Tamba no Kami gamble

[Bugyotsuji]

6 hours ago, Jacques D. said:

 

Author of the shinto taikan is Iimura Yoshiaki

Ah, excellent, many thanks Jacques.

[Yasaka Azuma]

A typical sword mei encyclopedia is "刀剣銘字大鑑 (An original book Tuchiya stamping 1961, Reprint 1997)". However, stamp is clumsy and not easy to compare with the actual product. I think that the works published in "新刀大鑑 (1976)" are also authoritative in terms of reliability. Unfortunately I don't own either. They occupy too much space and fall overhead to kill their owners in the event of an earthquake.

[Bugyotsuji]

Yas, I am guessing that you live in Tokyo. I do not sleep underneath my bookcases! 😅 

[Yasaka Azuma]

This book, which is much thinner than it is, is bad for the heart, though. According to one person's experience, he was shocked and chest became painful when he found his sword in this book "Research on fake swords(1973, Reprint 2008)".

[Yoshimichi]

Dear Piers:

 

Exciting find. Bravo. Jacques nailed it with the Imura Taikan  I have attached the whole page of the oshigata in question, and the cover title of the taikan. I have it listed as 4th generation in my inventory, but could be 3rd generation. Hope these give you more info.

 

Regards,

Bill E. Sheehan (Yoshimichi)

. 

[Bugyotsuji]

Much obliged, Bill. (I see the 4th is listed there as Kyoto.)

[Jacques D.]

It seems there's no Osaka yondai, i can't find it even in the Nihonto meikan (if i read it correctly)

[Babu]

There is a 3rd generation wakizashi on Aoi Art for £2000.

Looks a good match.

 

[Bugyotsuji]

And a fourth gen wakizashi from Kyoto in koshiraé.

[Surfson]

Piers, I recall reading that sudareba was invented by the nidai.  If that is true, then it would eliminate the shodai as the maker. 

[Bugyotsuji]

Thanks Robert. I’ll go back and check with the Sensei about what exactly he might have seen in the blade. “Something early”. Could it be the lack of any specific patterns (Kiku etc.) within the Sudareba, I wonder?
Like early latté with no heart design floating on top? 
Any old way, most posts above and fuzzy logic generally point to Ōsaka and the third generation, so I am easy. A couple of sword aficionados who looked at it commented btw, “Ah, Ōsaka Tamba!” 

[Bugyotsuji]

PS Searching for Adam’s find above, I came across this from Aoi:

“Special feature : There are 4 lineage on Yoshimichi in Kyoto; Kyo Tamba (No) Kami, Fushimi Tamba (No) Kami, Osaka Tamba (No) Kami and Yamato (No) Kami.
This blade has been forged by Osaka Yoshimichi the 3rd generation.
Shallow curvature of the blade is one of a characteristics of Kambun-Shinto.
Sudare-Ba has been started from Kyo Tamba (No) Kami Yoshimichi the first generation. (Sudare means a screen made from bamboo in Japanese word)
3rd generation Osaka Yoshimichi also made nice Sudare-ba and forged blade more wide and thick then other Yoshimichi generally.“

 

(My Wakizashi mihaba is definitely quite wide at the koshi which is why I have some worries about it eventually fitting into the lacquer Saya of the Koshirae.)

[Yoshimichi]

Dear Piers:

 

Attached are various oshigata arranged by generation that I put together years ago from various taikans. In looking at the radicals of your mei, it has a lot of similarities to the 2nd generation oshigata that is second from the left, in my opinion. Yours also has a lot of characteristics of the sandai mei, but there are little differences. For example, the "bow shaped" radical in the "Tam" kanji tends to commonly start at around 4 or 5 o'clock in relation to the mekugi-ana. Your kanji starts higher above the mekugi-ana. May be nothing. Just an observation. Hopefully, you will not get eye strain comparing these. I suppose if someone forced me to make a choice, I suppose I would pick 2nd generation. What say others?   

 

Regards,

Bill E. Sheehan (Yoshimichi)

[Mark S.]

So can anyone expound on the Tamba-ball in the kissaki of Osaka blades?  I’m guessing it is a clue but not a rule?  Started with which smith?  Osaka only?  If sidetracking thread I apologize.

[Tom Darling]

Piers,  Kindly take pic of boshi  and the hamon  going into nakago.  There are two points I'd like to make.  Thanks.

 

 

Tom D.

[Bugyotsuji]

What a kerfuffle! Now, the guy says he thinks it is not 2nd or 3rd gen Osaka at all. If I understand his email correctly, he suggests that it might be the second son of the Kyoto 2 Dai, forging swords around Kanbun in Settsu.

[Babu]

The photos Piers are dead links.

This renders the thread useless for future reference.

Can you please embed them?

[Bugyotsuji]

Tom asked for extra photos without saying what his theory was. For one person with no reason, I did not feel really comfortable as it's a public site, but despite being quite busy today I went ahead anyway, did the photo session, posted the photos and waited for four hours.  I gave the warning above and then erased them. (See the post above yours, Adam.)

 Next time it might be good to hear the points first.

Entirely my mistake. I should have sent them by PM.

[Yoshimichi]

Dear Piers:

 

I suppose Tom was looking for other characteristics of the Yoshimichi school when he requested photos of the hamon near the nakago and the kissaki. I was told that a characteristic is the yakidashi, which tends to show a sudareba hamon that becomes narrower and somewhat suguha in the last 2-4 inches of the hamon going into the nakago. Mark mentioned the "Tamba ball" in the kissaki, another characteristic tending to further support a Yoshimichi school blade. I have attached some photos of the yakidashi, "Tamba ball," and mei of a waki I own  which I believe to likely be a 3rd generation Osaka blade, though I have not had it papered, Just picked it up last July.

 

When all is said and done, yours is a nice looking piece, looks shoshin, and I would not have hesitated in buying it myself at auction, for a price that sounds like it was good purchase price. I would love to see more pictures as well.

 

Regards,

Bill E. Sheehan (Yoshimichi)

 

 

[Bugyotsuji]

Hi Bill, many thanks for the insights. Very interesting. That puts my mind more at ease. The differences that struck me were a) the dot of Tan- in 丹波 which is separate in some Mei but part of a long upright in others, and b) the central long vertical line which exists in some versions of  波 like yours above (but not in others).

 

Boshi is togari, with no 'ball' that I can see.

The hamon line from the nakago is fairly straight. No Yakidashi per se.(?) But some sudareba in there methinks.

[Tom Darling]

That is exactly what I wanted to determine on both points.  If I am looking at your boshi correctly,  it appears to be hakikake, should be ko- maru, I believe.  IMHO. Peace.

 

Also, the mei is a copy of the 2nd gen. and not as bold. Imho. Peace.

 

Tom. D.

[Bugyotsuji]

 Tom. You say 'should be' and 'copy', both of which leave me confused.

Do I assume that 'should be' means 'but isn't' when discussing A,B or C? Therefore it isn't what?

Do I take it that you are suggesting that the Mei is Gimei? 

(Hakikake is a good description.)

 

 

[DirkO]

Bit late here - it's not gimei.  It's published in Shinto Taikan + I was able to track down a very good match which is papered. However, they don't specify generation (rarely do for Mishina unless Kyotamba shodai). It was wrongly filed as 3rd gen Osaka Tamba on my PC - because it's not 3rd gen, too many clear differences in overall mei. This one does have the kikumon, which is a bit odd. There were a few Mishina smiths that moved from Kyoto to Osaka though. Further investigation needed.

 

 

 

[Bugyotsuji]

The Mei is a pretty good match. Thanks.

[Tom Darling]

Piers, to answer your question, in my opinion, it has a 50/50 % chance of being good. I am leaning towards its not.  Let me  know the results after shinsa. Good luck I really mean it.  Peace.

 

Tom D.

 

[Brian]

I'm confused. 50% Chance of what being good? We have already shown it is published. And it is clearly Yoshimichi from the sudareba. So aside from not being sure which generation/line, there is zero chance this is gimei. Or am I missing something?

[Shugyosha]

44 minutes ago, Brian said:

I'm confused. 50% Chance of what being good? We have already shown it is published. And it is clearly Yoshimichi from the sudareba. So aside from not being sure which generation/line, there is zero chance this is gimei. Or am I missing something?

 

Absolutely. It only got published because it is a representative work. If it was gimei it wouldn't be in there.

[paulb]

Actually John that isn't absolutely true. There are examples of work being published as an example of a maker only to have the attribution overturned following later research. It is not particularly frequent, and seen more often in fittings than swords but it certainly does happen.

Having said that I see absolutely no reason to doubt Piers blade and think it is the genuine article.

 

[Shugyosha]

Thanks Paul. It’s easy to forget sometimes (for me) that the pool of knowledge around the subject is continually evolving. 

[PNSSHOGUN]

Quite literally a textbook example of this smith IMO, would be amazed if it was knocked back.