Koto sword

[Steffieeee]

That's cool, so it could be any of those mentioned smiths? It's an education for me especially in regards to what I'm told on a subject I don't know much about, especially from the seller... Is there anything I can tell about the sword itself from the condition? As I mentioned the hamon? Is this typical for this period? This smith? Can anyone suggest a good book which covers early swords .. that isn't in Japanese...

[Ray Singer]

It seems that there were two generations of  Kozori Bizen Mitsuhisa working to the end of Nanbokucho.

[Steffieeee]

Thanks so much for your knowledge and time btw. Am I right that this is a small Tachi from my reading..? Carried edge down, Mei signature facing outwards?

[Ken-Hawaii]

Steffie, do a quick search, & you will find many posts on sword books in English. Who was the seller, out of curiosity? Yes, that's correct on how a tachi was worn.

[Grey Doffin]

Straight hamon are not uninteresting nor are they less valuable than more flamboyant hamon.  Done well, however, they are more difficult to produce (require greater skill) than the others.

Grey

[SAS]

The Connoisseur 's Book ofJapanese Swords by Kokan Nagayama is a very good book in English.

[Ray Singer]

Try the 3 Koto volumes of the English language Nihonto Koza. One of the volumes is partially focused on Bizen.

 

 

 Can anyone suggest a good book which covers early swords .. that isn't in Japanese...

[Ooitame]

Interesting piece and good advice from all. Congratulations. I would have guessed 1450s easily from the start. But I am still learning. The photo ending in wa0006, is it possible to get a photo of the same (tip/kissaki) just a bit more focused if possible. Trying to get a good look at the boshi.

[Ray Singer]

Per your question for good references, Nihonto Koza and Yamanaka Newsletters here: http://www.militaria.co.za/nmb/topic/30356-Japanese-sword-books-for-sale/

[Steffieeee]

Thanks very much Ray!

[Jacques]

IMHO many red flags such sugata, kissaki nagasa, fukura, nagasa <=> kasane, sori which are not in accordance with such and such period.

[Steffieeee]

Thanks Jacques but I have no idea what any of that means

[Rivkin]

The curvature is very uniform, which is sort of weird for Oei swords, and also not too common in late Nambokucho, especially as there is no o-kissaki. And the length is unusually small for the early swords.

Both however do fit Sengaku.

At the same time the ha is thin suguha. Again, not something that was done in Oei period (very wide), there were some earlier examples like that, but it was done now and then in Sengaku.

 

A personal and erroneous guess.

 

Kirill R.

[paulb]

 Kirill

you may be right but I don't agree with your comments re: Oei Bizen, thin Suguha small kissaki. If you take a look at the link below which describes in some detail an Oei period Bizen blade with ko-kissaki and thin(ish) suguha hamon). The top Oei Bizen smiths were aiming to return to the quieter sugata and of the early Kamakura period following the excesses seen in the earlier Nambokucho.  

http://www.militaria.co.za/articles/Yasumitsu.pdf

 

I don't know what this is and the shape and condition are not offering too many clues. I agree it could be interesting but stress "could" I think there is a long way to go before it can be properly evaluated.

[Jussi Ekholm]

This is a quote from NBTHK kantei for ubu Masamitsu tachi of 66 cm.

 

 

The blade has a normal mihaba, tapers noticeably, has a relative thick kasane, a deep koshizori which increases again towards the tip, and a chū-kissaki, That means we have a sugata which is typical for the late Nanbokuchō period, from about Eiwa (永和, 1375-1379) onwards.

 

Here are some dated short tachi (ubu or very near it) that I have recorded that show that it was indeed bit typical for some certain late Nanbokuchō Bizen smiths to make these small slender tachi. This trend was particulary strong in Kozori school. Of course these smiths also produced longer tachi of over 70 cm during the exactly same time. But the sudden emergence of these small tachi in large numbers supports the above quote.

 

Masamitsu - 1390 - 66,8 cm

Masamitsu - 1391 - 66,4 cm

Masamitsu - 1382 - 66,1 cm

Masamitsu - 1389 - 63,2 cm

Hidemitsu - 1383 - 65,0 cm

Hidemitsu - 1371 - 63,3 cm

Hidemitsu - 1386 - 62,8 cm

Nariie - 1381 - 66,6 cm

Nariie - 1381 - 60,4 cm

Sukeyoshi - 1391 - 62,4 cm

Moromitsu - 1401 - 67,0 cm

Moromitsu - 1394 - 67,0 cm

Moromitsu - 1394 - 66,3 cm

Moromitsu - 1392 - 65,6 cm

Moromitsu - 1387 - 65,5 cm

Moromitsu - 1399 - 62,6 cm

Moromitsu - 1381 - 61,3 cm

Moromitsu - 1385 - 60,3 cm

Yorimitsu - 1382 - 58,3 cm

Sadasue - 1381 - 65,4 cm

Iemori - 1404 - 63,4 cm

Iemori - 1377 - 62,0 cm

Ieshige - 1399 - 60,7 cm

 

Here is a link to a Kozori group tachi of 64,8 cm signed but not dated: https://www.e-sword.jp/katana/1910-1012.htm

Hidemitsu of 63,8 cm (not dated): https://www.aoijapan.net/katanabisyu-osa%e2%96%a1-hidemitsu/

 

Now to be clear I am not saying Kozori and the approx. age are correct but given the signature & size and shape that would be my first potential guess. I'd try to get into a meeting of UK based sword group where some people could see it in hand. Unfortunately condition is what it is. Depending on what the experienced folks think you might get it professionally restored.

[Steffieeee]

Blimey. Not easy for a beginner that's for sure

[16k]

Blimey. Not easy for a beginner that's for sure

Don’t worry, it’s not easier with experience!

[Steffieeee]

Regardless of opinions on age and style my main interest is; is this a genuine blade from the period it's from. Is this not fake, or pretending to be something it's not.? I realise even this statement is not straight forward but coming from a background of non Japanese swords it should be meaningful

[paulb]

Steff,

Your blade is an authentic work. From what can be seen in it's current condition it is an older piece. I dont believe it is from the 1200s as you originally thought but I do think it is likely to be koto and pre 1450 (but without being able to see more detail that is still a bit of a guess) As suggested by Jussi I think your next best step is to come along to one of the meetings in the UK and let some people look at it with you (we can also explain some of the terminology a bit as well) 

[Ken-Hawaii]

Hate to repeat what I & others have said, but if you don't understand the terminology, you should be spending a few dollars on reference books. If you're visually oriented, "The Sword of Japan," by Joseph Bott, is $16 well-spent on Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/Sword-Japan-Joseph-Bott/dp/1304242404/).

 

As Paul says, there are too many oddities to be precise, but your blade is more-likely early Muromachi than any earlier.

[16k]

I also highly recommend that book. Less known than many others, but a very good book.

[Gakusee]

People are getting hung up on minor things. Remember - kodachi were created throughout Koto. So, what is the issue with this being a 1300-1450 Kozori or Omiya kodachi? The mei looks well eroded, the patina looks right, the steel sort of looks right etc.

[Steffieeee]

So apart from all the other features that are visible here, would the blade steel itself be able to date it or give any more information to solve the puzzle as it appears to be. As I understand that is only possible with a proper polish

[paulb]

As a basic guide the original shape is and indicator of age, the hada(grain pattern) indicates tradition and the hamon (hardenned edge) school and possibly smith.

As always it isnt quite that staightforward but it is a good starting point.

You are right to learn much more about your blade you would need to have it polished so the hada and hamon become more clearly visible. As a first step it might be worth having a "window" polished on a small section of the blade before committing to a full polish. It might give you an indication of both condition and origin. 

[Jacques]

Look at nakago guys...

[Steffieeee]

What is inconsistent in the nakago for this date? Sori is 2.6 cms btw. Finally armed with my connoisseurs book of jap sword to try to spot these subtle differences...

[Rivkin]

 Kirill

you may be right but I don't agree with your comments re: Oei Bizen, thin Suguha small kissaki. If you take a look at the link below which describes in some detail an Oei period Bizen blade with ko-kissaki and thin(ish) suguha hamon). The top Oei Bizen smiths were aiming to return to the quieter sugata and of the early Kamakura period following the excesses seen in the earlier Nambokucho.  

http://www.militaria.co.za/articles/Yasumitsu.pdf

 

I don't know what this is and the shape and condition are not offering too many clues. I agree it could be interesting but stress "could" I think there is a long way to go before it can be properly evaluated.

 

Paul, my comment on o-kissaki was with respect to late Nambokucho, with regards to Oei yes you are right - there were thin suguha blades, thank you for the correction, though I personally would be more comfortable with a slightly earlier date this being the case, but that's all highly secondary in nature.

My main concern here is that lets say there is no signature. Lets say one just looks at the overall shape. Does Oei or late Nambokucho come to mind? To me what comes to mind is a classic late Muromachi profile. A great fit for the period. If its Nambokucho to Oei - there are questions. For Oei - Its not koshizori, it has absolutely NO fumbari. And so on.

Yes, late Nambokucho short tachi is a possibility here, Mr. Ekholm did great work digging out the numbers.

Do I personally like the shape for it? Not particularly. Maybe some of it is due to photography angle.

 

Kirill R.

[Steffieeee]

So if it's late muromachi is there a problem with that? Wouldn't the signature support that? Or is there some fakery going on? As I said before I was sold it as a 13th century sword so I have my own axe to grind with a dealer, but if it's a 15th /16th century sword that's fair enough. Here are some hopefully clearer pics of the shape, pretty much directly overhead. Another discovery from these pictures is that my phone camera is clearly appalling

[Rivkin]

Ook, even though I am looking on the phone, there is some fumbari here and maybe a tint of koshizori, at least the upper portion is more straight. 1380-1400 or so now looks promising.

I.e. - its worth money!

Kirill R.

[Steffieeee]

So if the signature is 'mitsuhisa'.. I found 8 guys with that name from 1342-1469... 120 years span. Is there no better way of dating it? Although when I look again at ones in Bizen? That's 1342-68

 

Another question (please bear with me for being annoying) . Where can I get really good quality handle wrapping. The one I have is clearly some polyester hideous fabric and I would like to redo it with traditional natural fabric.