many excercises they will present "ideal examples" of a smith's work...when you are presented with a blade for sale or examination (such as at a shinsa) you would come across these same factors frequently, and not always an ideal example. So to me this shows the difficulty of kantei in general, and makes me enjoy these exercises in spite of any shortcomings. So great post again, and an enjoyable one. Learned quite a bit too. Thanks all.

 

Brian

[Guido]

Not having done much in the way of real "in hand" kantei..but I would imagine that these same factors shown here, and the overthinking aspect (as well as items that are slight deviations from the norm of a smith) would just as likely present themselves in regular kantei.

Although in many excercises they will present "ideal examples" of a smith's work...when you are presented with a blade for sale or examination (such as at a shinsa) you would come across these same factors frequently, and not always an ideal example. So to me this shows the difficulty of kantei in general, and makes me enjoy these exercises in spite of any shortcomings. So great post again, and an enjoyable one. Learned quite a bit too. Thanks all.

 

Brian

Generally speaking, the majority of blades in a "real Kantei" are more or less typical works, only occasionally is an atypical blade thrown in for "educational purposes"; however, this happens more often recently, IMO to keep Kantei more lively for the Nihontô old hands :lol:.

 

I remember a Nyûsatsu Kantei session at the NBTHK last year that Zenon van Damme (who visited Japan ahead of the DTI) and I attended. Of the five blades on the table, one was unmistakenly a 3'rd generation Tadayoshi, but of the others we only got two "Jidai Chigai Yoku" or so, and were totally lost with the remaining two. (BTW, Zenon and I did the Kantei independently, and only compared notes after that, so there was no talking each other into the same bids .)

 

Judging by the murmers that went through the crowd when the answers were given, we were not the only ones that were flabbergasted with the answers, and some of the contestants seemd to be outright angry. OTOH, this was one of the most interesting sessions I ever attended, gaining a lot of new information, even if it was the hard way.

 

To summarize: starting, advancing, and even getting comfortable with Kantei, typical work is to be preferred. After that a few atypical blades keep your brain in gear and things more interesting. But even with the more straight Kantei you're never save from overthinking, which happens quite frequently, and - at least in my case - serves as a great excuse for giving the wrong answer !

[Brian]

I don't envy the shinsa panels who get presented with swords regardless of whether they are typical examples or not..shows that it takes a lifetime of study to get to that level.

I was thinking more of less formal kantei, such as when seeing a sword at a show or presented with something for sale or opinion that might be mumei.

Looks like the way to study swords is to first know how to differentiate a good sword from a bad one. Then you can narrow down to a school or smith. It might seem like a simple thing, but with swords not always in good polish, the difference between a good sword and a mediocre one is critical, and what I would love to see more articles and debate on.

Something to bear in mind for all the novices such as myself

For the overseas collectors at the Taikai who are NBTH members, I beleive there will be an excellent talk on this after the show for those who will be there.

 

Brian

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

I can't remember ever seeing a Sa school blade of this outstanding quality,

 

You, go figure me ! :lol:

 

I attributed the matter to my inexperience, hence my disclaimer...

 

just not enough exposure on my part to such a level of blades.

 

Guess this time helped instead to be an obstacle.

 

Compliments to Austin for his perfect Atari.

[Darcy]

Just to be clear on this one, it is fully a typical work of Sa Yukihiro, there is no Den in the designation which indicates by the NBTHK opinion that the work contains all of the features, and is lacking none, of Sa Yukihiro.

 

Repeating: by the NBTHK determination, this is a perfect and typical textbook example of Sa Yukihiro with no doubt or wiggle room. If someone disagrees with the opinion of the NBTHK or comes to a different conclusion, they are doing so either on the strength of their own scholarship or in a need to come up to speed with the knowledge of the NBTHK judges.

 

Given that the smith is considered to have made dai-saku for Sa, it means that one has to consider that a good portion of the work attributed to the great master is by the hand of Sa Yukihiro instead. This should say a lot about the skill of the smith, standing in for Sa is like standing in for Shizu or Kanemitsu. Sa Yukihiro is by this, an excellent smith.

 

What it points to then I think is that more of the good work of the Sa school would need to be seen to better place it.

 

It is far easier to find good work by Yukimitsu and to see it than to see good Sa school work. That is pretty rare stuff. I have photographed twice as many Yukimitsu for my book than the entire Sa school. It's for this reason I think that it might be easier to steer to Yukimitsu when seeing this work and to get caught up in the quality rather than the kantei points.

 

To reiterate in another way: That this blade is excellent is *not* something that makes it a bad kantei blade. It means that the judge is not familiar with the scope of quality of the smith in question so is unable to place it -or- the judge has an honest difference of opinion if sticking with Yukimitsu past the kantei.

 

The judgment between Yukimitsu and Sa Yukihiro here is a tradeoff:

 

Boshi = not correct for Yukimitsu, correct for Sa school

Hamon = unlikely for Yukimitsu, correct for Sa school

Size = incorrect for Yukimitsu's period, correct for students of Sa

 

The main kantei points all point away from Yukimitsu and to the students of Sa. The only thing that can be deceiving is that the blade is so good that one might be tempted to put it to a top level Soshu smith. And that is a limitation of the judge's knowledge, not a problem caused by or inherent to using this blade as an example.

 

It is definitely best to use the best, most reliable examples for kantei. These are not always available, and it's a shame to lose the experience because we don't have any signed Norishige laying around asking to be put up, for example.

 

Ramble time on Photo Kantei since people have been kicking in opinions on it lately:

 

This is intended to be a learning experience for everyone, myself included. I learned about the Sa boshi and since then this is one school I find is pretty straight forward to kantei in photographs and oshigata. It just jumps out once you are familiar with it. I would have been inclined to judge this one as O-Sa myself, looking at the quality and the boshi and would have missed on Yukihiro. Reading the kantei answer I would adjust my knowledge to reflect the fact that Sa Yukihiro kicks ass up and down the block as a swordsmith, tuck that away, and the next time I saw something similar I would be better prepared. I personally think that this is the correct thing to take away from errors in kantei, and this is why people who do not participate deprive themselves. There's always something to learn, and those with the balls to stand up and put their opinion up in public deserve congratulations because it makes one be humble when they're wrong.

 

When I have time available (I will be in 6 different cities, 4 countries, in the first few weeks of September... inbetween I have a few books to write and 30 gigabytes of photographs to edit) I try to do my best to participate in the Aoi Arts ones and am happy to have a chance to be on the side of getting them wrong as well. It sucks to be wrong, it is a humbling experience, but it's important to try and to pick up some knowledge in the process.

 

I sat down to kantei once with Ogawa san and got atari on 3 of the 5, got the school on the fourth. The middle blade of the 5 I drew a complete blank on. With hints, I could not get anywhere close.

 

It was an Omi Daijo Tadahiro of all things, perfectly normal.

 

I walked away from the experience with this memory burned in my mind. It was embarassing, especially as I got the harder blades just fine. I hope as a result to never miss the smith again, so far so good. I hope that I will not make this same error again, but I am glad I did that one time, it kept me from getting a big head, kept me remembering I am a middle level student and will probably never escape this level of knowledge, and that I know just enough to get myself into serious trouble. It helped me learn a bit more. Unfortunately that probably displaces something else I need, but that's our struggle.

 

But I know that by not participating, no matter how perfect or imperfect the process, and no matter how perfect or imperfect the blade, the only person that gets hurt is myself. By putting up answers that are not right, I am only proving who I am, and to not be OK with that would imply that I would want people to think I know more than I do. These are the things that I try to tell myself when pride gets in the way of participation.

 

So I hope that people will continue to participate, that we can one day just go forward with these in a positive manner, and we can most of all continue to enjoy ourselves while doing it.

[Guido]

Just to be clear on this one, it is fully a typical work of Sa Yukihiro, there is no Den in the designation which indicates by the NBTHK opinion that the work contains all of the features, and is lacking none, of Sa Yukihiro.

No contest, and I don't see anybody saying something to the contrary. My above post was a reply to Brian's question in regard to "regular" Nyûsatsu Kantei, and what I experienced there. It had nothing to do with the Sa Yukihiro.

What it points to then I think is that more of the good work of the Sa school would need to be seen to better place it.

...

It's for this reason I think that it might be easier to steer to Yukimitsu when seeing this work and to get caught up in the quality rather than the kantei points.

I don't know what it did for the other participants, but for me this is exactly the lesson learned. And since I'm not suffering from delusions of grandeuer and infallibility, I have no problem learning this lesson in public. :D

[Goldy]

G'day all,

 

As I live hundreds of miles from the nearest decent size city, in a country rarely (if at all) visited by the Nihonto illuminati, I have next to zero chance of being involved in a real kantei experience. Speaking of experience, I am light years away from being able to prevent any embarassment should I ever get the chance. Hence my enjoyment of these online 'kantei'.

 

I am learning volumes from you guys who have the experience and the time to share it with us newbies and appreciate your explained decisions, whether they be right or wrong. Reading your posts helps embed the logical thought processes and general, then detailed knowledge of nihonto examination.

 

Please keep the 'kantei' treats coming! Maybe one day I might be able to actually offer a knowledgeable post.

 

Many thanks,

[drbvac]

Same for me on the other side of the globe!

[Ted Tenold]

Darcy has illistrated some really great points on a beautiful sword and I can't really add much more. The point I was really elluding to was the characteristic yakiba which is a great hallmark of the Sa style. The widening of the yakiba approaching the kissaki, to a narrowly pointed boshi and long kaeri. The shape is, as discussed, what can throw one off a bit and not unreasonably so. That narrow range between Late Kamakura and Nambokucho can get very fuzzy sometimes and furthering the difficulties of a direct bid to a smith with so few extant direct works, like Yukihiro. Entering the process by starting with period is the first opportunity to start that overthinking process and lead one down the wrong path. When the shape confuses from the outset, then a latent doubt is established about everything else following it making the process really frustrating. If one can't use the next catagory of den to regain their balance from stumbling over the exact period, then the problems just contine to magnify. Everyone falls flat on their face though. You just have to get up and dust yourself off.

 

Several years ago this Yukihiro came up for sale and I was immediately attracted to it. Everything about it just appealed to me. I wasn't able to make the commitment at the time and passed the opportunity. Such is life. I have a habit of comparing swords to music. If a decent sword is like a note struck well on a finely tuned piano, then a good sword is like a simple yet pleasant chord, and great swords comparing to say, the kinds of chords Rachmaninov would play. Each sword has it's own timbre and any visual complexity that is overwhelming at first glance, begins to form its own balance that gradually presents itself with time, inviting the viewer to discover all the notes that comprise the piece. So I guess where I'm going with this is that looking at a fine sword in a picture (no matter how well executed) is much like listening to a great opus on a simple stereo; one can't get the full effect to appreciate, but the quality still shows through.

[M Ubertini]

Hey Guys,

 

Here is my tanto that I posted here for Kantei a long time ago. It's Hirado Sa, so I thought it would be a nice addition to Sa school tanto kantei. I posted for info for this school and smiths a few posts ago, but never the less, a nice example of O-EI period Sa. if anyone has any comments to it it would be appreciated. It has kantei by NBTHK just to the school, but no smith. Tokubetsu Hozon.

 

Matt

[M Ubertini]

here's a link for a detailed pic.

 

http://img518.imageshack.us/my.php?imag ... adeku1.jpg