The works of Gassan Sadakazu

[almeister]

Hi Bryce

In 1918 The Great Sadakazu passed away  .... ?

 

He was " One of " the only "2"  swordsmiths to ever be awarded " Teishitsu Gigien " Status - Direct Imperial Court Artisan ( April 4 1906 )

 

I can also see Dirks' reference  

 

I know more about Kanenori than Sadakazu 

Out of respect for such "A High Ranking Title " ... To my knowledge  - Kanenori  , Always stated , Title/Name /His Age/ on his Mei 

 

To our knowledge....

Sadakatsu is the Son(adopted?) of Sadakazu 

 

My question is.... in your research  , is there any " MEI " you have seen , signed by "Sadakazu " after 1906 without his "Teishitsu Gigien " Title Status appearing on the Mei (that you would consider Sadakatsu signed  ??) 

 

If so . Shinsa is the only answer  

 

Sorry if I missed something here !! , however you have brought up something here that I have heard of several times now and would appreciate clarification  !

 

Cheers AlanK 

 

 

 

[Bryce]

G'day Alan,

I am not sure. Certainly there are plenty of blades signed by Sadakatsu for Sadakazu with his title. An example is the one posted by Surfson earlier in this thread. I will have a look.

Cheers,

Bryce

[David Flynn]

If you check various sources, you'll find that the Gassan School  has a lot of Daisaku Daimei.      Sadakazu did it for Sadayoshi, Sadakatsu did it for Sadakazu and Sadamitsu (Sadakazu 2) did it for Sadakatsu, etc.      Sadakatsu died in 1943 and I'm lead to believe  that Sadakatsu swords dated from 1940- 1943 a Daisaku Daimei.   Again, I'm lead to believe Sadakatsu was very unwell during this period.

[Bryce]

G'day David,

I think Gassan Sadakatsu was still signing the vast majority of his blades right up till his death. His 1943 mei are not quite as crisp as his earlier ones, but still obviously in his hand. Gassan Sadakatsu mei not in his hand seem to be relatively uncommon and aren't restricted to his later years. Often the blades signed with his name, but not done by him, are atypical in sugata and kitae and I wonder if some are actually gimei? In contrast, I think you are hard pressed to find a Sadakazu blade made after Meiji 30 that was actually signed by Sadakazu. Also, while Sadakatsu was very consistent in how he signed, there is a lot of variation in Sadakazu mei.

Cheers,

Bryce

[Vagabond]

 This is signed on both sides and is written "  the imperial craftsman Gassan Sadakazu at the age of 79 did this. 
Taisho 3, eighth month on a lucky day (August 1914)

[Vagabond]

[Vagabond]

[Bryce]

G'day Raffaele,

Thank you for posting your blade. It is another example of one signed by Sadakatsu for his father.

Cheers,

Bryce

[David Flynn]

Bryce, the funny thing about Daisaku Daimei is, that unless the Shinsa team say so, it's always classed as Shoshin.   Saying that, to directly say that a sword is Daisaku Daimei  without  a shinsa team saying so is sort of a Faux Pas.   What one should say is, I Believe this is a  Daisaku Daimei.  Unless one has definitive proof, one must take the sword as Shoshin.

 

An example of this is Shigetsugu.  According to Chris Bowen, all Shigetsugu swords signed with Soshu script are Daisaku.  However, the Sword Socs. paper them as Shoshin. The purpose of regaling this is because, even though we know that many swords are Daisaku Daimei, they must be accepted as Shoshin if papered such.   I believe Chris Bowen has done a great disservice, in that these Soshu Script swords are now mentioned by Markus Sesko and have turned some people off from buying Shigetsugu swords with Soshu mei.  As said,  Daisaku Daimei have been done since Adam wore knickers. It's something that is known but not Directly said.  It's accepted that All members of the Gassan Family did this but again, unless papered as such, must be accepted as genuine.   One may state though, that So and So did Daisaku Daimei, again though, unless papered as such, we don't definitively say So and So made this sword as Daisaku Daimei.

[Curran]

An interesting one for the books:

https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/k1064432519

 

Full disclosure- I bid on this one. The seller pulled the auction, and seems to like to do it. Sometime of these dealers seem nuttier than squirrel poop.

Anyway, a Sadaichi (or Sadakazu #2 if you want to read the second kanji that way).

Nice gendaito.

 

[Vagabond]

23 hours ago, Bryce said:

G'day Raffaele,

Thank you for posting your blade. It is another example of one signed by Sadakatsu for his father.

Cheers,

i have personally considered that mei from sadakazu

[Bryce]

G'day Curran,

That is an interesting tanto signed Yusuishin Sadayoshi. I don't think I have ever seen a "cut-out" hi like that.

 

I am sorry if I have unintentionally committed a faux pas, by naming any blades as daimei. One of the forum members sent me some photos of their Sadakazu dated Meiji 38 which has a sayagaki by Tanobe sensei stating it is a work by Sadakatsu, although to my eyes it looks like it was actually signed by Sadakazu, making it daisaku.

Cheers,

Bryce

[Curran]

33 minutes ago, Bryce said:

G'day Curran,

That is an interesting tanto signed Yusuishin Sadayoshi. I don't think I have ever seen a "cut-out" hi like that.

 

Yes, it was an interesting one with very clean asayugi hada. Very rare I would try and buy something like it, but it was too interesting to me. 

 

[Bryce]

I know there is at least one Sadakazu that has gone Juyo. Does anyone have a photo or oshigata of it?

Cheers,

Bryce

[David Flynn]

I don't have a photo or oshigata, but I have seen this sword first hand.    The sword in question is a Utushi of a Sadamune.   It was on exhibition at the NBTHK a few years ago.

[PNSSHOGUN]

From memory there have been other Sadakazu that have passed Juyo, perhaps @Jussi Ekholm can get the numbers?

[Jussi Ekholm]

I believe there are 3 Sadakazu works that have passed Jūyō so far. Unfortunately I only have book entry for 20 as I am still missing session 60 & 61 books.

 

Wakizashi in session 20. (1908) 奉久邇宮殿下命月山貞一謹作 / 明治四十一年三月日

Katana in session 60. (the one talked above) (1906) 大阪住人月山貞一彫同作 (花押) / 以相州鎌倉住人貞宗伝作之 / 明治三十九年十一月吉日

Wakizashi in session 61 (very similar mei to the katana above, possibly a pair?) (1906) 大阪住人月山貞一彫同作 (花押) / 明治三十九年十一月吉日 / 以相州鎌倉住人貞宗伝作之

[Bryce]

Thanks very much Jussi. I would love to see the oshigata of these juyo blades if anyone can help? 

Bit of an update on what I found to date:

So far the earliest daimei by Sadakatsu I have found is dated Meiji 30. The latest blade I have come across, that I believe was actually signed by Sadakazu was dated Meiji 41, but the search continues.

Cheers,

Bryce

 

[Bryce]

This is an interesting sword I have come across on the net. Made in 1906 like the juyo example mentioned above and signed Gassan Sadakazu made this at the age of 71. I believe this is a daimei by Sadakatsu. Sadakatsu is also named in the mei. Can someone please tell me what the context of this is?

Cheers,

Bryce

[Bryce]

G'day Guys,

I think I found a picture of the Juyo katana. I believe this is also a daimei by Sadakatsu.

Cheers,

Bryce

 

[Bryce]

G'day Guys,

Does anyone have photos of what Sadakazu's ayasugi looks like? I am yet to find a blade done in ayasugi which I believe was actually signed by Sadakazu.

Cheers,

Bryce

 

[Bryce]

G'day Guys,

Below are photos showing the changes in Sadakazu's kokuin. The earliest blade with a kokuin I have found so far is Keio 1 and the latest is Meiji 38.

 

Below going left to right:

1. Found on blades dated Keio 1 to Meiji 2

2. Found on blades dated early Meiji 

3. Found on blades dated early Meiji

4. Found on blades dated late Meiji, so far I believe all are Sadakatsu daimei.

 

Number 3 is a bit of an enigma. All examples so far found on tanto which have a mei which isn't in Sadakazu's or Sadakatsu's hand. Some people have said these blades are gimei and I would have agreed, except the work in the blades does look Gassan and the NBTHK papers them.

 

There doesn't seem any pattern as to why some blades have a kokuin and some don't. Some blades have a kao and some don't. Some have a kokuin and kao. Sadakazu doesn't seem to have been very consistent in the way he signed his blades.

 

Cheers,

Bryce

 

[Bryce]

To demonstrate just how different the mei of the number 3 kokuin tantos are from the typical Sadakazu mei here are examples side by side from about the same time. The typical Sadakazu is on the left, the number 3 kokuin on the right. As I said, both have been papered by the NBTHK.

Cheers,

Bryce

 

[Ian B3HR2UH]

Hi Bryce , your photo of the kokuin reminded me of an article in the Metropolitan Museum Journal Vol 5 / 1972 . Ben Vincent wrote about the six !! sadakazu blades that the Met has . Attached is his analysis of two tanto blades . He concluded that Figure 9 was gimei based on problems with the way the strokes were cut , plus the crude kokuin and coarse filemarks . On that basis you would think that a number of the pieces on your photograph are also not right . Perhaps these seals wore out and new ones had to be cut . Same with the yasurimei which seen to be coarse on some pieces and much finer on others . Perhaps the way he made these changed over the years . Hope the photo is of some interest.

Ian Brooks

[Bryce]

G'day Ian,

Yes I was aware of this article. We are talking about the same number 3 kokuin. The tantos with this kokuin all have the same style of mei, filing acoss the kokuin and rougher yasurimei. The 6 or so of these I have come across are dated from Meiji 4 to Meiji 7. Half of them aren't dated, which is odd in itself. They look like Sadakazu invited a work experience student in to finish off some of his tantos, but he must have stayed for at least 3 years and never got any better! I would agree with the article you posted above and say they have to be gimei, but the NBTHK have papered at least three of them that I have seen.

Cheers,

Bryce

[Bryce]

G'day Guys,

I put together the kokuin progression after going thru the 80 or so Sadakazu blades I was able to find on the net. All of the examples I used in the photo were from NBTHK papered blades. Here is the number 3 kokuin example I used from AOIJapan, with it's NBTHK paper.

Cheers,

bryce

[Jussi Ekholm]

On 9/30/2022 at 7:44 AM, Bryce said:

This is an interesting sword I have come across on the net. Made in 1906 like the juyo example mentioned above and signed Gassan Sadakazu made this at the age of 71. I believe this is a daimei by Sadakatsu. Sadakatsu is also named in the mei. Can someone please tell me what the context of this is?

Cheers,

Bryce

 

I think it is bit out of my league but I tried my abilities in trying to get this one. Hopefully Steve or our Japanese members, or others, will fix the likely errors.

 

至華餘鐡 / 月山貞一七十一歳 / 男貞勝謹両作

明治三十九年十二月吉日 / 以備前一文字伝粉骨X身

 

Shison Yotetsu / Gassan Sadakazu 71 sai / Otoko Sadakatsu kin ryō saku
Meiji 39, 12 gatsu kichi hi / Motte Bizen Ichimonji den XXXX

 

Carefully made joint work using precious iron by Gassan Sadakazu at the age of 71 and son Sadakatsu
A lucky day in November 1906 / Made in style of Bizen Ichimonji tradition XXXX

[SteveM]

至尊餘鐡  しそんよてつ　shison yotetsu

粉骨砕身　ふんこつさいしん　funkotsu saishin  = made to the best of my abilities (literally "till my bones turned to dust and my body broken")

[Bryce]

Thanks Guys,

Cheers,

Bryce

[Jussi Ekholm]

Thanks for the corrections Steve, it does seem to be quite interesting blade.