Shinto Wakizashi - Hizen Kuni Mutsu Kami Tadayoshi. Please comment.

[2devnul]

Hello,

 

I was advised by one of forum members to contact Mr. Roger Robertshaw from http://www.hizento.com/

 

With Mr. Roger's approval I will copy/paste his email here as it has many valuable comments. I hope this helps in future discussion or close the topic. 

PS. Still looking for any comments about MON on the tsuba.  

 

Quote

Hi Adam,

 

Thank you for your email.

Buying a sword out of Japan is usually pretty safe except for one thing to remember --- If the sword has no papers it is either gimei OR the seller really does not know about the maker and it is a gamble. I buy Tadayoshi swords from Japan occassionally because I think the seller got it wrong by NOT papering the sword... but I do not send the word back for papers as I don't need to.  Even the Japanese have great difficulty with the Tadayoshi School signatures (they haven't read my book --- go here www.hizento.com  )   It is very easy to get a sword to shinsa in Japan, not expensive, and the price of the sword will skyrocket if the sword papers, so why not shinsa every sword before selling it? Did you ask the seller if it was ever submitted to Shinsa? FYI 95% of all the swords I see on Yahoo Japan signed Tadayoshi are gimei.

3rd Gen was probably the finest sword smith of the Edo period. His work was flawless and impeccable, as was his yasurime, signature etc. I think he made better swords than the 1st gen. His hada is tight, without any flaws, and rich in chikei on the better works. His signature is very precise. His yasurime is slightly sloping, relatively deep and exact. Every thing you see is utter crisp perfection. He seldom cut the same signature so it leads us to believe he had a secret way of chiselling the strokes in MUTSU.

Being such a high ranked smith, and having a slightly variable signature, means he was copied extensively, and anytime you see a Mutsu no Kami you should view with extreme caution.

 

Your sword:

The signature appears boldly cut and fairly accurate, BUT, it isn't perfect.... and therein lies the problem. It should be, Also the filemarks should be bolder.  There are many strokes reversed compared to the oshigata that you attached, not just in the Mutsu kanji. The grain shows some 'looseness' in the forging (probably the zoomed in photo is exacerbating any roughness?). The hamon appears glorious, but rare for this smith. The fittings not great (a later addition?). So my view is this sword had maybe failed papers and was being passed on.... it certainly had a recent polish, the saya is new..... so if someone went to the trouble of polish and fittings, would they not have sent it to shinsa?.

So onto confidence level ----- I am about 80% sure it is gimei. But not 100%. It is hard to pinpoint exactly why but It doesn't 'click' with me.

I have attached a Tokubetsu Hozon wakizashi --- from the Han Bin Siong collection (now in my collection). The signature is very different to yours. The attached is a slightly unusual signature --- maybe a special order --- but what I want you to see is how clean and precise the signature is, and the slightly sloping precise yasurime.  I have several swords by the 3rd, and they all show a surgical precision in their manufacture that is unmatched. I also own a merchants sword (wakizashi) with similar hamon, great fittings, 3rd gen, but without the surgical precision. It went "Horyu" at the NBTHK about 10 years ago ---- as in "We do not know".

 

One thing to be careful of with regards to the Tadayoshi School, in addition to unpapered swords out of Japan, is the lack of accurate oshigata in the reference books --- most of the reference books are riddled with gimei oshigata --- even Hizento Taikan issued by the NBTHK is 50% gimei. Most of the books were written before the computer age, so verification was almost impossible relying 100% on the subjective whim of the appraiser/author. I think I am guilty of the same. As Sensei Tanobe once said to me when looking at an old papered Tadayoshi I was thinking of buying in Tokyo............"Yesterday it papered, today it will not"

 

Still a nice sword -- the hamon is great.

Hope this helps a bit.

If you quote me on the forum, then please only do so by submitting the entire text (not piecemeal).

kind rgds,

Roger

 

 

[NewB]

Nice! I beg to differ on the 3rd being 'better' than the shodai but I'm not in a position to debate for obvious reasons. 

 

Here's another great article that goes in depth why so many Tadayoshi get rejected or remain in 'horyu' ..

 

I hope you enjoy it

 

https://nihonto.com/shodai-hizen-tadayoshi-初代肥前忠吉/

 

J.

 

 

[Matsunoki]

4 hours ago, 2devnul said:

Hope this helps a bit.

What a superb and helpful reply. So much more informative than just saying “gimei”………

 

[2devnul]

Hello,

 

Interesting finding IMHO. 

 

This hizen-kuni-mutsu-kami-tadayoshi Daisho from AOIJapan website:

https://www.aoijapan...utsu-kami-tadayoshi/

 

If you look at wakizashi's mei you will see that it is worse quality (speaking about perfect mei) then the one on mine. 

Although hamon is suguha style (mine is gunome) other attributes (especially hada) looks very similar. 

http://www.aoijapan....2014/14356-1-sho.jpg

 

Waki has: NBTHK Hozon paper and NBTHK Tokubetsu Kicyo paper.

 

[2devnul]

[2devnul]

To close the topic from my end. 

I am convinced that if sword would be in possession of Mr. Roger, or posted here by someone with 'high collector rank', or sent to Shinsa by AOI (Oyabun Tsuruta) then it would be 100% Mutsu Tadayoshi.

 

Since it is in possession of 'low rank collector' like me, then it must be gimei. 

 

Thank you again everyone for your valuable comments and sharing the knowledge. 

[Larason2]

I'm still pretty convinced it's legit, mostly because the blade is so good. Blades don't lie! I don't think it implies you are a low rank collector. I feel this forum does tend to overcall "gimei," but it is sometimes a difficult call to make. No assessment process is perfect, and there are always false positives and false negatives. I also think that having a high volume of "gimei" swords being presented for analysis on this site would tend to bias towards a "gimei" call. It's a complicated area of study, but that's part of what attracts a lot of us. Don't take it personally, and enjoy your beautiful sword!

[2devnul]

Hello,

Thanks Carlos. I think you might be right, I'm taking this personally. 

 

I just can't understand one thing. Have a look a this hamon/hada and please explain. Why a swordsmith would make gimei from such masterpiece blade instead of signing his own name. Spreading his own fame. Even with all that 'mei' doubts, when looking at the blade I'm convinced that it's Tadayoshi's work. 

 

[mywei]

There's no need to take this 'personally' imo, it's not an attack on your person or character after all. When you ask for opinions from others there will always be those that you disagree with, unless you just want everyone else to validate your pre-formed opinion on the matter.

Unfortunately with really big names like Mutsu Tadayoshi in good recent polish, you have to wonder why it doesn't have papers? You would expect any previous owners to have attempted a shinsa especially if they went to the trouble of polishing it.

 

This does looks like a good blade with konuka appearing hada and an active gunome hamon but questions will always remain in its current state. The signature is not a 100% match to papered Mutsu and the nakagojiri seems different to other ubu examples? Without seeing it in person no one can really say for sure. I would suggest the only to put it to bed would be to send it for shinsa.

 

My two cents

[paulb]

Re why would anyone produce a gimei. Basic answer is to survive.  For example Naotane and Naokatsu were both highly regarded Shin-Shinto smiths who made copies of earlier work but also, according to some authorities, were not above making copies and putting a false mei on them. They did what the market asked for to survive.

 

Re your blade, I re-read what I and others had written and I didn't see anything that criticised the blade, quite the opposite, most prefaced their comments with the fact they thought it was a good piece. No one here has sufficient confidence (or at least they shouldn't) to say whether a blade is genuine or otherwise. All they can do is look at all the elements they can see and express an opinion. that is very different from seeing it in hand and people are, quite rightly in my opinion, cautious. 

The only real way to progress this is to submit it to shinsa. I think it is a good sword. Roger R is the go to person in the west for Tadayoshi and if he believes it could be right his opinion is worth far more than mine or anyone else's here. However I do think it valid to ask why a blade in such good condition has come out of Japan without papers. Was the seller ignorant of what they had? had it been submitted and failed? we will never know but until you submit it for shinsa there will always be a niggling doubt.

Otherwise accept it is a nice work and enjoy it for that.

[Bazza]

A toad, even a handsome one, is not a frog no matter how much thinking might make it so.  Adam in Poland, this sword needs to be seen by the NBTHK in Tokyo, nobody else, anywhere else.  Myself and others on this Board have papered Hizen Tadayoshi school blades - shodai, nidai,sandai, godai, etc.   I have a possible Mutsu wakizashi, a stout blade with a 'presence', but it needs a polish AND a Shinsa before I can say anything else about it.  Until you have an NBTHK paper the maker of your sword is an open question and the 'rank' of the presenting collector has nothing at all to do with this process.  As Paul said, accept your sword as a nice work and continue study.  Line up some Tadayoshi in UK collections and go to England to study them.  Best of an essential ingredient in collecting - luck plus study...

 

BaZZa.

(Melbourne, Australia)

[2devnul]

Hello,

 

Gentlemen, thank you for your comments and I apologize for my outburst. I really need to work on myself being more humble. 

I don't plan to send sword for Shinsa due to several reasons. So I guess we will never know the true. 

 

I think this topic can really be closed now. 

 

Best regards and big thanks to everyone that contributed to discussion. 

[drbvac]

I appreciate the fact that you closed the conversation BUT at some point you really should submit it for shinsa and if not in Tokyo but at a nearer site where they are holding a shinsa - whatever you paid for your already beautiful blade - papered and authenticated it will guarantee it is cared for properly for many years.  Take care

[2devnul]

Hello,

 

Please find below my attempt on capturing beautiful Hada of Tadayoshi's workshop. 

 

[Rivkin]

I suspect it might be not Hizen.

[2devnul]

11 minutes ago, Rivkin said:

I suspect it might be not Hizen.

 

I'm still open for any comments/arguments. Can you please share why the doubts? 

[Soshin]

On 6/2/2023 at 4:53 AM, 2devnul said:

I recently bought this wakizashi and would like to hear any comments about it from the experts.

 

Not an expert. Sorry I missed the second page of replies, so I deleted my comment. I would contact Mr. Roger Robertshaw. I once had a Hizento wakizashi that he liked the signature of, and it later passed NBTHK Hozon after getting polished in Japan. 

 

[2devnul]

14 minutes ago, Soshin said:

 

Not an expert, but the hamon looks quite different than what I have seen of this swordsmith's work. I wish I could get an unobstructed view of the ji-hada. 

 

I wish I could show you the sword in person but that will be difficult/impossible. Unless you plan to visit Poland

I can try to make other pictures if you can give me a hint (example picture) of what you are looking for. 

 

[Rivkin]

Polish is a bit heavy on hadori, but generally the first class Hizen hada is very repeatable, tight with itame's nie being like a dot or protruding a bit along the blade... This one is rougher, wider, more spaced, and non-uniform.

Its still nice, but not to the same point. Weaker Hizen smith is an option, but so is a better than average shinto smiths who was inspired probably by Hizen Masahiro.

[Lee Bray]

36 minutes ago, Soshin said:

 

 I would contact Mr. Roger Robertshaw. I once had a Hizento wakizashi that he liked the signature of, and it later passed NBTHK Hozon after getting polished in Japan. 

 

Roger's response is at the top of this page.

[2devnul]

@Rivkin Thank you very much for your explanation. 

I still hope it is Mutsu Tadayoshi. But I'm bit afraid to invest/send for Shinsa as it might result as stated by Mr. Roger

"I also own a merchants sword (wakizashi) with similar hamon, great fittings, 3rd gen, but without the surgical precision. It went "Horyu" at the NBTHK about 10 years ago ---- as in "We do not know"."

 

[Jacques D.]

konuka hada

[Soshin]

On 3/1/2024 at 5:43 AM, 2devnul said:

 

I wish I could show you the sword in person but that will be difficult/impossible. Unless you plan to visit Poland

I can try to make other pictures if you can give me a hint (example picture) of what you are looking for. 

 

 

I found some old photo of the nakago of my Hizento wakizashi that later was professionally polishing in Japan. It is signed on the tachi side not the normal katana side of the nakago: "Omi Daijo Fujiwara Tadahiro (近江大掾藤原忠廣)". It was later papered to Hizen Tadahiro or something similar by the NBTHK. Sorry I don't have any photos of the NBTHK papers or the sword in polish. I remember the workmanship and characteristics of the steel itself of my wakizashi being vastly different than your sword from looking at photos after the polish that was sent to me by the new owner of the sword who paid for the polishing and appraisal at the NBTHK in Japan. 

 

 

     

[2devnul]

Hi,

 

I'm adding attempts of capturing Hada. 

 

 

[Jacques D.]

Definitely not a konuka hada

[2devnul]

[Jacques D.]

Gimei and it's visible :

 

[Tim Evans]

The correct kantei discipline or process is to consider the mei as the last factor. Kantei is first based on:

1. Sugata
2. Jigane
3. Yakiba

What does the assessment of the above factors say about time period and swordsmith group?

THEN look at the mei. Is the mei in alignment with the above assessment?

This process cannot be reliably done by looking at pictures (especially with an important name).

Since the consensus of the thread is not obviously gimei , then it needs to assessed in-hand by a knowledgeable person. 

 

A common error is to get excited by the mei and then try to rationalize the sugata, jigane and yakiba to fit the mei. 

I have done that myself when I was first starting out so I am offering this observation as a caution. 

 

[Jacques D.]

Quote

Jigane

Is it a konuka hada ? When it comes to gimei, it's simple: either the work doesn't match that of the smith and there's no need to check the mei, or it does and in that case you have to check the mei. The problem is that with photos, it is almost always impossible to check the work, all we have left is the mei..

[Bosco]

Have a look at this two from the 8th generation of Tadayoshi, sold from Samurai Museum with NBTHK certification. Both mei 5 characters look tottaly different even it was signed by the same person. So saying a mei is gimei because of the signature is baloney. One could be made when he was young and one could be made when he was older ( or drunk , sick ... ).